Randomized comparison between different insufflation pressures for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Research hotspots and trends in postlaparoscopic shoulder pain from 2003 to 2023: A bibliometric analysis

The incidence of postlaparoscopic shoulder pain has recently increased and has attracted increasing attention from clinical workers, but no study has performed bibliometric and visual analysis of the relevant literature. This study used bibliometric and visual analysis to conduct a comprehensive and systematic evaluation of postlaparoscopic shoulder pain to help researchers understand the latest global trends and hotspots and provide a reference for caregivers to carry out PLSP care interventions and research. Related studies on postlaparoscopic shoulder pain from 2003 to 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. We analysed current research trends and hotspots in this field using VOSviewer and CiteSpace. A total of 2451 authors from 352 institutions in 50 countries published 464 studies related to postlaparoscopic shoulder pain. The United States was the country with the most publications and worked closely with other countries. Donmez Turgut was the researcher with the most published articles, while Bisgaard T had the most citations per article. The Journal of Surgical Endoscopy was cited most frequently, totalling 356 times. Through keyword significance analysis, we found that relieving postlaparoscopic shoulder pain in patients through integrated care interventions was an emerging research hotspot. This bibliometric and visual analysis provides a comprehensive review of studies related to postlaparoscopic shoulder pain. The current global research trend and hotspot is to alleviate postlaparoscopic shoulder pain through integrated care interventions, but the advantages of this approach are not outstanding. However, further research and global collaboration are still needed. Our findings can help researchers understand the current status of postlaparoscopic shoulder pain research and identify new directions for future research.

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with deep neuromuscular blockade versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstone disease: a non-inferiority randomized control trial

BACKGROUND

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum (LPP) is an attempt at improving laparoscopic surgery. However, it has the issue of poor working space for which deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) may be a solution. There is a lack of literature comparing LPP with deep NMB to standard pressure pneumoperitoneum (SPP) with moderate NMB.

METHODOLOGY

This was a single institutional prospective non-inferiority RCT, with permuted block randomization of subjects into group A and B [Group A: LPP; 8-10 mmHg with deep NMB [ Train of Four count (TOF): 0, Post Tetanic Count (PTC): 1-2] and Group B: SPP; 12-14 mmHg with moderate NMB]. The level of NMB was monitored with neuromuscular monitor with TOF count and PTC. Cisatracurium infusion was used for continuous deep NMB in group A. Primary outcome measures were the surgeon satisfaction score and the time for completion of the procedure. Secondarily important clinical outcomes were also reported.

RESULTS

Of the 222 patients screened, 181 participants were enrolled [F: 138 (76.2%); M: 43 (23.8%); Group A n = 90, Group B n = 91]. Statistically similar surgeon satisfaction scores (26.1 ± 3.7 vs 26.4 ± 3.4; p = 0.52) and time for completion (55.2 ± 23.4 vs 52.5 ± 24.9 min; p = 0.46) were noted respectively in groups A and B. On both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis it was found that group A was non-inferior to group B in terms of total surgeon satisfaction score, however, non-inferiority was not proven for time for completion of surgery. Mean pain scores and incidence of shoulder pain were statistically similar up-to 7 days of follow-up in both groups. 4 (4.4%) patients in group B and 2 (2.2%) in group A had bradycardia (p = 0.4). Four (4.4%) cases of group A were converted to group B. One case of group B converted to open surgery. Bile spills and gallbladder perforations were comparable.

CONCLUSION

LPP with deep NMB is non-inferior to SPP with moderate NMB in terms of surgeon satisfaction score but not in terms of time required to complete the procedure. Clinical outcomes and safety profile are similar in both groups. However, it could be marginally costlier to use LPP with deep NMB.

Effect of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on pain and inflammation in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

We aim to assess the effect of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on post operative pain and ten of the known inflammatory markers.

BACKGROUND

The standard of care pneumoperitoneum set pressure in laparoscopic cholecystectomy is set to 12-14 mmHg, but many societies advocate to operate at the lowest pressure allowing adequate exposure of the operative field. Many trials have described the benefits of operating at a low-pressure pneumoperitoneum in terms of lower post operative pain, and better hemodynamic stability. But only few describe the effects on inflammatory markers and cytokines.

METHODS

A prospective, double-blinded, randomised, controlled clinical trial, including patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients randomised into low-pressure (8-10 mmHg) vs. standard-pressure (12-14 mmHg) with an allocation ratio of 1:1. Perioperative variables were collected and analysed.

RESULTS

one hundred patients were allocated, 50 patients in each study arm. Low-pressure patients reported lower median pain score 6-hour post operatively (5 vs. 6, p-value = 0.021) in comparison with standard-pressure group. Eight out of 10 inflammatory markers demonstrated better results in low-pressure group in comparison with standard-pressure, but the effect was not statistically significant. Total operative time and surgery difficulty was not significantly different between the two groups even in the hands of inexperienced surgeons.

CONCLUSION

low-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with less post operative pain and lower rise of inflammatory markers. It is feasible with comparable complications to the standard of care. Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05530564/ September 7th, 2022).

Low intra-abdominal pressure in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Guidelines do not provide clear recommendations with regard to the use of low intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) during laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the influence of low versus standard IAP during laparoscopic surgery on the key-outcomes in perioperative medicine as defined by the StEP-COMPAC consensus group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials comparing low IAP (<10 mmHg) with standard IAP (10 mmHg or higher) during laparoscopic surgery without time, language, or blinding restrictions. According to the PRISMA guidelines, two review authors independently identified trials and extracted data. Risk ratio (RR), and mean difference (MD), with 95% CIs were calculated using random-effects models with RevMan5. Main outcomes were based on StEP-COMPAC recommendations, and included postoperative complications, postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) scores, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Eighty-five studies in a wide range of laparoscopic procedures (7349 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. The available evidence indicates that the use of low IAP (<10 mmHg) leads to a lower incidence of mild (Clavien-Dindo grade 1-2) postoperative complications (RR=0.68, 95% CI: 0.53-0.86), lower pain scores (MD=-0.68, 95% CI: -0.82 to 0.54) and PONV incidence (RR=0.67, 95% CI: 0.51-0.88), and a reduced length of hospital stay (MD=-0.29, 95% CI: -0.46 to 0.11). Low IAP did not increase the risk of intraoperative complications (RR=1.15, 95% CI: 0.77-1.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the established safety and the reduced incidence of mild postoperative complications, lower pain scores, reduced incidence of PONV, and shorter length of stay, the available evidence supports a moderate to strong recommendation (1a level of evidence) in favor of low IAP during laparoscopic surgery.

Low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

It has been previously demonstrated that the rise of intra-abdominal pressures and prolonged exposure to such pressures can produce changes in the cardiovascular and pulmonary dynamic which, though potentially well tolerated in the majority of healthy patients with adequate cardiopulmonary reserve, may be less well tolerated when cardiopulmonary reserve is poor.

Nevertheless, theoretically lowering intra-abdominal pressure could reduce the impact of pneumoperitoneum on the blood circulation of intra-abdominal organs as well as cardiopulmonary function. However, the evidence remains weak, and as such, the debate remains unresolved. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to demonstrate the current knowledge around the effect of pneumoperitoneum at different pressures levels during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Materials and methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis were reported according to the recommendations of the 2020 updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions.

Results

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 44 randomized controlled trials that compared different pressures of pneumoperitoneum in the setting of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Length of hospital, conversion rate, and complications rate were not significantly different, whereas statistically significant differences were observed in post-operative pain and analgesic consumption. According to the GRADE criteria, overall quality of evidence was high for intra-operative bile spillage (critical outcome), overall complications (critical outcome), shoulder pain (critical outcome), and overall post-operative pain (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was moderate for conversion to open surgery (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 1 day (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 3 days (important outcome), and bleeding (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was low for operative time (important outcome), length of hospital stay (important outcome), post-operative pain at 12 h (critical outcome), and was very low for post-operative pain at 1 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 4 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 8 h (critical outcome), and post-operative pain at 2 days (critical outcome).

Conclusions

This review allowed us to draw conclusive results from the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with an adequate quality of evidence.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09201-1.

Reduced Laparoscopic Intra-abdominal Pressure During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Its Effect on Post-operative Pain: a Double-Blinded Randomised Control Trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is regarded as the gold standard for the surgical management of cholelithiasis. To improve post-operative pain, low-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LPLC) have been trialed. A recent systematic review found that LPLC reduced pain; however, many of the randomised control trials were at a high risk of bias and the overall quality of evidence was low.

METHODS

One hundred patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomised to a LPLC (8 mmHg) or a standard pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy (12 mmHg) (SPLC) with surgeons and anaesthetists blinded to the pressure. Pressures were increased if vision was compromised. Primary outcomes were post-operative pain and analgesia requirements at 4-6 h and 24 h.

RESULTS

Intra-operative visibility was significantly reduced in LPLC (p<0.01) resulting in a higher number of operations requiring the pressure to be increased (29% vs 8%, p=0.010); however, there were no differences in length of operation or post-operative outcomes. Pain scores were comparable at all time points across all pressures; however, recovery room fentanyl requirement was more than four times higher when comparing 8 to 12 mmHg (12.5mcg vs 60mcg, p=0.047). Nausea and vomiting was also higher when comparing these pressures (0/36 vs 7/60, p=0.033). Interestingly, when surgeons estimated the operating pressure, they were correct in only 69% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Although pain scores were similar, there was a significant reduction in fentanyl requirement and nausea/vomiting in LPLC. Although LPLC compromised intra-operative visibility requiring increased pressure in some cases, there was no difference in complications, suggesting LPLC is safe and beneficial to attempt in all patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12619000205134).

Comparing postoperative pain in various pressure pneumoperitoneum of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a double-blind randomized controlled study

Purpose

This study aims to evaluate the effect of different pneumoperitoneum pressures on postoperative pain, especially by subcategorizing the pressures into 3 groups during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

We conducted a prospective randomized, double-blinded study of 150 patients with benign and uncomplicated gallbladder disease. They were categorized into 3 groups. Each group (50 patients) underwent LC with different pneumoperitoneum methods: group VLP, very-low pressure (6–8 mmHg); group LP, low pressure (9–11 mmHg); and group SP, standard pressure (12–14 mmHg). The 3 groups were compared for pain intensity, duration, analgesic requirement, and complications.

Results

The characteristics of the patients were similar among all groups. Postoperative pain scores at each time point (1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours) were not significantly different among the 3 groups. Further, operation time, hospital stay, the number of analgesic consumption doses, and postoperative complications were not significantly different among the 3 groups.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates no difference in postoperative pain among various pneumoperitoneum pressures during LC. Therefore, routine use of lower-pressure pneumoperitoneum is not recommended unless in selected patients who require low-pressure pneumoperitoneum surgery.

Effects of deep neuromuscular block with low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on respiratory mechanics and biotrauma in a steep Trendelenburg position

We hypothesized that deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) with low-pressure pneumoperitoneum (PP) would improve respiratory mechanics and reduce biotrauma compared to moderate NMB with high-pressure PP in a steep Trendelenburg position. Seventy-four women undergoing robotic gynecologic surgery were randomly assigned to two equal groups. Moderate NMB group was maintained with a train of four count of 1–2 and PP at 12 mmHg. Deep NMB group was maintained with a post-tetanic count of 1–2 and PP at 8 mmHg. Inflammatory cytokines were measured at baseline, at the end of PP, and 24 h after surgery. Interleukin-6 increased significantly from baseline at the end of PP and 24 h after the surgery in moderate NMB group but not in deep NMB group (P_group*time = 0.036). The peak inspiratory, driving, and mean airway pressures were significantly higher in moderate NMB group than in deep NMB group at 15 min and 60 min after PP (P_group*time = 0.002, 0.003, and 0.048, respectively). In conclusion, deep NMB with low-pressure PP significantly suppressed the increase in interleukin-6 developed after PP, by significantly improving the respiratory mechanics compared to moderate NMB with high-pressure PP during robotic surgery.

The impact of intra-abdominal pressure on perioperative outcomes in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy involves using intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) to facilitate adequate surgical conditions. However, there is no consensus on optimal IAP levels to improve surgical outcomes. Therefore, we conducted a systematic literature review (SLR) to examine outcomes of low, standard, and high IAP among adults undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

An electronic database search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared outcomes of low, standard, and high IAP among adults undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to conduct pairwise meta-analyses and indirect treatment comparisons of the levels of IAP assessed across trials.

Results

The SLR and NMA included 22 studies. Compared with standard IAP, on a scale of 0 (no pain at all) to 10 (worst imaginable pain), low IAP was associated with significantly lower overall pain scores at 24 h (mean difference [MD]: − 0.70; 95% credible interval [CrI]: − 1.26, − 0.13) and reduced risk of shoulder pain 24 h (odds ratio [OR] 0.24; 95% CrI 0.12, 0.48) and 72 h post-surgery (OR 0.22; 95% CrI 0.07, 0.65). Hospital stay was shorter with low IAP (MD: − 0.14 days; 95% CrI − 0.30, − 0.01). High IAP was not associated with a significant difference for these outcomes when compared with standard or low IAP. No significant differences were found between the IAP levels regarding need for conversion to open surgery; post-operative acute bleeding, pain at 72 h, nausea, and vomiting; and duration of surgery.

Conclusions

Our study of published trials indicates that using low, as opposed to standard, IAP during laparoscopic cholecystectomy may reduce patients’ post-operative pain, including shoulder pain, and length of hospital stay. Heterogeneity in the pooled estimates and high risk of bias of the included trials suggest the need for high-quality, adequately powered RCTs to confirm these findings.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-020-07527-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Low intra-abdominal pressure and deep neuromuscular blockade laparoscopic surgery and surgical space conditions: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Low intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) are frequently used in laparoscopic abdominal surgery to improve surgical space conditions and decrease postoperative pain. The evidence supporting operations using low IAP and deep NMB is open to debate.

METHODS

The feasibility of the routine use of low IAP +deep NMB during laparoscopic surgery was examined. A meta-analysis is conducted with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the influence of low IAP + deep NMB vs. low IAP + moderate NMB, standard IAP +deep NMB, and standard IAP + moderate NMB during laparoscopic procedures on surgical space conditions, the duration of surgery and postoperative pain. RCTs were identified using the Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases from initiation to June 2019. Our search identified 9 eligible studies on the use of low IAP + deep NMB and surgical space conditions.

RESULTS

Low IAP + deep NMB during laparoscopic surgery did not improve the surgical space conditions when compared with the use of moderate NMB, with a mean difference (MD) of -0.09 (95% confidence interval (CI): -0.55-0.37). Subgroup analyses showed improved surgical space conditions with the use of low IAP + deep NMB compared with low IAP + moderate NMB, (MD = 0.63 [95% CI:0.06-1.19]), and slightly worse conditions compared with the use of standard IAP + deep NMB and standard IAP + moderate NMB, with MDs of -1.13(95% CI:-1.47 to 0.79) and -0.87(95% CI:-1.30 to 0.43), respectively. The duration of surgery did not improve with low IAP + deep NMB, (MD = 1.72 [95% CI: -1.69 to 5.14]), and no significant reduction in early postoperative pain was found in the deep-NMB group (MD = -0.14 [95% CI: -0.51 to 0.23]).

CONCLUSION

Low IAP +deep NMB is not significantly more effective than other IAP +NMB combinations for optimizing surgical space conditions, duration of surgery, or postoperative pain in this meta-analysis. Whether the use of low IAP + deep NMB results in fewer intraoperative complications, enhanced quality of recovery or both after laparoscopic surgery should be studied in the future.

Effects of deep vs moderate neuromuscular block on the quality of recovery after robotic gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether deep neuromuscular blockade results in better postoperative recovery than does moderate neuromuscular blockade. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to compare the effects of deep neuromuscular blockade and moderate neuromuscular blockade on the quality of postoperative recovery in patients undergoing robotic gastrectomy.

METHODS

In this prospective, double-blind, single-center randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel groups, 56 adult patients (19-80 years) scheduled for elective robotic gastrectomy were randomly assigned to a moderate neuromuscular blockade group or a deep neuromuscular blockade group in a 1:1 ratio. In the deep and moderate neuromuscular blockade groups, the infusion rate for rocuronium was adjusted to maintain a post-tetanic count of 1-2 or a train-of-four count of 1-2, respectively. The primary outcome was the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) score on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included the QoR-40 score on postoperative day 2, intraoperative hemodynamic data, intraoperative respiratory data, visual analog scale score for pain, postoperative incidences of nausea and vomiting, postoperative rescue analgesic use, and postoperative rescue antiemetic use.

RESULTS

The postoperative QoR-40 score was similar between the two groups on postoperative days 1 and 2. Moreover, the two groups showed no differences in intraoperative hemodynamic and respiratory data or postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, and rescue medication use.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that the quality of recovery after robotic gastrectomy is similar for deep and moderate neuromuscular blockade. Therefore, deep neuromuscular blockade during robotic gastrectomy may be unnecessary, at least in patients with normal body mass index.

Intraabdominal Pressure and Postoperative Discomfort in Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) Surgery: a Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

High intraabdominal pressure (IAP) during laparoscopic surgery has been associated with postoperative discomfort. Effects on nausea and access have not been subjected to randomized studies. In cholecystectomy, lower IAP may cause less pain, but nausea and surgical access in RYGB surgery have not been investigated. We studied the influence of two IAP levels on surgical access, operation time, postoperative pain, and nausea.

METHODS

Fifty consecutive female gastric bypass patients were randomized to intraabdominal pressure of 12 (IAP12) or 18 (IAP18) mm Hg. Surgeons and personnel were blinded to randomization; study groups were well matched for age and BMI. Operative time was noted in minutes. Visual analogue scales were used for assessing access and for patients assessing pain (abdomen-shoulder) and nausea (supine-standing) at six time points during the first 16 postoperative hours. Rescue medication was recorded.

RESULTS

In 3/25 patients in the IAP12 group, the code was broken due to access problems vs. 0/25 in the IAP18 group (p = 0.1398). Operative time did not differ. Access was significantly better for IAP18 (92.2 ± 2.3 vs. 69.3 ± 4.2; p = 0.0001). Postoperative shoulder pain was maximal after 6 h but throughout less than in the abdomen (p < 0.0001); there were no differences in pain between IAP18 and IAP12 (p = 0.7408). Postoperative nausea was significantly greater standing than supine but without differences between groups.

CONCLUSION

Higher IAP gives better surgical access in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with no negative effect on pain or nausea.

Association between intraabdominal pressure during gynaecologic laparoscopy and postoperative pain

PURPOSE

Laparoscopy is nowadays a well-established surgical method and plays a main role in an ever-increasing range of indications in gynaecology. High-quality studies of surgical techniques are necessary to improve the quality of patient care. The present study aims at evaluating postoperative pain after gynaecological laparoscopy depending on the intraoperative CO₂ pressure.

METHODS

In a prospective, monocentric, randomized single-blind study at the Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics at the Hannover Medical School, we include patients scheduled for different laparoscopic procedures. Randomization of the intraoperative CO₂ pressure was carried out in six groups. Pain was assessed the day after surgery by the blinded nurse using a visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

550 patients were included in the period from May 2013 to January 2016. The analysis of the per protocol population PPP (n = 360) showed no statistically significant difference between the six intervention groups with regard to mean postoperative pain perception. In direct comparison between two groups, an intraoperative CO₂ pressure of 15 mmHg was associated with a significant higher pain score than a pressure of 12 mmHg. The difference was 7.46 mm on a 10 cm VAS.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study indicate that a CO₂ pressure of 12 versus 15 mmHg can be advantageous. However, the clinical relevance remains unclear due to the low difference in pain. The additional benefit of an even lower pressure of 10 or 8 mmHg cannot be reliably assessed; we found signs of poor visibility conditions in these low pressure groups.

Which intraperitoneal insufflation pressure should be used for less postoperative pain in transperitoneal laparoscopic urologic surgeries?

Purpose

To determine whether using different intraperitoneal insufflation pressures for transperitoneal laparoscopic urologic surgeries decreases postoperative pain.

Materials and Methods

76 patients who underwent transperitoneal laparoscopic upper urinary tract surgery at different insufflation pressures were allocated into the following groups: 10mmHg (group I, n=24), 12mmHg (group II, n=25) and 14mmHg (group III, n=27). These patients were compared according to age, gender, body mass index (BMI), type and duration of surgery, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative pain score and length of hospital stay. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used for postoperative pain.

Results

Demographic characteristics, mean age, gender, BMI and type of surgeries were statistically similar among the groups. The mean operation time was higher in group I than group II and group III but this was not statistically significant (P=0.810). The mean intraoperative bleeding volume was significantly higher in group I compared with group II and group III (P=0.030 and P=0.006). The mean length of postoperative hospital stays was statistically similar among the groups (P=0.849). The mean VAS score at 6h was significantly reduced in group I compared with group III (P=0.011). At 12h, the mean VAS score was significantly reduced in group I compared with group II and group III (P=0.009 and P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the mean VAS scores at 24h among three groups (P=0.920).

Conclusion

Lower insufflation pressures are associated with lower postoperative pain scores in the early postoperative period.

Effects of low and standard intra-abdominal pressure on systemic inflammation and immune response in laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A prospective randomised study

BACKGROUND:

The advantages of laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) over open adrenalectomy are undeniable. Nevertheless, carbon dioxide (CO₂) pneumoperitoneum may have an unfavourable effect on the local immune response. The aim of this study was to compare changes in the systemic inflammation and immune response in the early post-operative (p.o.) period after LA performed with standard and low-pressure CO₂ pneumoperitoneum.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

We studied, in a prospective randomised study, 51 patients consecutively with documented adrenal lesion who had undergone a LA: 26 using standard-pressure (12-14 mmHg) and 25 using low-pressure (6-8 mmHg) pneumoperitoneum. White blood cells (WBC), peripheral lymphocyte subpopulation, human leucocyte antigen-DR (HLA-DR), neutrophil elastase, interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1, and C-reactive protein (CRP) were investigated.

RESULTS:

Significantly higher concentrations of neutrophil elastase, IL-6 and IL-1 and CRP were detected p.o. in the standard-pressure group of patients in comparison with the low-pressure group (P < 0.05). A statistically significant change in HLA-DR expression was recorded p.o. at 24 h, as a reduction of this antigen expressed on the monocyte surface in patients from the standard group; no changes were noted in low-pressure group patients (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

This study demonstrated that reducing the pressure of the pneumoperitoneum to 6-8 mmHg during LA reduced p.o. inflammatory response and averted p.o. immunosuppression.

A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing systemic stress response in Laparoascopic cholecystectomy between low-pressure and standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become the gold-standard treatment for gallstone diseases. However, despite huge reduction in operative injury, systemic stress response remains high. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to compare systemic stress response between 2 different techniques of CO2 pneumoperitoneum.

METHODS

Trough a prospective, double-blinded RCT, serum levels of cortisol, adrenaline, glucose, and C-reactive protein (CRP) were compared between the two groups consisted of 50 patients undergoing LC under low-pressure and standard-pressure CO2 pneimoperitoneum.

RESULTS

A total of fifty patients undergoing LC were equally assigned to 2 groups of twenty five patients. Average age was 48 ± 13.8 years (range, 19-74 years). Operative time was similar between standard-pressure group (47.8 ± 16.8 min) and low-pressure group (53.6 ± 25.1). Moreover, intra-operative IV volume administration and urine output did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (p > 0.05). Although the average heart rate and mean arterial pressure were slightly higher in a standard-pressure group compared with a low-pressure group, serial measurements of these parameters were statistically similar between the 2 groups. Serial changes of serum levels of cortisol, glucose, adrenaline, and CRP were compared between surgery day, postoperative 6-h and 1st postoperative day, which did not differ significantly between the standard-pressure and the low-pressure groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study did not reveal any alteration in systemic stress response with reduction in intra-abdominal pressure of pneumoperitoneum in LC. RCT REGISTRATION: irct.ir ID: IRCT201110072982N5.

Shoulder Tip Pain Following Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy-a Randomized Control Study to Determine the Cause

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum and duration of surgery in laparoscopic cholecystectomy on postoperative shoulder tip pain. A total of 100 patients were assigned into two groups depending on the intraperitoneal pressure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Group A included patients in whom the intraperitoneal pressure was 13-15 mm of Hg and group B included patients who underwent surgery at 10-12 mmHg. Each group was then subdivided into two subgroups depending on the duration of surgery. In the first subgroup, the duration of surgery was less than 1 h and the next subgroup included patients who took more than 1 h. Presence or absence of shoulder tip pain was recorded within 4 h, at 24 h, and at 48 h. Total number of patients having shoulder tip pain in the lower pneumoperitoneal group was more than the higher pneumoperitoneal group in both subgroups, P values >0.05. More patients in the <1 h subgroup had shoulder tip pain as compared to the >1 h group at both pneumoperitoneal groups, P values >0.05. Shoulder tip pain was most at 24 h and gradually decreased thereafter. In our study, intra-abdominal pressures and shorter duration of surgery were factors unrelated to incidence of shoulder tip pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

What is the evidence for the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum? A systematic review

Background

Laparoscopic surgery has several advantages when compared to open surgery, including faster postoperative recovery and lower pain scores. However, for laparoscopy, a pneumoperitoneum is required to create workspace between the abdominal wall and intraabdominal organs. Increased intraabdominal pressure may also have negative implications on cardiovascular, pulmonary, and intraabdominal organ functionings. To overcome these negative consequences, several trials have been performed comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

Methods

A systematic review of all randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

Results and conclusions

Quality assessment showed that the overall quality of evidence was moderate to low. Postoperative pain scores were reduced by the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. With appropriate perioperative measures, the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum does not seem to have clinical advantages as compared to standard pressure on cardiac and pulmonary function. Although there are indications that low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is associated with less liver and kidney injury when compared to standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum, this does not seem to have clinical implications for healthy individuals. The influence of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on adhesion formation, anastomosis healing, tumor metastasis, intraocular and intracerebral pressure, and thromboembolic complications remains uncertain, as no human clinical trials have been performed. The influence of pressure on surgical conditions and safety has not been established to date. In conclusion, the most important benefit of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is lower postoperative pain scores, supported by a moderate quality of evidence. However, the quality of surgical conditions and safety of the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum need to be established, as are the values and preferences of physicians and patients regarding the potential benefits and risks. Therefore, the recommendation to use low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopy is weak, and more studies are required.

A prospective randomized trial of postoperative pain following different insufflation pressures during gynecologic laparoscopy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of different intra-abdominal pressure values on visceral pain following gynecologic laparoscopic surgery in the Trendelenburg position.

STUDY DESIGN

This randomized, controlled prospective trial was conducted at a tertiary education hospital and included 150 patients who underwent gynecologic laparoscopy with different abdominal insufflation pressures. There were 54 patients in the 8 mmHg low pressure group (LPG), 45 in the 12 mmHg standard pressure group (SPG), and 51 in the 15 mmHg high pressure group (HPG). We assessed mean age, body mass index (BMI), duration of surgery, analgesic consumption, length of hospital stay, amount of CO2 expended and volume of hemorrhage. Visceral pain and referred visceral pain were assessed 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively using a visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in age, BMI, analgesic consumption or length of hospital stay among groups. The mean operative time and total CO2 expended during surgery were higher in the LPG compared with the SPG and HPG. The mean intensity of postoperative pain assessed by the VAS score at 6 and 12 h was less in the LPG than in the SPG and HPG and was reduced significantly at 12 h. VAS scores at 24 h in the LPG and SPG were lower than in the HPG.

CONCLUSION

Pain is reduced by low insufflation pressure compared with standard and high insufflation pressure following gynecologic laparoscopic surgery in the Trendelenburg position. However, low insufflation pressure may result in longer operation times and increased hemorrhage.

Is a drain necessary routinely after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for an acutely inflamed gallbladder? A retrospective analysis of 457 cases

BACKGROUND

During laparoscopic surgery for an acutely inflamed gallbladder, most surgeons routinely insert a drain. However, no consensus has been reached regarding the need for drainage in these cases, and the use of a drain remains controversial.

METHODS

This retrospective study divided 457 cases into two groups according to whether or not a drain was inserted and reviewed the surgical outcomes and perioperative morbidity.

RESULTS

In this study, 231 patients had no drains and 226 had drains. Both groups were comparable in terms of pathology, demographics, and operative details. There was no statistical difference in operating time, visual analog scale for pain, or postoperative hospital stay. Morbidity occurred in 49 cases (10.7%) and did not differ significantly between the two groups. No mortality occurred in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

The routine use of a drain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for an acutely inflamed gallbladder had no effect on the postoperative morbidity. Therefore, this retrospective study supports that it is feasible not to insert a drain routinely in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients who have an acutely inflamed gallbladder.

Low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

A pneumoperitoneum of 12 to 16 mm Hg is used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lower pressures are claimed to be safe and effective in decreasing cardiopulmonary complications and pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of low pressure pneumoperitoneum compared with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2013 to identify randomised trials,using search strategies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised clinical trials, irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status for inclusion in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified trials and independently extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with RevMan 5 based on available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1092 participants randomly assigned to the low pressure group (509 participants) and the standard pressure group (583 participants) in 21 trials provided information for this review on one or more outcomes. Three additional trials comparing low pressure pneumoperitoneum with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum (including 179 participants) provided no information for this review. Most of the trials included low anaesthetic risk participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. One trial including 140 participants was at low risk of bias. The remaining 20 trials were at high risk of bias. The overall quality of evidence was low or very low. No mortality was reported in either the low pressure group (0/199; 0%) or the standard pressure group (0/235; 0%) in eight trials that reported mortality. One participant experienced the outcome of serious adverse events (low pressure group 1/179, 0.6%; standard pressure group 0/215, 0%; seven trials; 394 participants; RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.14 to 65.90; very low quality evidence). Quality of life, return to normal activity, and return to work were not reported in any of the trials. The difference between groups in the conversion to open cholecystectomy was imprecise (low pressure group 2/269, adjusted proportion 0.8%; standard pressure group 2/287, 0.7%; 10 trials; 556 participants; RR 1.18; 95% CI 0.29 to 4.72; very low quality evidence) and was compatible with an increase, a decrease, or no difference in the proportion of conversion to open cholecystectomy due to low pressure pneumoperitoneum. No difference in the length of hospital stay was reported between the groups (five trials; 415 participants; MD -0.30 days; 95% CI -0.63 to 0.02; low quality evidence). Operating time was about two minutes longer in the low pressure group than in the standard pressure group (19 trials; 990 participants; MD 1.51 minutes; 95% CI 0.07 to 2.94; very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be completed successfully using low pressure in approximately 90% of people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, no evidence is currently available to support the use of low pressure pneumoperitoneum in low anaesthetic risk patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety of low pressure pneumoperitoneum has to be established. Further well-designed trials are necessary, particularly in people with cardiopulmonary disorders who undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The feasibility and safety of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy remain unclear.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing low-pressure with standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1,263 patients were included. Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum was associated with significantly decreased postoperative pain. The requirement for increased pressure was significantly greater in the low-pressure group (risk ratio = 6.16; P < .001). Operative time was similar, with only a slight statistical significance (weighted mean difference = 2.07; P < .001). Length of hospital stay was shorter in the low-pressure group (weighted mean difference = -.27; P = .01). No significant differences were found in surgical complications or conversion to open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is feasible and safe and results in reduced postoperative pain and near-equal operative time compared with standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum. More studies are required to investigate the potential benefits of the reduced length of hospital stay.

A prospective randomized study of systemic inflammation and immune response after laparoscopic nissen fundoplication performed with standard and low-pressure pneumoperitoneum

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare changes in the systemic inflammation and immune response in the early postoperative (p.o.) period after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) was performed with standard-pressure and low-pressure carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied 68 patients with documented gastroesophageal reflux disease and who underwent a LNF: 35 using standard-pressure (12 to 14 mmHg) and 33 low-pressure (6 to 8 mmHg) pneumoperitoneum. White blood cells, peripheral lymphocytes subpopulation, human leukocyte antigen-DR, neutrophil elastase, interleukin (IL)-6 and IL-1, and C-reactive protein were investigated.

RESULTS

A significantly higher concentration of neutrophil elastase, IL-6 and IL-1, and C-reactive protein was detected postoperatively in the standard-pressure group of patients in comparison with the low-pressure group (P<0.05). A statistically significant change in human leukocyte antigen-DR expression was recorded p.o. at 24 hours, as a reduction of this antigen expressed on monocyte surface in patients from standard group; no changes were noted in low-pressure group patients (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that reducing the pressure of the pneumoperitoneum to 6 to 8 mm Hg during LNF is reduced p.o. inflammatory response and avoided p.o. immunosuppression.

Is a drain required after laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

OBJECTIVE

Whether drains should be routinely used after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is still debated. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the benefits of drain use after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for non-acute and non-inflamed gallbladders.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two hundred and fifty patients (mean age, 47±13.8 years; 200 females and 50 males) who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholestasis were included in the study. The medical files of the patients were examined retrospectively to obtain data on patient demographics, cholecystitis attacks, complications during the operation, whether a drain was placed in the biliary tract during the operation, etc. The volume of the fluid collection detected in the subhepatic area by ultrasonography on the first postoperative day was recorded.

RESULTS

Drains were placed in 51 patients (20.4%). The mean duration of drain placement was 3.1±1.9 (range 1-16) days. Fluid collection was detected in the gallbladder area in 67 patients (26.8%). The mean volume of collected fluid was 8.8±5.2 mL. There were no significant effects of age, gender, and previous cholecystitis attacks on the presence or volume of the fluid collection (P>0.05 for all). With regard to the relationship between fluid collection and drains, 52 of 199 (26.1%) patients without drains had postoperative fluid collection, compared to 15 of 51 (29.4%) patients with drains (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, there is no relationship between the presence of a drain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy and the presence of postoperative fluid collection. Thus, in patients without complications, it is not necessary to place a drain to prevent fluid collection.

Laparoscopic elective cholecystectomy with and without drain: A controlled randomised trial

BACKGROUND:

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the main method of treatment of symptomatic gallstones. Routine drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is an issue of considerable debate. Therefore, a controlled randomised trial was designed to assess the value of drains in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

During a two-year period (From April 2008 to January 2010), 80 patients were simply randomised to have a drain placed (group A), an 8-mm pentose tube drain was retained below the liver bed, whereas 80 patients were randomised not to have a drain (group B) placed in the subhepatic space. End points of this trial were to detect any differences in morbidity, postoperative pain, wound infection and hospital stay between the two groups.

RESULTS:

There was no mortality in either group and no statistically significant difference in postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting, wound infection or abdominal collection between the two groups. However, hospital stay was longer in the drain group than in group without drain and it is appearing that the use of drain delays hospital discharge.

CONCLUSION:

The routine use of a drain in non-complicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy has nothing to offer; in contrast, it is associated with longer hospital stay.

A prospective randomized, controlled study comparing low pressure versus high pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

The increase in intra-abdominal pressure by insufflation of carbon dioxide during laparoscopy brings certain changes in function of organ systems and also leads to postoperative pain. Degree of intra-abdominal pressure is directly related with such change. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed at low pressure pneumoperitoneum. However, available space for dissection is less than the high pressure pneumoperitoneum.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were studied in a prospective, randomized, patient, and surgeon blinded manner. The intra-abdominal pressure was kept either in low pressure (8 mm Hg) or in high pressure (12 mm Hg). All patients underwent two dimensional echocardiography, pulmonary function test and color Doppler examination of lower limb vessels preoperatively and postoperatively. Arterial blood gas analysis and End Tidal CO2 monitored before insufflation, during surgery and after deflation. Pain score was measured by visual analog scale and surgeon's comfort level was recorded. Postoperative analgesia requirement, complications, and hospital stay were recorded. Student t test used for the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Both groups match for the demographic parameters. Four patients required conversion to high pressure. Intraoperative pO2 level, postoperative pain, analgesic requirement, pulmonary function, and hospital stay were favoring low pressure pneumoperitoneum in a statistically significant manner. There was no difference between 2 groups for duration of surgery, intraoperative, and postoperative complications. However, the technical difficulties were graded more (statistically nonsignificant) with low pressure pneumoperitoneum.

CONCLUSIONS

An uncomplicated gall stone disease can be treated by low pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy with reasonable safety by an experienced surgeon. Though surgeons experience more difficulty in dissection during low pressure pneumoperitoneum, it is significantly advantageous in terms of postoperative pain, use of analgesics, preservation of pulmonary function, and hospital stay.

Low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

A pneumoperitoneum of 12 to 16 mmHg is used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lower pressures are claimed to be safe and effective in decreasing cardiopulmonary complications and pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of low pressure pneumoperitoneum compared with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until November 2008 for identifying randomised trials using search strategies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised clinical trials, irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status were considered for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified trials and independently extracted data on mortality, morbidity, conversion to open cholecystectomy, pain, analgesic requirement, operating time, hospital stay, patient satisfaction, additional measures to increase vision, and cardiopulmonary parameters. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models with RevMan 5 based on available case-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials randomised 690 patients to low pressure (n = 336) and standard pressure (n = 354). All the trials were of high risk of bias. There was no difference in the mortality, morbidity, or conversion to open cholecystectomy between the groups. The intensity of pain was lower in the low pressure group at various time points. The incidence of shoulder pain was lower in the low pressure group (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.90). The analgesic consumption was also lower. The operating time was similar between the groups (MD 2.30 minutes; 95% CI 0.42 to 4.18). Because of the high risk of bias due to incomplete outcome data in seven trials, it was not possible to conclude about the safety of low pressure pneumoperitoneum.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low pressure pneumoperitoneum appears effective in decreasing pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety of low pressure pneumoperitoneum has to be established.

Innovative technique for the study of pneumoperitoneum in the evaluation of abdominal pain after chemical irritation with zymozan

PURPOSE

To assess the influence of pneumoperitoneum in mice submitted to peritoneal irritation provoked by the biological agent Saccharomyces cerevisae, by counting the number of abdominal contractions elicited.

METHODS

To study the effects of pneumoperitoneum analgesic action, 60 mice were divided into two groups: the experimental group, subjected to pneumoperitoneum; and the control group, without pneumoperitoneum. The both groups received intraperitoneal injection of zymosan at a dose of 1mg/0,2ml/mouse.

RESULTS

The sum of the number of abdominal contractions of the experimental group (with pneumoperitoneum) was significantly lower than that of the control group (without pneumoperitoneum). In the experimental group, a lower number of contractions occurred in each min compared to the control.

CONCLUSION

The observation of the analgesic effect of pneumoperitoneum using CO2 in mice submitted to peritoneal irritation by zymosan was verified.

Clinical significance of drainage tube insertion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the appropriateness of inserting an intraperitoneal drainage tube after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), based on postoperative pain and clinical courses, in a randomized comparative study.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty patients who were to have LC were enrolled in this prospective randomized study. An 8-mm Penrose drain was retained below the liver bed for 42 h in each of 60 patients (group A), and no drain was retained in the remaining 60 patients (group B). Patients in each group were hospitalized for 4 days after operation, and the pain reported by the patients, using a visual analogue pain scale (VAS), and the time courses of changes in the highest body temperature, leukocyte count, and C-reactive protein (CRP) were studied comparatively for men and women.

RESULTS

Mean VAS scores were significantly greater in group A than in group B at 24 h (P = 0.00004), and 48 h (P = 0.0014) after operation. When sex-stratified changes in mean VAS scores were compared within group A, females had more pain than their male counterparts at 24 h (P = 0.030), but group B showed no sex differences. When the number of patients who used analgesics postoperatively was compared between groups A and B, analgesics were used more frequently in group A. When changes in maximum body temperature were compared, the change was significantly higher in group A than in group B on day 2 after the operation (P = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative pain was intensified by the insertion of a drainage tube after LC. This tendency was stronger in women.

Prospective randomized trial on low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Inpatient low-pressure pneumoperitoneum laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LPLC) has been shown to have less postoperative pain (especially shoulder-tip pain). No report so far has documented the use of lower-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). A prospective randomized trial was conducted in Tung Wah Hospital, Day Surgery Centre from January 2004 to December 2004. A total of 40 patients were recruited and 20 of whom were allocated to each arm. Outcome measures included operation time, treatment-related morbidity, mortality, postoperative pain (eg, shoulder-tip pain), consumption of analgesics, and level of satisfaction. All patients in both groups could be discharged on the same day. Patients' demographics and operation time were comparable in both groups. There were no treatment-related morbidity and mortality, nor was there any significant difference in postoperative pain. Less shoulder-tip pain was observed in the LPLC group though without significant difference (5% vs. 20%; P=0.151). Three patients in the LPLC group needed higher insufflation pressure (12 mm Hg) because of inadequate exposure and adhesions, and the operations were successful in all of them. Otherwise, no conversion to open procedure was noted in both groups. The consumption of analgesics was minimal and a high level of satisfaction was achieved in both groups of patients. The present study demonstrated no difference in LPLC and standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the outcomes of outpatient LC. Routine use of lower-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient LC would not be recommended unless in selected straightforward cases.

The real intraabdominal pressure during laparoscopy: comparison of different insufflators

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare 5 laparoscopic insufflators with different gas flow rates with regard to accuracy of preset pressure setting versus real intraoperative intraabdominal pressure.

DESIGN

Prospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

Fayette Medical Center, Alabama.

PATIENTS

Five patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

INTERVENTIONS

Intraoperative intraabdominal and system pressure measurements during comparable laparoscopic procedures.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Actual intraabdominal pressure was measured and compared between 5 different 10 to 20 L/min insufflators (Storz Laparoflator and Endoflator, Richard Wolf, BEI Medical and Snowden & Pencer) with a computer-based online data acquisition system. At a nominal pressure of 10 mm Hg, the mean intraabdominal pressure during the entire procedure was measured to be between 9.68 and 11.45 mm Hg. The mean intraabdominal pressure during laparoscopy for the insufflators showed a margin of error of 14.5%, with maximum intraabdominal pressure peaks measured between 14.65 and 17.87 mm Hg.

CONCLUSIONS

Within an error margin of <15% of the preset intraabdominal pressure setting, the insufflators evaluated can be considered pressure reliable. Although intraabdominal pressure peaks exceeding the nominal pressure temporarily reached up to 78.7% of the setting, no apparent complications were observed. Excessive pressure peaks seen in the previous reported laboratory model could not be confirmed during in vivo application.

Gender differences in postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Some evidence suggests that females have a lower pain threshold and a lower tolerance to painful stimuli. This study investigated gender differences in postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) on the basis of visual analog pain scale (VAS) scores and the clinical course.

METHODS

The 100 patients in this study (46 males and 54 females) underwent LC for cholecystolithiasis or gallbladder polyps without intraoperative complications. An 8-mm Penrose drain was retained for 42 h below the liver bed. All the patients were hospitalized for 4 days after LC, and the pain reported by patients, the time course of changes in the highest body temperature, the leukocyte count, and the C-reactive protein level were studied comparatively for the male and female patients.

RESULTS

The VAS scores were significantly higher for the female patients than for the male patients at 24 h (62.7 +/- 24.6 vs 47.0 +/- 23.3; p = 0.0015) and at 48 h (39.2 +/- 24.3 vs 28.3 +/- 19.1; p = 0.0137) after LC. The female patients used analgesics more frequently and had significantly higher body temperatures than the male patients on day 1 (37.2 +/- 0.6 vs 36.9 +/- 0.4; p = 0.0037) and day 2 (36.9 +/- 0.6 vs 36.6 +/- 0.4; p = 0.0037) after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Early postoperative pain after LC was more severe in female patients, and patients with high VAS scores tended to use analgesics more frequently.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a patient with ankylosing spondylitis with severe spinal deformity

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the current gold standard for the management of cholelithiasis. As experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy has increased, contraindications to the procedure have started decreasing. Kyphoscoliosis with fixed rigidity is considered as a relative contraindication to laparoscopic surgery. Ankylosing spondylitis is a challenge to the anaesthesiologist because it is associated with difficult intubation, restrictive ventilatory defects, and frequent cardiac involvement. The benefits of laparoscopic surgery can be extended to this group of patients with severe kyphoscoliosis due to advances in anesthesia and surgical expertise. We report a case of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed in a patient with severe ankylosing spondylitis with fixed rigidity of the cervical spine and marked thoracolumbar kyphosis with severe restrictive lung disease. The purpose of this report is to describe the difficulties encountered in anesthesia and operative difficulties due to altered body habitus in terms of patient positioning and surgical access.

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum combined with intraperitoneal saline washout for reduction of pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND

We designed a prospective randomized clinical trial to investigate whether intraperitoneal saline washout combined with a low-pressure pneumoperitoneum (LPSW) was superior to low-pressure pneumoperitoneum (LP) alone as a means of reducing postoperative pain and analgesic consumption in the early recovery period after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

A total of 124 consecutive patients undergoing LC due to uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones were randomized to the LP or LPSW group. In the LPSW group, normal saline at body temperature (25 ml/kg of body weight) was irrigated under the diaphragm. The fluid was evacuated via the passive-flow method through a 16-F closed drain left under the liver for 24 h. We then assessed the intensity of total abdominal postoperative pain using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), including the incidence of shoulder-tip pain (STP), total daily analgesia demand rate, analgesic consumption. Quality of life (QOL) within 7 days after the operation was assessed using the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36). A p value of <0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

The mean postoperative pain score was lower by 2.64 +/- 0.86 in the LPSW; the difference equaled 9.64% (p < 0.05). The incidence of STP was lower in the LPSW group (LP 11.29% vs LPSW 1.6%; p = 0.028). The analgesia demand rate was remarkably lower in LPSW vs LP within 24 and 48 h postoperatively (70.96% vs 90.32%; p = 0.006 and 64.51% vs. 83.87%; p = 0.013, respectively). After LPSW vs LP, QOL was better in terms of physical functioning, role limitations due to physical problems, and bodily pain (90.32% vs 77.42%; p = 0.05, 90.32% vs 75.8%; p = 0.03, 91.93% vs 74.19%; p = 0.008, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In terms of lower postoperative pain and a better QOL within the early recovery period, LPSW is superior to LP alone. The saline washout procedure should be recommended during LC because it is a simple way to reduce pain intensity, even after LP operations.