Comparison of blunt and sharp dissection techniques during cesarean hysterectomy in placenta percreta.

Seyhun Sucu, Ibrahim Taskum, Furkan Cetin, Muhammed Hanifi Bademkiran, Ozge Komurcu Karuserci, Huseyin Caglayan Ozcan
{"title":"Comparison of blunt and sharp dissection techniques during cesarean hysterectomy in placenta percreta.","authors":"Seyhun Sucu, Ibrahim Taskum, Furkan Cetin, Muhammed Hanifi Bademkiran, Ozge Komurcu Karuserci, Huseyin Caglayan Ozcan","doi":"10.5603/gpl.101542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to compare the effects of the blunt dissection technique (BDT) with finger and the sharp dissection technique (SDT) with scissors during cesarean hysterectomy (CH) in patients with placenta percreta.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>We included 70 patients with placenta percreta who underwent CH in a territory hospital between 2020 and 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 included 34 patients who underwent blunt bladder dissection, and Group 2 included 36 patients who underwent sharp bladder dissection. Demographic data, operative complications, surgical parameters, and transfusion rates were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>BDT was associated with a statistically significant reduction in operation time compared to SDT (95.62 ± 20.76 min vs 107.08 ± 26.04 min, p = 0.046). Moreover, the rate of bladder injury was significantly lower in the BDT group compared to the SDT group (11.8% vs 33.3%, p = 0.032). Although there were no significant differences in blood transfusion products between the two groups, postoperative transfusion amounts tended to be lower in the BDT group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BDT may be a proper surgical method to reduce bladder injury rates and operation time compared to SDT in CH of placenta percreta cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":94021,"journal":{"name":"Ginekologia polska","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ginekologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/gpl.101542","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effects of the blunt dissection technique (BDT) with finger and the sharp dissection technique (SDT) with scissors during cesarean hysterectomy (CH) in patients with placenta percreta.

Material and methods: We included 70 patients with placenta percreta who underwent CH in a territory hospital between 2020 and 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1 included 34 patients who underwent blunt bladder dissection, and Group 2 included 36 patients who underwent sharp bladder dissection. Demographic data, operative complications, surgical parameters, and transfusion rates were compared between the two groups.

Results: BDT was associated with a statistically significant reduction in operation time compared to SDT (95.62 ± 20.76 min vs 107.08 ± 26.04 min, p = 0.046). Moreover, the rate of bladder injury was significantly lower in the BDT group compared to the SDT group (11.8% vs 33.3%, p = 0.032). Although there were no significant differences in blood transfusion products between the two groups, postoperative transfusion amounts tended to be lower in the BDT group.

Conclusions: BDT may be a proper surgical method to reduce bladder injury rates and operation time compared to SDT in CH of placenta percreta cases.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信