Re: tubal ligation

From: Anna Meenan, MD (annam@uic.edu)
Sat May 20 09:25:56 2006


Well, the consent form that public aid patients sign in Illinois states that it is not reversible, and really, I think one could get into more trouble medicolegally by telling pts it is reversible. You know d*mn well pts. only hear what they want to hear. I basically say it is permanent. I mention that some folks have had them reversed successfully, but that it is expensive and not covered by any insurance.

--
Anna Meenan, MD

At Fri, 19 May 2006, mjutras@gate.net wrote: > >On a different note: > >Why is it that we were always told to tell the patient the truth about >everything including when a mistake was made but we were all taught to lie >about tubal ligation? Was anyone not told to tell the patient that it was >not reversible? > >There were two reasons we were told not to do fimbrectomies. The first was >higher fistula formation and therefore procedure failure (fattest part of >tube). Second, was that it was difficult to reverse - requires >neosalpingostomy with cuff fimbrioplasty - IVF works better here. > >I do a lot of IVF but 98% of patients with tubal ligation chose tubal >anastomosis over IVF. > >Mark Jutras, MD >Orlando





use when must restrict search to only the ob-gyn-l forum...
Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:

Return to  OB-GYN-L 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: Wed Dec 2 05:05:08 2009

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.