Investigation of the Effect of Puncture Order and Position on the Difficulty of Lower and Middle Abdominal Port Placement.

IF 1.4 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT Pub Date : 2023-07-31 eCollection Date: 2023-10-01 DOI:10.4103/gmit.gmit_124_22
Chihiro Nakai, Koji Yamanoi, Akihito Horie, Ken Yamaguchi, Junzo Hamanishi, Masaki Mandai
{"title":"Investigation of the Effect of Puncture Order and Position on the Difficulty of Lower and Middle Abdominal Port Placement.","authors":"Chihiro Nakai, Koji Yamanoi, Akihito Horie, Ken Yamaguchi, Junzo Hamanishi, Masaki Mandai","doi":"10.4103/gmit.gmit_124_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Port placements at the mid-abdomen (mainstay of robotic surgery [Rob]) appear to be difficult compared to that at lower abdomen (mainstay of conventional laparoscopy [Con-Lap]). We hypothesized that the reason for this may be the difference in port puncture places.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We examined how the differences between the place and puncture order of ports affected Con-Lap cases with ports mainly placed in the lower abdomen and Rob cases with ports mainly placed in the middle abdomen. The trocar time was measured from the time when the puncture position and skin incision were determined and initiated, respectively, to the time when the port was punctured and fixed and used as the indicator of difficulty.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the Con-Lap group analysis, the trocar time of the left lower port was longer (right lower: 77 s, middle lower: 117.5 s, and left lower: 138 s, <i>P</i> < 0.0001). In the Rob group analysis, the trocar time of the left most port was significantly longer (right-most: 89.0 s, right-middle: 92.5 s, left-middle: 121.0 s, and left-most: 197.0 s; <i>P</i> < 0.0001). In addition, the total trocar time was significantly longer in the first puncture at the right-middle port in the Rob group (right-most first: 8.4 min, right-middle first: 12.4 min, and left-middle first: 8.5 min, <i>P</i> = 0.0063).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the mid-abdomen port placement, mainstay of Rob cases, the puncture order, and port site have a significant impact on the difficulty of the procedure. It is preferable to avoid initially puncturing the right-middle port in case of the Rob.</p>","PeriodicalId":45272,"journal":{"name":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","volume":"12 1","pages":"218-224"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10683955/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecology and Minimally Invasive Therapy-GMIT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/gmit.gmit_124_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Port placements at the mid-abdomen (mainstay of robotic surgery [Rob]) appear to be difficult compared to that at lower abdomen (mainstay of conventional laparoscopy [Con-Lap]). We hypothesized that the reason for this may be the difference in port puncture places.

Materials and methods: We examined how the differences between the place and puncture order of ports affected Con-Lap cases with ports mainly placed in the lower abdomen and Rob cases with ports mainly placed in the middle abdomen. The trocar time was measured from the time when the puncture position and skin incision were determined and initiated, respectively, to the time when the port was punctured and fixed and used as the indicator of difficulty.

Results: In the Con-Lap group analysis, the trocar time of the left lower port was longer (right lower: 77 s, middle lower: 117.5 s, and left lower: 138 s, P < 0.0001). In the Rob group analysis, the trocar time of the left most port was significantly longer (right-most: 89.0 s, right-middle: 92.5 s, left-middle: 121.0 s, and left-most: 197.0 s; P < 0.0001). In addition, the total trocar time was significantly longer in the first puncture at the right-middle port in the Rob group (right-most first: 8.4 min, right-middle first: 12.4 min, and left-middle first: 8.5 min, P = 0.0063).

Conclusion: In the mid-abdomen port placement, mainstay of Rob cases, the puncture order, and port site have a significant impact on the difficulty of the procedure. It is preferable to avoid initially puncturing the right-middle port in case of the Rob.

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
穿刺顺序和位置对下腹部和中腹部端口放置难度影响的研究
目的:与下腹部(传统腹腔镜的支柱[Con Lap])相比,中腹(机器人手术的支柱[Rob])的端口放置似乎很困难。我们推测,造成这种情况的原因可能是端口穿刺位置的差异。材料与方法:我们研究了端口位置和穿刺顺序的差异对Con-Lap例(端口主要位于小腹)和Rob例(端口大多位于中腹)的影响。套管针时间分别从确定和开始穿刺位置和皮肤切口的时间到穿刺和固定端口并用作难度指标的时间进行测量。结果:在Con-Lap组的分析中,左下端口的套管针时间较长(右下:77 s,中下:117.5 s,左下:138 s,P<0.0001)。在Rob组的分析,最左端口的套管钉时间显著较长(最右端:89.0 s,右中端:92.5 s,左中端:121.0 s,最左端:197.0 s;P<0.0001),Rob组右中口第一次穿刺的总套管针时间明显较长(最右侧第一次:8.4min,右中位第一次:12.4min,左中位第一第一次:8.5min,P=0.0063)。在Rob的情况下,最好避免最初刺穿右中间端口。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
98
审稿时长
52 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Novel Technique of Laparoscopic Transabdominal Cerclage after a Mersilene Tape Erosion in a Prior Laparoscopic Radical Trachelectomy and Transvaginal Cerclage Patient. Comment on "Evaluation of the success of hysteroscopic uterine septum resection". Hysteroscopic Uterine Septum Resection: Is it a Successful Treatment for Infertile Patients? Laparoscopic Excision of Cesarean Scar Ectopic Pregnancy: An Optimum Management Option. Laparoscopic Posterior Pelvic Exenteration with Radical Vulvectomy for Intestinal-type Vulvar Adenocarcinoma.
×
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