| Literature DB >> 31432999 |
Aline Ribeiro Pedroso1, Renato Miranda de Melo2, Enio Chaves de Oliveira3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the resistance to medial traction of abdominal wall muscles, before and after performing relaxing incisions.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31432999 PMCID: PMC6705344 DOI: 10.1590/s0102-865020190060000008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Cir Bras ISSN: 0102-8650 Impact factor: 1.388
Figure 1Crown AT portable analog dynamometer.
Figure 2– A. Demarcation of the midline ( arrow ); B . Location of the handles for the dynamometer.
Figure 3Initiating a relaxing incision on anterior (A) and posterior (B) blades of the rectus sheath. Tensile strength measurement 3.0 cm beyond the midline (C) .
Figure 4Average, in gF (grams-force), obtained from the realization of three strength measurements for each variable. RC: right control; RA: right anterior incision; A+PR: anterior + posterior right incision; LC: left control; LP: left posterior incision; A+PL: anterior + posterior left incision.
Pairwise comparison between right and left sides for each variable, presenting mean discrimination and confidence interval (gF).
| Average | Standard deviation | Confidence interval (95%) | p* | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Inferior limit | Upper limit | |||||
| Stage 1 | Right: Control 1 | 585.098 | 88.271 | 539.713 | 630.483 | 0.360 |
| Left: Control 1 | 609.803 | 106.591 | 555.000 | 664.608 | ||
| Stage 2 | Right: Anterior 2 | 515.294 | 72.639 | 477.946 | 552.642 | 0.240 |
| Left: Posterior 3 | 549.803 | 148.419 | 473.494 | 626.114 | ||
| Stage 3 | Right: Anterior+Posterior 4 | 461.960 | 69.112 | 426.427 | 497.495 | 0.371 |
| Left: Anterior+Posterior 4 | 486.274 | 111.964 | 486.2745 | 111.96405 | ||
*T-Pareado test, considering 95% confidence with p ≤ 0.05.
1: before the relaxant incisions.
2: incision made in the right anterior blade of the rectus sheath.
3: Incision made in the left posterior blade of the rectus sheath.
4: Incision in both blades of the rectus sheath.
Comparison of the right sheath incisions in the control, anterior and anterior + posterior (gF).
| Right | Average | Standard deviation | Confidence interval (95%) | p* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Inferior limit | Upper limit | ||||
| Control (A) 1,3 | 585.098 | 88.271 | 539.713 | 630.483 | < 0.001 |
| Anterior (B) 1,2 | 515.294 | 72.639 | 477.946 | 552.642 | |
| Anterior+ Posterior (C) 2,3 | 461.961 | 69.112 | 426.427 | 497.495 | |
*P: Anova test of repeated measurements.
1 – P= <0,001; 2 – P= <0,001; 3 – P=0,001 (Bonferroni post hoc – paired comparison).
A: before the relaxant incisions.
B: incision made in the right anterior blade of the rectus sheath.
C: incision in both blades of the right rectus sheath.
Figure 5Percentage reduction in tensile strength after relaxation incisions to the right of the abdomen.
Comparison of the left sheath incisions in the control, posterior and anterior + posterior (gF).
| Left | Average | Standard deviation | Confidence interval (95%) | p* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Inferior limit | Upper limit | ||||
| Control (A) 1,2 | 609,803 | 106,591 | 555,000 | 664,608 | < 0,001 |
| Posterior (B) 1,3 | 549,803 | 148,419 | 473,494 | 626,114 | |
| Anterior+ Posterior (C) 2,3 | 486,274 | 111,964 | 428,708 | 543,841 | |
*P: Anova test of repeated measurements.
1 – P= 0,001; 2- P= <0,001; 3 – P= 0,001 (Bonferroni post hoc – paired comparison).
A: before the relaxant incisions.
B: Incision made in the left posterior blade of the rectus sheath.
C: incision in both blades of the left rectus sheath.
Figure 6Percentage of reduction of tensile strength after performing relaxing incisions to the left of the abdomen.