Comparison of Microlaparoscopy and Conventional Laparoscopy for Tubal Sterilization Under Local Anesthesia with Mild Sedation

M. Bülent Tıraş, Oznur Gokce, Volkan Noyan, Hulusi Bülent Zeyneloğlu, Haldun Güner, Mülazım Yildirim, Francisco Rísquez
In: The Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists · 2001 · vol. 8(3) , pp. 385–388 · doi:10.1016/s1074-3804(05)60335-0 · PMID:11509778 · W2263160555
article OA: closed CC0
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-07 ⓘ

This study compared microlaparoscopy and conventional laparoscopy for tubal sterilization under local anesthesia with mild sedation, assessing their outcomes.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

Study objectiveTo compare tubal sterilization performed by microlaparoscopy and conventional laparoscopy.DesignProspective, randomized trial (Canadian Task Force classification I).SettingGazi University School of Medicine.PatientsTwenty women undergoing surgical sterilization.InterventionTen sterilizations by conventional laparoscopy and 10 by microlaparoscopy.Measurements and main resultsThe techniques were comparable in quality of visualization, operating time, amount of drugs used for sedation and local anesthesia, and intraoperative pain scores. However, the postoperative analgesic requirement was significantly less in women treated by by microlaparoscopy.ConclusionTubal sterilization by microlaparoscopy does not differ greatly from conventional laparoscopic sterilization.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (1)

References (13)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-05-14T06:54:16.401154+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK