Balloon blunt-tip trocar for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Improvement over the traditional Hasson and Veress needle methods

被引:11
作者
Bernik, TR
Trocciola, SM
Mayer, DA
Patane, J
Czura, CJ
Wallack, MK
机构
[1] St Vincents Hosp, Dept Surg, New York, NY USA
[2] Huntington Hosp, Dept Surg, Huntington, NY USA
来源
JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES-PART A | 2001年 / 11卷 / 02期
关键词
D O I
10.1089/109264201750162275
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Purpose: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a routine procedure for most general surgeons, yet the technical aspects of gaining access to the peritoneal cavity continue to be quite diverse. We describe a prospective review of 180 LCs using three access techniques: open balloon blunt-tip trocar (BBTT), open Hasson (HA), and closed Veress needle (VN). We favor the BBTT because it is designed to avoid all sharp instrumentation and offers superior seal and mobility, as well as expeditious and easy abdominal access. Patients and Methods: The techniques and devices were evaluated prospectively with regard to simplicity of access, leakage of carbon dioxide, access time, and complications. All patients underwent LC by one of two Board-certified surgeons. Results: The mean time to insertion of the laparoscope for the BBTT (3.5 +/- 0.99 minutes) was significantly less than the insertion time for the VN technique (5.2 +/- 0.9 minutes, P < 0.05). The insertion time for the BBTT was also less than for the standard HA approach (4.25 <plus/minus> 1.0 minutes; P < 0.05). There were no visceral or vascular injuries noted, but CO2 leakage and subcutaneous insufflation of gas experienced in the standard HA and VN groups resulted in lengthened operative times. One patient in the BBTT group experienced a postoperative port-site herniation, which was repaired primarily without consequence. Conclusion: The BBTT is an established, safe alternative to blind access for LC. Our technique is simple and rapid and avoids most of the technical difficulties encountered by other open access devices. We believe this method provides surgeons with an option that is efficient and easier to perform than most other conventional open-access laparoscopic techniques.
引用
收藏
页码:73 / 78
页数:6
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
BONGARD F, 1994, CURR PROB SURG, V31, P857
[2]   Open versus closed establishment of pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgery [J].
Bonjer, HJ ;
Hazebroek, EJ ;
Kazemier, G ;
Giuffrida, MC ;
Meijer, WS ;
Lange, JF .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1997, 84 (05) :599-602
[3]  
BYRON JW, 1993, SURG GYNECOL OBSTET, V177, P259
[4]   Blind versus open approach to laparoscopic cholecystectomy - A randomized study [J].
Cogliandolo, A ;
Manganaro, T ;
Saitta, FP ;
Micali, B .
SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY & ENDOSCOPY, 1998, 8 (05) :353-355
[5]   COMPLICATIONS OF LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY - A NATIONAL SURVEY OF 4,292 HOSPITALS AND AN ANALYSIS OF 77,604 CASES [J].
DEZIEL, DJ ;
MILLIKAN, KW ;
ECONOMOU, SG ;
DOOLAS, A ;
KO, ST ;
AIRAN, MC .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1993, 165 (01) :9-14
[6]   MODIFIED INSTRUMENT AND METHOD FOR LAPAROSCOPY [J].
HASSAON, HM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1971, 110 (06) :886-&
[7]  
HURD WW, 1994, J REPROD MED, V39, P393
[8]  
James WPT, 1998, EXP CLIN ENDOCR DIAB, V106, P1
[9]  
KAALI SG, 1992, J REPROD MED, V37, P617
[10]  
LEHMANNWILLENBROCK E, 1992, J REPROD MED, V37, P671