Literature DB >> 16698530

Three-dimensional model for gas flow, resistance, and leakage-dependent nominal pressure maintenance of different laparoscopic insufflators.

Volker R Jacobs1, John E Morrison, Stefan Paepke, Thorsten Fischer, Marion Kiechle.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To compare laparoscopic insufflators with different insufflation characteristics and evaluate the effects of resistance and leakage on maintenance of nominal pressure.
DESIGN: Prospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
SETTING: Laboratory of university clinic.
INTERVENTIONS: Measurement in an abdomen box model of insufflator response to different resistance and leakage combinations during steady state while attempting to maintain a nominal set pressure of 12 mm Hg.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: An abdomen box model for laboratory measurements was designed with differing entrance and exit diameters simulated by hole disks of 0.5 mm to 7.6 mm. With a computer-based data-acquisition model, five insufflators (Olympus 9L and 16L, Storz 10L and 30L, HiTec 16L) were evaluated with 150 disk combinations. Average abdominal box pressures were recorded in three-dimensional (3-D) profiles showing different nominal pressure maintenance response for all insufflators regarding the resistance and leakage combination, maximum flow performance, and insufflation principle of the device. Average abdomen model box pressure can increase up to 26.57 mm Hg at 12 mm Hg nominal pressure setting (+121.4%). Insufflators with high flow rates (Storz 30L) tend to compensate leakage better but with the risk of higher intraabdominal pressure peaks. Insufflators with low-pressure principle (HiTec 16L) have limited pressure compensation but are safer for the patient.
CONCLUSIONS: Nominal pressure maintenance of insufflators is mainly dependent on flow resistance and leakage rate and less on potential insufflator flow capacity. With this 3-D model, the nominal pressure maintenance of different insufflators can be described for the first time regarding these main factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16698530     DOI: 10.1016/j.jmig.2005.10.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Minim Invasive Gynecol        ISSN: 1553-4650            Impact factor:   4.137


  3 in total

1.  Benchtop evaluation of pressure barrier insufflator and standard insufflator systems.

Authors:  Kenneth G Nepple; Dorina Kallogjeri; Sam B Bhayani
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Bradycardia during laparoscopic surgery due to high flow rate of CO2 insufflation.

Authors:  Ki Tae Jung; Sang Hun Kim; Jae Wook Kim; Keum Young So
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2013-09

3.  Cardiorespiratory impact of intrathoracic pressure overshoot during artificial carbon dioxide pneumothorax: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Yunqin Ren; Xing Zhu; Hong Yan; Liyong Chen; Qingxiang Mao
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2022-03-23       Impact factor: 2.217

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.