Comparison of two entry methods for laparoscopic port entry: technical point of view.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy Pub Date : 2012-01-01 Epub Date: 2012-06-13 DOI:10.1155/2012/305428
Adriana Toro, Maurizio Mannino, Giovanni Cappello, Andrea Di Stefano, Isidoro Di Carlo
{"title":"Comparison of two entry methods for laparoscopic port entry: technical point of view.","authors":"Adriana Toro,&nbsp;Maurizio Mannino,&nbsp;Giovanni Cappello,&nbsp;Andrea Di Stefano,&nbsp;Isidoro Di Carlo","doi":"10.1155/2012/305428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Laparoscopic entry is a blind procedure and it often represents a problem for all the related complications. In the last three decades, rapid advances in laparoscopic surgery have made it an invaluable part of general surgery, but there remains no clear consensus on an optimal method of entry into the peritoneal cavity. The aim of this paper is to focus on the evolution of two used methods of entry into the peritoneal cavity in laparoscopic surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":11288,"journal":{"name":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","volume":"2012 ","pages":"305428"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2012/305428","citationCount":"50","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/305428","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 50

Abstract

Laparoscopic entry is a blind procedure and it often represents a problem for all the related complications. In the last three decades, rapid advances in laparoscopic surgery have made it an invaluable part of general surgery, but there remains no clear consensus on an optimal method of entry into the peritoneal cavity. The aim of this paper is to focus on the evolution of two used methods of entry into the peritoneal cavity in laparoscopic surgery.

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
腹腔镜下两种入路方法的比较:技术观点。
腹腔镜进入是一个盲目的程序,它往往代表了一个问题,所有相关的并发症。在过去的三十年中,腹腔镜手术的快速发展使其成为普通外科手术的宝贵组成部分,但对于进入腹腔的最佳方法仍然没有明确的共识。本文的目的是集中讨论腹腔镜手术中进入腹腔的两种常用方法的演变。
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
期刊最新文献
Retracted: Comparison of Two Entry Methods for Laparoscopic Port Entry: Technical Point of View Endoscopic Ultrasound Elastography for Evaluation of Lymph Nodes: A Single Center Experience. Unsuspected Small-Bowel Crohn's Disease in Elderly Patients Diagnosed by Video Capsule Endoscopy. Use of 4-Fr versus 6-Fr Nasobiliary Catheter for Biliary Drainage: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study. Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of EUS Needles for Liver Biopsy: Ex Vivo Study.
×
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