Article

[Pathophysiologic effects of CO2-pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgery].

Zavod za anesteziologiju, reanimatologiju i intenzivno lijecenje, Opća bolnica, Sveti Duh, Zagreb, Hrvatska.
Acta medica Croatica: c̆asopis Hravatske akademije medicinskih znanosti 05/2007; 61(2):165-70.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Today, laparoscopic surgery is one of the most important diagnostic and therapeutic tools in general surgery. This minimally invasive procedure requires pneumoperitoneum for adequate visualization and operative manipulation. Carbon dioxide is the most commonly used gas for creating pneumoperitoneum, because of its high diffusibility and rapid rate of absorption and excretion. Certain specific operations that in the past required long hospitalization and were associated with severe postoperative pain and frequent complications are today performed laparoscopically. This minimally invasive technique potentially offers reduced operative time and morbidity, decreased hospital stay and earlier return to normal activities, less pain and less postoperative ileus compared with the traditional open surgical procedures. Because the postoperative benefits are superior to open surgical procedures, laparoscopy is today also used in many high risk patients in advanced age and pre-existent cardiopulmonary and respiratory diseases. However, insufflations of carbon dioxide into the peritoneum may lead to alteration in the acid-base balance, cardiovascular and pulmonary physiology. Although these changes may be well tolerated in healthy patients, in high risk patients they may increase the rate of perioperative complications. Therefore, it is very important that the anesthesiologist thoroughly understands the pathophysiology of carbon dioxide-pneumoperitoneum and treatment of potential complications. In this article, the acid-base balance, cardiovascular and pulmonary changes associated with laparoscopic surgery, and their potential complications and management are discussed based on our experience and literature data.

67 Bookmarks
 · 
1,437 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The concept of balloon laparoscopy (B-LSC) pursues the simplification of conventional diagnostic laparoscopy (LSC). The pneumoperitoneum is replaced by a transparent balloon, which is positioned in front of the optical system. It shall be shown that with this arrangement diagnostic LSC can be performed outside of the operating room without requiring general anesthesia. An inflatable balloon was developed for a 30 degrees /3.5-mm rod lens. Intra-abdominally the balloon was expanded to a diameter of 30 mm by air insufflation, and B-LSC was performed. Twelve patients were examined in general anesthesia before laparoscopic surgery. Twelve patients were subjected to B-LSC fully awake or with sedation (midazolam or propofol/S-ketamine) as a "second-look" procedure by way of a flexible trocar (port) left in the abdominal wall at the end of previous operation. Eight patients have been first provided with a trocar under sedation (midazolam or propofol/S-ketamine) combined with local anesthesia, and B-LSC was performed before laparoscopic surgery. On a scale of 1-5, the general impression was rated 1.9, the navigability to the different abdominal organs 2.5, the resolution 1.5, the stability of the system optic/trocar 2.1, the suitability of the balloon format 1.9, and the stability of the balloon against lateral shear forces 2.4. The degree of painfulness of the examination was rated 2.8, the tolerance of the port 1.4, and the degree of painfulness of trocar placement at 2.5. On a scale of 1 to 3, the strain of the abdominal musculature was rated 1.4 and the obstruction by adhesions 1.7. B-LSC is technically practicable with good imaging qualities and without requiring pneumoperitoneum. It is tolerated in great extent under slight sedation and particularly well under deep sedation. The procedure is suitable for diagnostics of unclear abdominal conditions, as a second-look LSC and also as a staging LSC.
    Surgical Endoscopy 07/2010; 24(7):1566-72. · 3.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for patients with acute cholecystitis, percutaneous cholecystostomy has been performed in patients unsuitable for cholecystectomy. EUS-guided transgastric/transduodenal gallbladder drainage by using a plastic stent and/or nasobiliary drainage may be an alternative effective treatment for these patients, but bile leakage into the peritoneal space causing bile peritonitis is not uncommon during placement of a plastic stent. To evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of EUS-guided transgastric/transduodenal gallbladder drainage with single-step placement of a modified covered self-expandable metal stent (CSEMS) in patients with acute cholecystitis who are unsuitable for cholecystectomy. Prospective feasibility study. Tertiary-care referral center. This study involved 15 patients with acute cholecystitis who did not respond to initial medical treatment and were unsuitable for cholecystectomy. EUS-guided transgastric/transduodenal gallbladder drainage with single-step placement of a modified CSEMS. Technical success, functional success, complications associated with the placement of a metal stent, and recurrence of acute cholecystitis. Modified CSEMSs were successfully placed in all patients through the stomach (n = 10) or duodenum (n = 5). All patients achieved functional success within 3 days of metal stent placement. Pneumoperitoneum occurred in two patients during or after the procedure, but both patients improved with conservative management. During follow-up (median 145 days, range 60-297 days), no patient experienced recurrent cholecystitis. Small patient population without long-term follow-up. Placement of a modified CSEMS after EUS-guided transgastric/transduodenal gallbladder drainage may be a feasible and safe alternative to treatments such as percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients with acute cholecystitis who are unsuitable for cholecystectomy.
    Gastrointestinal endoscopy 07/2011; 74(1):176-81. · 6.71 Impact Factor