Back to Search Start Over

Comparison of intraabdominal pressures using the gastroscope and laparoscope for transgastric surgery.

Authors :
Meireles, O.
Kantsevoy, S.
Kalloo, A.
Jagannath, S.
Giday, S.
Magno, P.
Shih, S.
Hanly, E.
Ko, C.
Beitler, D.
Marohn, M.
Kantsevoy, S V
Kalloo, A N
Jagannath, S B
Giday, S A
Shih, S P
Hanly, E J
Ko, C-W
Beitler, D M
Marohn, M R
Source :
Surgical Endoscopy & Other Interventional Techniques. Jun2007, Vol. 21 Issue 6, p998-1001. 4p. 1 Chart, 1 Graph.
Publication Year :
2007

Abstract

<bold>Background: </bold>The peroral transgastric endoscopic approach for intraabdominal procedures appears to be feasible, although multiple aspects of this approach remain unclear. This study aimed to measure intraperitoneal pressure in a porcine model during the peroral transgastric endoscopic approach, comparing an endoscopic on-demand insufflator/light source with a standard autoregulated laparoscopic insufflator.<bold>Methods: </bold>All experiments were performed with 50-kg female pigs under general anesthesia. A standard upper endoscope was advanced perorally through a gastric wall incision into the peritoneal cavity. The peritoneal cavity was insufflated with operating room air from an endoscopic light source/insufflator. Intraperitoneal pressure was measured by three routes: (1) through the endoscope biopsy channel, (2) through a 5-mm transabdominal laparoscopic port, and (3) through a 16-gauge Veress needle inserted into the peritoneal cavity through the anterior abdominal wall. The source of insufflation alternated between on-demand manual insufflation through the endoscopic light source/insufflator using room air and a standard autoregulated laparoscopic insufflator using carbon dioxide (CO(2)).<bold>Results: </bold>Six acute experiments were performed. Intraperitoneal pressure measurements showed good correlation regardless of measurement route and were independent of the type of insufflation gas, whether room air or CO(2). On-demand insufflation with the endoscopic light source/insufflator resulted in a wide variation in pressures (range, 4-32 mmHg; mean, 16.0 +/- 11.7). Intraabdominal pressures using a standard autoregulated laparoscopic insufflator demonstrated minimal fluctuation (range, 8-15 mmHg; mean, 11.0 +/- 2.2 mmHg) around a predetermined value.<bold>Conclusion: </bold>Use of an on-demand unregulated endoscopic light source/insufflator for translumenal surgery can cause large variation in intraperitoneal pressures and intraabdominal hypertension, leading to the risk of hemodynamic and respiratory compromise. Safety may favor well-controlled intraabdominal pressures achieved with a standard autoregulated laparoscopic insufflator. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
18666817
Volume :
21
Issue :
6
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Surgical Endoscopy & Other Interventional Techniques
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
25684355
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-006-9167-7