medigraphic.com
ISSN 0185-3252 (Print)
Revista de la Asociación Médica del Centro Médico ABC

2006, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

An Med Asoc Med Hosp ABC 2006; 51 (4)

Simplified technique of cesarean surgery (Fernández-Guerra) versus conventional technique Comparative clinical analysis

Guerra UP, Fernández MJM, Antúnez RNA, Salazar JCM

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 159-163
PDF size: 59.73 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the conventional technique of cesarean with the simplified technique in which hysterorrhaphy in a plane is closed and unnecessary surgical steps are eliminated. Material and methods: prospective, observing, cross-sectional and analytical study. 154 patients April 2005 to July 2006 were operated in the Regional Hospital General Ignacio Zaragoza and the Regional Hospital of Puebla, of the ISSSTE. Descriptive statistic are made with measures of central tendency and dispersion. The analytical statistic with Student t test and U of Mann-Whitney. A value of p = 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Blood loss was smaller in the group of simplified technique problem 407.14 ± 93 mL in comparison with conventional 585.71 ± 170 mL with p ‹ 0.05. Surgical time was shorter in the simplified technique 21.03 ± 2.8 vs 49.29 ± 10.8 for conventional technique p ‹ 0.001. Days of hospital stay were half with the use of the simplified technique reduced to wing, p ‹ 0.05. There was a reduced amount of analgesics in the group of patients with simplified technique, with a significant difference between both groups p ‹ 0.0001. Conclusions: The technique of a simplified cesarean section includes a series of factors that combined cumulatively in a shorter surgical time, smaller blood loss, faster recovery and less amount of analgesics with a shorter hospital stay. All of the above contributes to diminish the surgical costs and to optimize the use of human resources destined for the cesarean as well as materials.


REFERENCES

  1. Ruiz V. La operación cesárea. 3a ed. México: La Prensa Médica Mexicana, 1992.

  2. Alfaro de la Vega. 15 años de operación cesárea en el Hospital General. Ginec Obstet Mex 1952; 7: 3-4.

  3. Aure M, Agüero O. Cesárea en la Maternidad (1953-1962). Ginec Obstet Mex 1970; 28: 641-642.

  4. Erhardt C, Gold E. Cesarean section in New Cork City. Incident and mortality during. 1950-55. Obs Gynec 1958; 11: 241-242.

  5. Hammouda A. Cesarean section in the young gravida. A ten years analysis. Am J Obst and Gynec 1968; 100: 267-269.

  6. Jones O. Trends in the incidence and indications for cesarean section at Charlotte Hospital during the last ten years. Am J Obst and Gynec 1963; 87: 306.

  7. MacLennan A. Fetal loss in cesarean section. Am J Obst Gynec 1961; 82: 22-24.

  8. Rosas A, Ruiz V, Quesada R, Enríquez A. Cesárea interactiva. Ginec Obstet Mex 1968; 24: 391-394.

  9. Ruiz V, Postcesarean infertility. Internat J Fertil 1965; 10: 229-232.

  10. Ruiz V, Pérez de S, Evolución de la cesárea en México. Ginec Obstet Mex 1970; 27: 115.

  11. Scarpitti C, Micheletti G, Balio U. Considerazioni sul taglio cesareo ripetuto e sultaglio cesareo demolitore nella casistica di 15 anni (1949-1964) dell’ Istituto Ospitaliero Provinciale per la Maternita de Milano. Minerva Ginec 1965; 17: 283.

  12. Claude R, Mamoun M, Cesárea. Encyclopedie Médico-Chirurgicale. Paris: 2003; E-41-900.

  13. Waniorek A. Hysteroscopy alter cesarean section for evaluation of suturing technic. Obstet Gynecol 1967; 29: 192-199.

  14. Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Balestreri D, Berreta P, Maymon E, Miglierina M et al. Un ensayo clínico aleatorizado de dos técnicas quirúrgicas para la cesárea. Es J Perinatol 1998; 15: 589-594.

  15. Wilkinson C, El Mw De Enkin. El Non-cierre de peritoneo a la sección del cesarean. Banco de Datos de Cochrane, Rev Syst 2000; 2: CD000163.

  16. Ellis H, Heddle R. Does the peritoneum need to be closed at laparotomy? Br J Surg 1977; 64: 733-736.

  17. Jelsema RD, Wittingen JA, Kenneth J, Vander Kolk. Continuous non locking, single layer repair of the low transverse uterine incision. J Repro Med 1993; 3: 393-396.

  18. Oviedo OJG et al. Técnica Simplificada de Operación Cesárea. An Med Asoc Med Hosp ABC 2002, 47: 24-28.

  19. Marcello Pietrantoni et al. Peritoneal closure or non closure at Cesarean. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 2: 77-78.

  20. Hull D, Varner M. A randomized study of closure of the peritoneus at Cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 2: 77-79.

  21. Robbins GF, Brunchwig A, Foote F. Deperitonealization: Clinical and experimental observations. Ann Surg 1949; 130: 466-472.

  22. Ellis H. The etiology of postoperative abdominal adhesions. Br J Surg 1962; 50: 10-16.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com