Safe access to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with previous periumbilical incsions: new approach to avoid entry related bowel injury.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Mostafa Seif, Mohamed Mourad, Mostafa Refaie Elkeleny, Mohamed Wael
{"title":"Safe access to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with previous periumbilical incsions: new approach to avoid entry related bowel injury.","authors":"Mostafa Seif, Mohamed Mourad, Mostafa Refaie Elkeleny, Mohamed Wael","doi":"10.1007/s00423-025-03624-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Patients with prior abdominal surgeries are at higher risk of intra-peritoneal adhesions near the trocar entry site, increasing the likelihood of organ injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This study evaluates a novel technique where the epigastric trocar is inserted first, after creating pneumoperitoneum, to allow safe dissection of adhesions under direct vision before placing the umbilical trocar.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study included 244 patients with symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease and a history of previous abdominal surgeries extending to the umbilicus. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: Group I (n = 98) underwent traditional umbilical trocar-first LC using the Hasson technique, while Group II (n = 146) received LC using the epigastric trocar-first approach. Operative time, complications, and conversion rates were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in the demographics between both groups. The epigastric trocar-first approach significantly reduced total operative time (41.6 ± 7.7 min vs. 46.8 ± 8.8 min, p = 0.031) and small bowel injury rates (p = 0.006). Otherwise, intraoperative complications were comparable. Conversion to open surgery was lower in Group II (2.1% vs. 8.2%, p = 0.012). Postoperative pain at 6 h was significantly lower in Group II (p = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The epigastric trocar-first approach, offers a safer alternative for patients with prior abdominal surgeries when undergoing LC. This approach is safe; minimizes bowel injury risk, reduces conversion rates, and enhances patient recovery. This approach may also be beneficial in other laparoscopic procedures requiring safe entry in patients with prior abdominal surgeries. Further studies are recommended to validate its broader clinical application.</p>","PeriodicalId":17983,"journal":{"name":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","volume":"410 1","pages":"57"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11782402/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-025-03624-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Patients with prior abdominal surgeries are at higher risk of intra-peritoneal adhesions near the trocar entry site, increasing the likelihood of organ injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This study evaluates a novel technique where the epigastric trocar is inserted first, after creating pneumoperitoneum, to allow safe dissection of adhesions under direct vision before placing the umbilical trocar.

Methods: This prospective study included 244 patients with symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease and a history of previous abdominal surgeries extending to the umbilicus. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: Group I (n = 98) underwent traditional umbilical trocar-first LC using the Hasson technique, while Group II (n = 146) received LC using the epigastric trocar-first approach. Operative time, complications, and conversion rates were analyzed.

Results: There was no significant difference in the demographics between both groups. The epigastric trocar-first approach significantly reduced total operative time (41.6 ± 7.7 min vs. 46.8 ± 8.8 min, p = 0.031) and small bowel injury rates (p = 0.006). Otherwise, intraoperative complications were comparable. Conversion to open surgery was lower in Group II (2.1% vs. 8.2%, p = 0.012). Postoperative pain at 6 h was significantly lower in Group II (p = 0.001).

Conclusions: The epigastric trocar-first approach, offers a safer alternative for patients with prior abdominal surgeries when undergoing LC. This approach is safe; minimizes bowel injury risk, reduces conversion rates, and enhances patient recovery. This approach may also be beneficial in other laparoscopic procedures requiring safe entry in patients with prior abdominal surgeries. Further studies are recommended to validate its broader clinical application.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
342
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Langenbeck''s Archives of Surgery aims to publish the best results in the field of clinical surgery and basic surgical research. The main focus is on providing the highest level of clinical research and clinically relevant basic research. The journal, published exclusively in English, will provide an international discussion forum for the controlled results of clinical surgery. The majority of published contributions will be original articles reporting on clinical data from general and visceral surgery, while endocrine surgery will also be covered. Papers on basic surgical principles from the fields of traumatology, vascular and thoracic surgery are also welcome. Evidence-based medicine is an important criterion for the acceptance of papers.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信