Laparoscopic Insertion of Various Shaped Trocars in a Porcine Model
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
6
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2019
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
SOC LAPAROENDOSCOPIC SURGEONS
Autores
ANNA, Ricardo Kyoiti Sant
AZEVEDO, Rafael Ulysses de
SAVIO, Luiz Felipe
Citação
JSLS-JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC SURGEONS, v.23, n.2, article ID e2019.00002, 6p, 2019
Resumo
Background and Objective: The number of laparoscopic procedures increases annually with an estimated 3% of complications, one third of them linked to Verres' needle or trocar insertion. The safety and efficacy of ports insertion during laparoscopic surgery may be related the technique but also to trocar design. This study aims to compare physical parameters of abdominal wall penetration for 5 different trocars. Methods: Eleven pigs were studied. Five different commercially available trocars were randomically inserted at the midline. Real-time video recording of the insertions was achieved to measure the excursion of the abdominal wall and the time and distance the cutting surface of the bladed trocars was exposed inside the abdominal cavity. An especially designed hand sensor was developed and placed between the trocar and the hand of the surgeon to record force required for abdominal wall perforation. Results: Greater deformations and forces occurred in non-bladed as compared to bladed trocars, and in conical trocars as compared to pyramidal pointed ones, except for peritoneum perforation. Greater distance and time of blade exposure occurred in pyramidal laminae as compared to conical. Conclusion: The bladed trocars have lower forces and deformations in their introduction, and should be those that cause less injury and are more suitable for first entry. Conical and pyramidal trocars with the same blade size showed similar force, deformation, time, and distance of exposed blade.
Palavras-chave
Laparoscopy, Trocar, Safety, Animal model
Referências
- Ahmad G, 2008, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, V16, P2
- Ahmad G, 2019, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, V18, P1
- Antoniou SA, 2013, SURG ENDOSC, V27, P2312, DOI 10.1007/s00464-013-2793-y
- Berrick JD, 2005, GOOD PARENTS OR GOOD WORKERS?, P1
- Bhoyrul S, 1996, SURG ENDOSC-ULTRAS, V10, P775, DOI 10.1007/s004649900155
- Bohm B, 1998, SURG ENDOSC-ULTRAS, V12, P1434, DOI 10.1007/s004649900876
- Corcione F, 2007, Minerva Chir, V62, P443
- Corson SL, 2001, J AM ASSOC GYN LAP, V8, P341, DOI 10.1016/S1074-3804(05)60328-3
- Montes SFP, 2015, WORLD J CLIN CASES, V3, P450, DOI 10.12998/wjcc.v3.i5.450
- Hashizume M, 1997, SURG ENDOSC, V11, P1198, DOI 10.1007/s004649900568
- Hasson H M, 1984, Biomed Bull, V5, P1
- Hurd WW, 1995, AM J OBSTET GYNECOL, V173, P1731, DOI 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90418-2
- Kaplan JR, 2016, CURR UROL REP, V17, DOI 10.1007/s11934-016-0602-6
- Leibl BJ, 1999, J LAPAROENDOSC ADV A, V9, P135, DOI 10.1089/lap.1999.9.135
- Magrina JF, 2002, CLIN OBSTET GYNECOL, V45, P469, DOI 10.1097/00003081-200206000-00018
- Nishimura M, 2019, J MINIM INVAS GYN, V26, P63, DOI 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.06.023
- Passerotti CC, 2009, J AM COLL SURGEONS, V209, P222, DOI 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.03.022
- Seem K, 1987, YB MED, P30
- Shafer DM, 2006, SURG INNOV, V13, P183, DOI 10.1177/1553350606294247
- Tarnay CM, 1999, OBSTET GYNECOL, V94, P83, DOI 10.1016/S0029-7844(99)00288-4
- Trottier DC, 2009, MINERVA CHIR, V64, P339
- Turner DJ, 1996, J AM ASSOC GYN LAP, V3, P609, DOI 10.1016/S1074-3804(05)80175-6
- Vilos GA, 2017, J OBSTET GYNAECOL CA, V39, pE69, DOI 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.04.013