|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Instrument for the Infundibulo-pelvic ligamentsFrom: ainsron (ainsron@sbcglobal.net)Tue Feb 6 09:54:35 2007
I prefer the Ligasure. I like the hand activation, rather than another foot peddle. I have used the PK and generally it worked well, except it would sometimes stick if the pedicle charred. Ronald E. Ainsworth, MD, FACOG -----Original Message----- From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of rmodugno@aol.com Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:53 PM To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L Subject: Instrument for the Infundibulo-pelvic ligaments Surveying the cyber-gyns: Which, in your experience, is the safest instrument to take the infundibulo-pelvic ligament in laparoscopic hysterectomy? By safest, I mean the instrument which most consistently takes this pedicle without having to go back to deal with bleeding. In my experience it has been the seitzenger-type coagulator/cutter - Gyrus also manufactures one. Agree? disagree? Prefer the harmonic scalpel? Staples? Other? Thanks in advance. Robert Modugno MD MBA FACOG Sylva, NC
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Thu Oct 2 04:55:46 2008 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.