Systematic review on techniques for the creation of pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgeries

Asna Zehra Naqvi, Vignesh Balasubaramaniam, Wasif Raza, Lajpat Rai, Graham S Whiteley
{"title":"Systematic review on techniques for the creation of pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgeries","authors":"Asna Zehra Naqvi, Vignesh Balasubaramaniam, Wasif Raza, Lajpat Rai, Graham S Whiteley","doi":"10.3126/ajms.v15i5.62482","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, laparoscopic surgeries (LPSs) are becoming increasingly prevalent. Incorporating these methods into clinical practice necessitates an in-depth understanding of the surgical techniques and multifaceted instrumentation that are specific to a slightly invasive operation. Within this systematic review, attention is directed to the technique for pneumoperitoneum creation, like the open and closed technique, to select optimal procedures along with appropriate utilization, with prominence on complication avoidance. This systematic literature review (SLR) examined significant findings from 2018 to 2023. This SLR complies with the quality standards suggested by the PRISMA document. Web of Science, SCOPUS, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink are the resources. The exclusion criteria included case reports, abstracts, and letters, as well as inclusion criteria included randomized, quasi-randomized, non-randomized, and cohort investigations on human patients, provided that they liked access safety methods and presented values. According to the findings, it can be concluded that the LP inspection of the abdominal cavity (AC), which necessitates cannula implantation, is safe and effective. Closed (Veress needle technique) and open (Hasson technique) pneumoperitoneum induction techniques are frequently utilized. Most laparoscopy (LP) surgeons prefer closed LP utilizing a Veress needle and the first trocar’s masked insertion. Critics of the Veress needle, however, assert that this technique increases the risk of vascular injury. According to proponents of the open Hasson technique, vascular injury could be entirely avoided. The use of an open approach utilizing a blunt-tipped trocar for the formation of pneumoperitoneum may provide a potentially safer alternative during LPSs, depending on safety considerations.","PeriodicalId":8522,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3126/ajms.v15i5.62482","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

Recently, laparoscopic surgeries (LPSs) are becoming increasingly prevalent. Incorporating these methods into clinical practice necessitates an in-depth understanding of the surgical techniques and multifaceted instrumentation that are specific to a slightly invasive operation. Within this systematic review, attention is directed to the technique for pneumoperitoneum creation, like the open and closed technique, to select optimal procedures along with appropriate utilization, with prominence on complication avoidance. This systematic literature review (SLR) examined significant findings from 2018 to 2023. This SLR complies with the quality standards suggested by the PRISMA document. Web of Science, SCOPUS, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, and SpringerLink are the resources. The exclusion criteria included case reports, abstracts, and letters, as well as inclusion criteria included randomized, quasi-randomized, non-randomized, and cohort investigations on human patients, provided that they liked access safety methods and presented values. According to the findings, it can be concluded that the LP inspection of the abdominal cavity (AC), which necessitates cannula implantation, is safe and effective. Closed (Veress needle technique) and open (Hasson technique) pneumoperitoneum induction techniques are frequently utilized. Most laparoscopy (LP) surgeons prefer closed LP utilizing a Veress needle and the first trocar’s masked insertion. Critics of the Veress needle, however, assert that this technique increases the risk of vascular injury. According to proponents of the open Hasson technique, vascular injury could be entirely avoided. The use of an open approach utilizing a blunt-tipped trocar for the formation of pneumoperitoneum may provide a potentially safer alternative during LPSs, depending on safety considerations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腹腔镜手术中建立腹腔积气技术的系统性综述
近来,腹腔镜手术(LPS)越来越盛行。要将这些方法应用于临床实践,就必须深入了解微创手术特有的外科技术和多方面的器械。在这篇系统性综述中,我们关注腹腔积气形成的技术,如开放式和闭合式技术,以选择最佳的手术方法和适当的使用方法,并重点关注并发症的避免。本系统性文献综述(SLR)研究了2018年至2023年的重要发现。本SLR符合PRISMA文件建议的质量标准。资源包括 Web of Science、SCOPUS、ProQuest、ScienceDirect 和 SpringerLink。排除标准包括病例报告、摘要和信件,纳入标准包括对人类患者进行的随机、准随机、非随机和队列研究,前提是这些研究喜欢访问安全方法并提出了数值。根据研究结果,可以得出结论:必须植入插管的腹腔(AC)LP检查是安全有效的。闭合式(Veress针技术)和开放式(Hasson技术)腹腔积气诱导技术经常被使用。大多数腹腔镜手术(LP)外科医生更倾向于使用Veress针进行闭式腹腔镜手术,并在第一根套管插入时进行遮盖。然而,Veress针的批评者认为这种技术会增加血管损伤的风险。开放式哈森技术的支持者认为,血管损伤完全可以避免。利用钝头套管形成腹腔积气的开放式方法可能是 LPS 期间更安全的替代方法,这取决于安全方面的考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
A comparative study of efficacy of intravenous dexmedetomidine with perineural dexmedetomidine as adjuvant to ropivacaine in supraclavicular brachial plexus block in upper limb surgery Efficacy and safety of low-dose celecoxib with chemoradiation in locally advanced head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma Comparison between mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intra renal surgery for the management of lower calyceal calculi of size less than 1.5 cm : Our institutional experience A study on clinicoradiological profile of patients with hydropneumothorax in a tertiary care hospital in Eastern India Role of low-dose deflazacort with tamsulosin versus tamsulosin alone for medical expulsive therapy of ureteric stone
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1