首页> 外文期刊>British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology >A comparative study of the cosmetic appeal of abdominal incisions used for hysterectomy.
【24h】

A comparative study of the cosmetic appeal of abdominal incisions used for hysterectomy.

机译:子宫切除术腹部切口的美观性的比较研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cosmetic appeal of abdominal incisions used for hysterectomy. DESIGN: A comparative study. SETTING: St James's University Hospital, Leeds. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred women, including 50 consecutive women attending a gynaecology clinic for the first time and 50 hospital staff. RESULTS: Sixty-eight percent of women preferred a Pfannenstiel incision as the incision of first choice, while 31% chose the laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy incisions (LAVH). When women who had undergone previous abdominal surgery were compared with women with no previous surgery, there was a significant difference in their choice (80% Pfannenstiel, 18% LAVH compared with 54% Pfannenstiel, 45% LAVH). CONCLUSIONS: In gynaecological surgery there is already a cosmetically-favoured incision. One cannot assume that if a gynaecologist uses a minimally invasive surgical technique at hysterectomy that this will be cosmetically acceptable to the woman. Gynaecologists should not use cosmetic appeal in counselling women for LAVH and should concentrate on the other proven benefits of minimally invasive surgery.
机译:目的:评估用于子宫切除术的腹部切口的美容效果。设计:一项比较研究。地点:利兹圣詹姆斯大学医院。参加者:一百名妇女,其中包括50名连续第一次去妇科诊所的妇女和50名医院工作人员。结果:68%的女性更倾向于采用Pfannenstiel切口作为首选切口,而31%的女性选择了腹腔镜辅助阴道子宫切除术切口(LAVH)。将之前接受过腹部手术的妇女与没有进行过先前手术的妇女进行比较时,她们的选择存在显着差异(80%的泛氟斯蒂尔,18%的LAVH与54%的泛氟斯蒂尔,45%的L​​AVH)。结论:在妇科手术中已经有一个美观的切口。人们不能认为,如果妇科医生在子宫切除术中使用微创外科手术技术,那么女性在美容上是可以接受的。妇科医生不应在为妇女提供LAVH咨询方面使用美容方法,而应专注于微创手术的其他已证实的好处。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号