Comparative Study of Veress Needle and Visiport in Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Surgery

Sheela Prince, P. Kannan
{"title":"Comparative Study of Veress Needle and Visiport in Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Surgery","authors":"Sheela Prince, P. Kannan","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10033-1368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: In minimal access surgery, the technique of first entry in the human body with the telescope and instruments is called the access technique. Laparoscopic access is of two types: closed and open access. 1,2 Here we are analyzing the merits and demerits of two entry techniques and the incidence of complications in both techniques. Comparison is between the blind technique by using the Veress needle and the undervision technique by using Visiport. Aim of study: To assess, evaluate, and compare the incidence of complications in blind and clear view access techniques in laparoscopic surgery. Materials and methods: A total of 150 cases of laparoscopic surgeries using the Veress needle and 150 cases of laparoscopic surgeries done by Visiport have been reported. (All laparoscopic surgeries were done in the General Surgery Department in Rashid Hospital from January 1, 2015 to December 12, 2015.) Result: In this study of comparison, both techniques were seen to have been associated with their own complications. But Visiport is a safe and faster method of creating pneumoperitoneum, though there was a statistically insignificant major vascular injury. It happened with an inexperienced surgeon. Conclusion: Visiport is a safe and faster method of creating pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgery.","PeriodicalId":38741,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10033-1368","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In minimal access surgery, the technique of first entry in the human body with the telescope and instruments is called the access technique. Laparoscopic access is of two types: closed and open access. 1,2 Here we are analyzing the merits and demerits of two entry techniques and the incidence of complications in both techniques. Comparison is between the blind technique by using the Veress needle and the undervision technique by using Visiport. Aim of study: To assess, evaluate, and compare the incidence of complications in blind and clear view access techniques in laparoscopic surgery. Materials and methods: A total of 150 cases of laparoscopic surgeries using the Veress needle and 150 cases of laparoscopic surgeries done by Visiport have been reported. (All laparoscopic surgeries were done in the General Surgery Department in Rashid Hospital from January 1, 2015 to December 12, 2015.) Result: In this study of comparison, both techniques were seen to have been associated with their own complications. But Visiport is a safe and faster method of creating pneumoperitoneum, though there was a statistically insignificant major vascular injury. It happened with an inexperienced surgeon. Conclusion: Visiport is a safe and faster method of creating pneumoperitoneum 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
Veress针与Visiport在腹腔镜手术中造气腹的比较研究
导读:在微创手术中,利用望远镜和仪器首次进入人体的技术被称为进入技术。腹腔镜通路有两种类型:封闭通路和开放通路。1,2在此,我们分析两种入路技术的优缺点以及两种入路技术的并发症发生率。比较了Veress针的盲法和Visiport的欠视法。研究目的:评估、评价和比较腹腔镜手术中盲视和清晰视野通路技术的并发症发生率。材料与方法:共报道Veress针腹腔镜手术150例,Visiport腹腔镜手术150例。(2015年1月1日至2015年12月12日腹腔镜手术均在拉希德医院普外科完成。)结果:在这项比较研究中,两种技术都被认为与它们自己的并发症有关。但Visiport是一种安全、快速的制造气腹的方法,尽管在统计上没有明显的大血管损伤。这发生在一个没有经验的外科医生身上。结论:Visiport是一种安全、快速的腹腔镜手术造气腹方法。
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
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Surgical Aspects of the Possover LION Procedure: An Emerging Procedure for Recovery of Visceral Functions and Locomotion in Paraplegics Avoiding the Falciform Ligament Sign during the Intraoperative Cholangiogram A Study on Effects of Leaking Carbon Dioxide Gas on Surgeons during Laparoscopic Surgeries Comparison between Laparoscopic Ultrasound and Intraoperative Cholangiogram in Detection of Common Bile Duct Stones during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Cholelithiasis: A Prospective Study Short-term Outcome of Laparoscopic vs Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial
×
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