Literature DB >> 35851813

Bladed and bladeless conical trocars do not differ in terms of caused fascial defect size in a Porcine Model.

Christoph Paasch1, Anne Mantke2, Richard Hunger2, Rene Mantke2,3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Trocar insertion during laparoscopy may lead to complications such as bleeding, bowel puncture and fascial defects with subsequent trocar site hernias. It is under discussion whether there is a difference in the extent of the trauma and thus in the size of the fascia defect between blunt and sharp trocars. But the level of evidence is low. Hence, we performed a Porcine Model.
METHODS: A total of five euthanized female pigs were operated on. The average weight of the animals was 37.85 (Standard deviation SD 1.68) kg. All pigs were aged 90 ± 5 days. In alternating order five different conical 12-mm trocars (3 × bladeless, 2 × bladed) on each side 4 cm lateral of the mammary ridge were placed. One surgeon performed the insertions after conducting a pneumoperitoneum with 12 mmHg using a Verres' needle. The trocars were removed after 60 min. Subsequently, photo imaging took place. Using the GSA Image Analyser (v3.9.6) the respective abdominal wall defect size was measured.
RESULTS: The mean fascial defect size was 58.3 (SD 20.2) mm2. Bladed and bladeless trocars did not significant differ in terms of caused fascial defect size [bladed, 56.6 (SD 20) mm2 vs. bladeless, 59.5 (SD 20.6) mm2, p = 0.7]. Without significance the insertion of bladeless trocars led to the largest (Kii Fios™ First entry, APPLIEDMEDICAL©, 69.3 mm2) and smallest defect size (VersaOne™ (COVIDIEN©, 54.1 mm2).
CONCLUSION: Bladed and bladeless conical 12-mm trocars do not differ in terms of caused fascial defect size in the Porcine Model at hand. The occurrence of a trocar site hernia might be largely independent from trocar design.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bladed trocar; Bladeless trocar; Incisional hernia; Porcine Model; Trocar site hernia

Year:  2022        PMID: 35851813     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09401-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   3.453


  6 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis.

Authors:  F Keus; J A F de Jong; H G Gooszen; C J H M van Laarhoven
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-10-18

2.  Complications in laparoscopic intestinal surgery: prevention and management.

Authors:  D C Trottier; G Martel; R P Boushey
Journal:  Minerva Chir       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Randomized double-masked comparison of radially expanding access device and conventional cutting tip trocar in laparoscopy.

Authors:  S F Yim; P M Yuen
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Endoscopic salpingectomy.

Authors:  J C Tarasconi
Journal:  J Reprod Med       Date:  1981-10       Impact factor: 0.142

Review 5.  Trocar types in laparoscopy.

Authors:  Claire F la Chapelle; Hilko A Swank; Monique E Wessels; Ben Willem J Mol; Sidney M Rubinstein; Frank Willem Jansen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-12-16

6.  Laparoscopic Insertion of Various Shaped Trocars in a Porcine Model.

Authors:  Danilo Galante Moreno; Cesar Augusto Martins Pereira; Ricardo Kyoiti Sant Anna; Rafael Ulysses de Azevedo; Luiz Felipe Savio; Ricardo Jordão Duarte; Miguel Srougi; Carlo Camargo Passerotti
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.