Cargando…

Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background: To study the efficacy of closed and open methods for creating pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy by comparing the two in terms of their outcome and complication. Study Design: Single-centre, prospective, observational study. Materials and study: Purposive sampling method wh...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Agarwal, Puneet K, Golmei, Jason, Goyal, Richa, Maurya, Ajeet P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10004421/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36911586
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35991
_version_ 1784904828492709888
author Agarwal, Puneet K
Golmei, Jason
Goyal, Richa
Maurya, Ajeet P
author_facet Agarwal, Puneet K
Golmei, Jason
Goyal, Richa
Maurya, Ajeet P
author_sort Agarwal, Puneet K
collection PubMed
description Background: To study the efficacy of closed and open methods for creating pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy by comparing the two in terms of their outcome and complication. Study Design: Single-centre, prospective, observational study. Materials and study: Purposive sampling method where the inclusion criteria were all patients with cholelithiasis who were advised and consented to laparoscopic cholecystectomy of age 18-70 years were included in the study group. Exclusion criteria include patients with a paraumbilical hernia, a history of upper abdominal surgery, uncontrolled systemic illness, and local skin infection. Sixty cases of cholelithiasis satisfying exclusion and inclusion criteria who underwent elective cholecystectomy during the study period were included. Thirty-one of these cases underwent the closed method, while in the remaining 29 patients open method was adopted. Cases in which pneumoperitoneum created by closed technique were grouped as group A and those by open technique as group B. Parameters comparing the safety and efficacy of the two methods were studied. The parameters were access time, gas leak, visceral injury, vascular injury, need for conversion, umbilical port site hematoma, umbilical port site infection, and hernia. Patients were assessed on the first postoperative day, the seventh postoperative day, and then two months after surgery. Some follow-ups were done telephonically. Results: Out of 60 patients, 31 underwent the closed method, while 29 underwent the open method. Minor complications like gas leak during the procedure was observed more in the open method. The mean access time in the open-method group was less than in the closed-method group. Other complications like visceral injury, vascular injury, need for conversion, umbilical port site hematoma, umbilical port site infection, and hernia were not observed in either group during the allocated follow-up period in the study. Conclusion: Open technique for pneumoperitoneum is as safe and effective as the closed technique.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10004421
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100044212023-03-11 Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Agarwal, Puneet K Golmei, Jason Goyal, Richa Maurya, Ajeet P Cureus Gastroenterology Background: To study the efficacy of closed and open methods for creating pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy by comparing the two in terms of their outcome and complication. Study Design: Single-centre, prospective, observational study. Materials and study: Purposive sampling method where the inclusion criteria were all patients with cholelithiasis who were advised and consented to laparoscopic cholecystectomy of age 18-70 years were included in the study group. Exclusion criteria include patients with a paraumbilical hernia, a history of upper abdominal surgery, uncontrolled systemic illness, and local skin infection. Sixty cases of cholelithiasis satisfying exclusion and inclusion criteria who underwent elective cholecystectomy during the study period were included. Thirty-one of these cases underwent the closed method, while in the remaining 29 patients open method was adopted. Cases in which pneumoperitoneum created by closed technique were grouped as group A and those by open technique as group B. Parameters comparing the safety and efficacy of the two methods were studied. The parameters were access time, gas leak, visceral injury, vascular injury, need for conversion, umbilical port site hematoma, umbilical port site infection, and hernia. Patients were assessed on the first postoperative day, the seventh postoperative day, and then two months after surgery. Some follow-ups were done telephonically. Results: Out of 60 patients, 31 underwent the closed method, while 29 underwent the open method. Minor complications like gas leak during the procedure was observed more in the open method. The mean access time in the open-method group was less than in the closed-method group. Other complications like visceral injury, vascular injury, need for conversion, umbilical port site hematoma, umbilical port site infection, and hernia were not observed in either group during the allocated follow-up period in the study. Conclusion: Open technique for pneumoperitoneum is as safe and effective as the closed technique. Cureus 2023-03-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10004421/ /pubmed/36911586 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35991 Text en Copyright © 2023, Agarwal et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Gastroenterology
Agarwal, Puneet K
Golmei, Jason
Goyal, Richa
Maurya, Ajeet P
Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
title Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
title_full Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
title_fullStr Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
title_full_unstemmed Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
title_short Comparison Between Closed and Open Methods for Creating Pneumoperitoneum in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
title_sort comparison between closed and open methods for creating pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
topic Gastroenterology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10004421/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36911586
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.35991
work_keys_str_mv AT agarwalpuneetk comparisonbetweenclosedandopenmethodsforcreatingpneumoperitoneuminlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT golmeijason comparisonbetweenclosedandopenmethodsforcreatingpneumoperitoneuminlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT goyalricha comparisonbetweenclosedandopenmethodsforcreatingpneumoperitoneuminlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT mauryaajeetp comparisonbetweenclosedandopenmethodsforcreatingpneumoperitoneuminlaparoscopiccholecystectomy