BACKGROUND: A new dissection technique with high-pressure water stream (Hydro-Jet) has recently been applied for selective dissection during various surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to compare Hydro-Jet with the conventional technique for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS:Eighty patients were randomized to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy with standard (n = 40) or Hydro-Jet-assisted (n = 40) dissection techniques. The rates of intraoperative complications, including blood loss and injury to the adjacent organs, were compared between the groups. The versatility of this technique and the features of surgical dissection were also evaluated and compared. RESULTS:Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was successfully completed in all subjects. The mean operative times were 78 minutes (range, 52-120 minutes) and 81 minutes (range, 45-135 minutes) for Hydro-Jet versus conventional dissection, respectively (P = not significant). Complications included gallbladder perforation in 15% and 30% (P <.1) and liver laceration in 0% and 10% (P <.04) with Hydro-Jet and conventional techniques, respectively. Increased hemorrhage from the gallbladder bed that necessitated fulguration occurred in 12 patients with the conventional technique as compared with none in the Hydro-Jet group (P <.001). Hydro-Jet resulted in a selective dissection of connective tissue preserving blood vessels and the cystic duct. The continuous water flow allowed a clear view for the operator, and the dissection was performed in a relatively bloodless field. The ease of blunt dissection with the bent-tip dissector represents another advantage. CONCLUSION: This study shows that Hydro-Jet dissection represents an excellent alternative to the conventional technique for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The improved anatomic dissection combined with an almost bloodless operating field as the result of continuous water flow decreased the rate of dissection-related complications.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: A new dissection technique with high-pressure water stream (Hydro-Jet) has recently been applied for selective dissection during various surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to compare Hydro-Jet with the conventional technique for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Eighty patients were randomized to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy with standard (n = 40) or Hydro-Jet-assisted (n = 40) dissection techniques. The rates of intraoperative complications, including blood loss and injury to the adjacent organs, were compared between the groups. The versatility of this technique and the features of surgical dissection were also evaluated and compared. RESULTS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was successfully completed in all subjects. The mean operative times were 78 minutes (range, 52-120 minutes) and 81 minutes (range, 45-135 minutes) for Hydro-Jet versus conventional dissection, respectively (P = not significant). Complications included gallbladder perforation in 15% and 30% (P <.1) and liver laceration in 0% and 10% (P <.04) with Hydro-Jet and conventional techniques, respectively. Increased hemorrhage from the gallbladder bed that necessitated fulguration occurred in 12 patients with the conventional technique as compared with none in the Hydro-Jet group (P <.001). Hydro-Jet resulted in a selective dissection of connective tissue preserving blood vessels and the cystic duct. The continuous water flow allowed a clear view for the operator, and the dissection was performed in a relatively bloodless field. The ease of blunt dissection with the bent-tip dissector represents another advantage. CONCLUSION: This study shows that Hydro-Jet dissection represents an excellent alternative to the conventional technique for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The improved anatomic dissection combined with an almost bloodless operating field as the result of continuous water flow decreased the rate of dissection-related complications.
Authors: Yi Gao; Lu Chen; Ye Ning; Xingang Cui; Lei Yin; Jie Chen; Junkai Wang; Baicong Shao; Danfeng Xu Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2014-03-18 Impact factor: 2.370