This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (78)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

The Next Phase of Minimally Invasive Surgery

R. Stephen Smith, MD; William R. Fry, MD; Edmund K. M. Tsoi, MD; Vernon J. Henderson, MD; Elsa R. Hirvela, MD; Richard H. Koehler, MD; David M. Brams, MD; Diane J. Morabito, RN, MPH; Gerald W. Peskin, MD

Arch Surg. 1993;128(10):1102-1107.

Abstract
Objective
To assess the capability of a retractor system that permits laparoscopic surgery without pneumoperitoneum and to determine if the system facilitates the use of conventional surgical instruments during minimally invasive surgery.

Design
Prospective evaluation and data collection with review.

Setting
University-affiliated county hospital.

Patients
Twenty-nine male and 29 female subjects evaluated prospectively via 27 trauma-related and 31 elective procedures.

Methods
Fifty-eight laparoscopic procedures were performed between July 1992 and February 1993 with a system consisting of an intra-abdominal fan retractor and an electrically powered mechanical arm using conventional surgical and laparoscopic instruments.

Results
Gasless laparoscopy was used in the evaluation of 27 patients with abdominal trauma (11 gunshot wounds, 11 stab wounds, and five blunt injuries). The need for celiotomy was obviated in 20 (74%) of 27 cases. Three enterotomies, two diaphragmatic lacerations, and one gastric perforation were repaired with conventional instruments. Gasless laparoscopic techniques were also used in cholecystectomy (n=26), diagnostic laparoscopy (n=3), and appendectomy (n=2). Exposure similar to that obtained by pneumoperitoneum was obtained in 30 (97%) of 31 cases. One major (trocar tip enterotomy) and two superficial wound infections occurred in this group. The ability to use conventional surgical instruments was advantageous in several cases.

Conclusions
Comparable exposure was achieved in this cohort of patients with gasless laparoscopy. The use of conventional surgical instruments provides an advantage with this technique. Further improvements in abdominal wall lift systems and modification of existing surgical instruments may expand the role of gasless laparoscopy.

(Arch Surg. 1993;128:1102-1107)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis—East Bay.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Current technology: laparoscopic surgery in trauma
Brooks and Boffard
Trauma 1999;1:53-60.
ABSTRACT  

"Alternative" Surgery in Trauma Management
Britt and Cole
Arch Surg 1998;133:1177-1181.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Invited Commentary
Chin
Arch Surg 1997;132:169-169.
ABSTRACT  

The Role of Laparoscopy in the Acute Abdomen and Trauma
Johnson and Luchette
SURG INNOV 1996;3:168-177.
ABSTRACT  

Abdominal Wall Lifting Devices as Alternatives to Pneumoperitoneum
Tsoi and Organ
SURG INNOV 1995;2:205-208.
ABSTRACT  

Changes in Intracranial Pressure Associated With Apneumic Retractors
Este-McDonald et al.
Arch Surg 1995;130:362-366.
ABSTRACT