Open abdominal surgery: a risk factor for future laparoscopic surgery?

Seetahal, Shiva; Obirieze, Augustine; Cornwell, Edward E.; Fullum, Terrence M.; Tran, Daniel

doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.12.017

Cited by 28 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…14 The risk of such complications in the patients with previous multiple abdominal surgeries is high, even with open surgery. 14,15 Use of preoperative evaluation tools like Hostile Abdomen Index risk stratification may help to select the right patients for laparoscopic procedures. 16 One of the significant limitations of our operative technique was the failure to assess the patency of the graft during operation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>A Short Series of Laparoscopic Mesenteric Bypasses for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia</p>

Kazmi¹,

Berge²,

Sahba³

et al. 2020

VHRM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Laparoscopic aortomesenteric bypass may be performed to treat the chronic mesenteric ischemia patients who are not suitable for endovascular treatment. This study presents an initial experience with a limited series of laparoscopic mesenteric artery revascularization for the treatment of mesenteric ischemia. Methods: Chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) patients with previous unsuccessful endovascular treatment or with arterial occlusion and extensive calcification precluding safe endovascular treatment were offered laparoscopic mesenteric revascularization. From October 2015 until November 2018, nine patients with CMI underwent laparoscopic revascularization. In addition to demographic data and perioperative results of the treatment, graft patency was assessed with Duplex ultrasound at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, and annually thereafter. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed. Results: All bypasses were constructed with an 8 mm ring enforced expanded polytetrafluoroethylene graft in a retrograde fashion (from infrarenal aorta or iliac artery) to either superior mesenteric artery or splenic artery (2 cases). Median operation time was 356 mins (range 247-492 mins). Five patients had a history of unsuccessful endovascular treatment. Laparoscopic technical success was 78%, and the primary open conversion rate was 22%. All laparoscopic revascularization procedures remained patent after discharge during a median follow-up time of 26 months (range 18-49 months). The primary graft patency at 30 days was 78%. Primary assisted, and secondary graft patency was 78% and 100%, respectively. Median weight gain was 2 kg (range 2-18 kg), and all patients achieved relief from postprandial pain and nausea. No mortality was observed during the follow-up period. Conclusion: Laparoscopic aortomesenteric revascularization procedures for chronic mesenteric ischemia are feasible but require careful patient selection. These procedures should only be performed at referral centers by vascular surgeons with prior experience in laparoscopic vascular surgery.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>A Short Series of Laparoscopic Mesenteric Bypasses for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia</p>

Kazmi¹,

Berge²,

Sahba³

et al. 2020

VHRM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As in this case, adhesions can make laparoscopic surgery technically difficult and increase the risk of complications related to port-site placement. The impact of previous abdominal surgery in non-urological laparoscopic procedures has been extensively reviewed [11]. However, few studies have evaluated the outcomes of urological laparoscopic procedures such as nephrectomy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laparoscopic Nephrectomy in Patients with Previous Abdominal Surgery

Breish

Whiting

Sriprasad

2020

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laparoscopic nephrectomy is a minimally invasive procedure that provides significant benefits to the patient, such as reduced analgesic requirements and shorter recovery time. While the popularity of laparoscopy has grown substantially, there are associated risks of injury to the blood vessels and/or viscera during the insertion of the laparoscopic ports. Such injuries can lead to a significant increase in mortality rates. Patients who have had previous abdominal surgery have a higher risk of adhesions; this has been shown to increase the risk of complications from port placement. Consequently, previous abdominal surgery was viewed as a relative contraindication to laparoscopic surgery. However, studies have demonstrated the advantages of laparoscopic surgery over an open radical approach; hence, previous abdominal surgery is no longer viewed as a contraindication. Here, we describe the case of a 62-year-old man who presented with an incidental finding of right renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We performed a radical nephrectomy on this patient who had undergone multiple previous abdominal surgeries. During this procedure, a small bowel injury occurred. Herein, we review the available evidence and describe the risk factors and techniques to avoid injury from laparoscopic port-site placement in patients undergoing nephrectomy with a history of previous abdominal surgery.

show abstract

“…The limitation in those reviews was the SHAM surgical intervention implemented in surgical RCTs. [20][21][22][23][24][25][26] The surgical guidelines (SAGES) recommend that any surgeon about to perform an intervention on appendicitis, the first choice should always be LA instead of OA to prevent the spread of infection, which goes hand in hand with the CDC guidelines. 27,28 Due to the guidelines, systematic reviews, RCTs, and other studies, LA is increasingly becoming the main intervention chosen for the treatment of the disease despite its cost and intra-abdominal abscess formation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Review Comparing Laparoscopic and Open Appendectomy

2018

J Bah Med Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Various prospective randomized controlled trials were conducted to compare open and laparoscopic appendectomies. The aim of this systematic review is to compare both the surgical appendectomy interventions and to evaluate the most favored, safe, and effective choice of treatment for appendicitis. In this review, 2462 studies have been retrieved from three major databases: Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane. The inclusion criteria were clinical diagnosis of appendicitis, publication date, and patient’s age. Of these, six studies that met both inclusion and exclusion criteria were chosen. The studies selected were assessed for quality using the CONSORT PRO tool. The data extracted was later analyzed using NCCS 2007 software and Microsoft excel. The means and P values were calculated using the student t test and chi square test provided by the studies. The six studies chosen met the inclusion criteria and achieved an average quality of 15.5 over 25, which is in line with the CONSORT PRO tool. The results indicated that further elaboration on the randomization method should’ve been provided; however, the methodology was the same across the six studies showing a strong correlation and homogeneity in the outcomes. The primary outcomes were all favored in laparoscopic appendectomy (LA) except for intra-abdominal abscesses. The secondary outcomes were all favored by LA except for cost and mortality, which weren’t favored by both the interventions. In conclusion, LA is a safer and more effective surgical procedure than open appendectomy.

show abstract

Open abdominal surgery: a risk factor for future laparoscopic surgery?

Cited by 28 publications

References 13 publications

<p>A Short Series of Laparoscopic Mesenteric Bypasses for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia</p>

<p>A Short Series of Laparoscopic Mesenteric Bypasses for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia</p>

Laparoscopic Nephrectomy in Patients with Previous Abdominal Surgery

Systematic Review Comparing Laparoscopic and Open Appendectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About