| dc.contributor.author | Túri, Ákos | |
| dc.contributor.author | Németh, Tibor | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-05T08:20:11Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2021-05-05T08:20:11Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2015-05 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Magyar Állatorvosok Lapja 137(5), 293-304. (2015) | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10832/2936 | |
| dc.description.abstract | SUMMARY
In the last decade minimal invasive surgery including laparoscopy has gradually
been spreading in the veterinary field. This concept has started being
interesting for both practitioner and clients in Hungary. In their study the authors
compared two different electronic surgical haemostatic techniques used
in small animal laparoscopy: a bipolar laparoscopic forceps combined with
laparoscopic scissor, and a multifunctional device that was able to simultaneously
coagulate and cut by dissectioning the ovaries. They conclude
that the multifunctional device is superior, compared to the bipolar laparoscopic
forceps for the ovariectomy of the dog (mean procedure time:
37.6 and 41.9 min; hemorrhagic complication rate: 0 and 25%, respectively). | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | hu | en_US |
| dc.publisher | Magyar Állatorvosok Lapja | en_US |
| dc.title | Két különböző elektrosebészeti vérzéscsillapító rendszer klinikai összehasonlítása kisállatok laparoszkópos sebészetében | en_US |
| dc.title.alternative | Comparison of two different electrosurgical haemostatic devices for laparoscopic surgery in small animals | en_US |
| dc.type | Article | en_US |
| dcterms.bibliographicCitation | Magyar Állatorvosok Lapja 137(5), 293-304. (2015) | |
