Laparoscopic surgery produced less surgical smoke and contamination comparing with open surgery: the pilot study in fresh cadaveric experiment in COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

Background The SARS-CoV2 virus has been identified in abdominal cavity of the COVID-19 patients. Therefore, the potential viral transmission from any surgical created smoke in these patients is of concern especially in laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to compare the amount of surgical smoke and surgical field contamination between laparoscopic and open surgery in fresh cadavers. Methods Cholecystectomy in 12 cadavers was performed and they were divided into 4 groups: laparoscopic approach with or without smoke evacuator, and open approach with or without smoke evacuator. The increased particle counts in surgical smoke of each group were analyzed. In the model of appendectomy, surgical field contamination under ultraviolet light and visual contamination scale between laparoscopic and open approach were compared. Results Open cholecystectomy significantly produced a greater amount of overall particle sizes, particle sizes < 5 μm and particle sizes ≥ 5 μm than laparoscopic cholecystectomy (10,307 × 103 vs 3738 × 103, 10,226 × 103 vs 3685 × 103 and 81 × 103 vs 53 × 103 count/m3, respectively at p < 0.05). The use of smoke evacuator led to decrease in the amount of overall particle sizes of 58% and 32.4% in the open and laparoscopic chelecystectomy respectively. Median (interquatile range) visual contamination scale of surgical field in open appendectomy [3.50 (2.33, 4.67)] was significantly greater than laparoscopic appendectomy [1.50 (0.67, 2.33)] at p < 0.001. Conclusions Laparoscopic cholecystectomy yielded less smoke-related particles than open cholecystectomy. The use of smoke evacuator, abeit non-significantly, reduced the particles in both open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic appendectomy had a lower degree of surgical field contamination than the open approach.

Aerosol protection using modified N95 respirator during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy: a randomized controlled trial

“…In this study, the particle counter was kept 1 m apart from the patient's mouth as the distance between the patient's mouth and the endoscopist's nose was estimated to be approximately 1 m. Further, a shorter distance could have interfered with the endoscopic procedure. 24 The strength of this randomized study was the presence of a controlled environment (only two endoscopic rooms with limited traffic were used). Both staff and trainee endoscopists reported no difficulty during endoscopy in patients wearing masks, indicating that a modified N95 respirator could be effectively applied in daily practice.…”

Lingering SARS-CoV-2 in Gastric and Gallbladder Tissues of Patients with Previous COVID-19 Infection Undergoing Bariatric Surgery

“…The essential concerns were that the technique of testing for COVID-19 generated false negative results 40% of the time and that the studies presented did not test any form of viral culture or conduct cytopathic studies [ 4 ]. We can conclude now, with new research, that surgical smoke does not pose any risk [ 35 – 37 ]. The goals of all the research and consensus manuscripts were the protection of patients and operation theatre staff in and around these patients.…”

Management of aerosol generation during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy

“…The infection is transmitted frequently via droplets, airborne carriers, and fomites. [2][3][4] After coughing or talking, droplets from the respiratory tract containing viable viruses can infect other individuals. Large droplets of over 5 μm can deposit by falling on surfaces and cause propagation through fomites.…”