BACKGROUND: Local peritoneal effects of laparoscopic gases might be important in peritoneal biology during and after laparoscopic surgery. The most commonly used gas, CO(2), is known to be well tolerated, but also causes changes in acid-base balance. Helium is an alternative gas for laparoscopy. Although safe, it is not widely used. In this study a method for monitoring peritoneal pH during laparoscopy was evaluated and peritoneal pH during CO(2) and helium pneumoperitoneum was studied as well as its systemic reflection in arterial pH. METHODS: For these experiments 20 pigs were used, with ten exposed to pneumoperitoneum with CO(2), and ten to helium. Peritoneal and sub-peritoneal pH were continuously measured before and during gas insufflation, during a 30-minute period with a pneumoperitoneum and during a 30-minute recovery period. Arterial blood-gases were collected immediately before gas insufflation, at its completion, at 30 minutes of pneumoperitoneum and after the recovery period. RESULTS: Peritoneal pH before gas insufflation was in all animals 7.4. An immediate local drop in pH (6.6) occurred in the peritoneum with CO(2) insufflation. During pneumoperitoneum pH declined further, stabilising at 6.4, but was restored after the recovery period (7.3). With helium, tissue pH increased slightly (7.5) during insufflation, followed by a continuous decrease during pneumoperitoneum and recovery, reaching 7.2. Systemic pH decreased significantly with CO(2) insufflation, and increased slightly during helium insufflation. Systemic pH showed co-variation with intra-peritoneal pH at the the end of insufflation and after 30 minutes of pneumoperitoneum. CONCLUSIONS: Insufflation of CO(2) into the peritoneal cavity seemed to result in an immediate decrease in peritoneal pH, a response that might influence biological events. This peritoneal effect also seems to influence systemic acid-base balance, probably due to trans-peritoneal absorption.
BACKGROUND: Local peritoneal effects of laparoscopic gases might be important in peritoneal biology during and after laparoscopic surgery. The most commonly used gas, CO(2), is known to be well tolerated, but also causes changes in acid-base balance. Helium is an alternative gas for laparoscopy. Although safe, it is not widely used. In this study a method for monitoring peritoneal pH during laparoscopy was evaluated and peritoneal pH during CO(2) and helium pneumoperitoneum was studied as well as its systemic reflection in arterial pH. METHODS: For these experiments 20 pigs were used, with ten exposed to pneumoperitoneum with CO(2), and ten to helium. Peritoneal and sub-peritoneal pH were continuously measured before and during gas insufflation, during a 30-minute period with a pneumoperitoneum and during a 30-minute recovery period. Arterial blood-gases were collected immediately before gas insufflation, at its completion, at 30 minutes of pneumoperitoneum and after the recovery period. RESULTS: Peritoneal pH before gas insufflation was in all animals 7.4. An immediate local drop in pH (6.6) occurred in the peritoneum with CO(2) insufflation. During pneumoperitoneum pH declined further, stabilising at 6.4, but was restored after the recovery period (7.3). With helium, tissue pH increased slightly (7.5) during insufflation, followed by a continuous decrease during pneumoperitoneum and recovery, reaching 7.2. Systemic pH decreased significantly with CO(2) insufflation, and increased slightly during helium insufflation. Systemic pH showed co-variation with intra-peritoneal pH at the the end of insufflation and after 30 minutes of pneumoperitoneum. CONCLUSIONS: Insufflation of CO(2) into the peritoneal cavity seemed to result in an immediate decrease in peritoneal pH, a response that might influence biological events. This peritoneal effect also seems to influence systemic acid-base balance, probably due to trans-peritoneal absorption.
Authors: Johnna Schölin; Mark Buunen; Wim Hop; Jaap Bonjer; Bo Anderberg; Miguel Cuesta; Salvadora Delgado; Ainitze Ibarzabal; Marie-Louise Ivarsson; Martin Janson; Antonio Lacy; Johan Lange; Lars Påhlman; Stefan Skullman; Eva Haglind Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-06-11 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Julia Grabowski; Daniel E Vazquez; Todd Costantini; David M Cauvi; Wisler Charles; Stephen Bickler; Mark A Talamini; Virginia L Vega; Raul Coimbra; Antonio De Maio Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2010-09-27 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Fabíola B Fukushima; Christina Malm; Maria Elisa J Andrade; Humberto P Oliveira; Eliane G Melo; Fátima Maria C Caldeira; Valentim A Gheller; Maristela S Palhares; Sabrina P Macedo; Mariana S Figueiredo; Marcos X Silva Journal: Can Vet J Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 1.008
Authors: Frederico S Falcetta; Theresa A Lawrie; Lídia Rf Medeiros; Maria Ines da Rosa; Maria I Edelweiss; Airton T Stein; Alice Zelmanowicz; Anaelena B Moraes; Roselaine R Zanini; Daniela D Rosa Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-10-13
Authors: W J A Brokelman; M Lensvelt; I H M Borel Rinkes; J H G Klinkenbijl; M M P J Reijnen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-06-15 Impact factor: 4.584