Affiliation:
1. UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, İSTANBUL KARTAL DR. LÜTFİ KIRDAR HEALTH RESEARCH CENTER
2. ACIBADEM MEHMET ALI AYDINLAR UNIVERSITY
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to assess the safety of laparoscopic entry techniques.
Materials and Methods: Within the scope of the study, medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopy due to various gynecological indications at our clinic between January 1, 2011, and July 1, 2015, were examined. Evaluation was conducted using our hospital’s electronic database.
Results: In the patient cohort, direct trocar placement was preferred in 91.8% (1025 patients), Veress needle placement was used in 7.4% (82 patients), and an open technique was used in 0.8% (9 patients). In terms of entry sites, umbilicus was the most commonly chosen option, being preferred in 97.2% (1085 patients) of cases. In 2.4% of patients (27 patients), the midline abdominal trocar was preferred as the initial trocar insertion site. Among these patients, suprapubic incision was preferred in 62% (17 patients), while Lee-Huang point was chosen as the entry site in 38% (10 patients).Looking at the history of previous surgeries, 18.5% (206 patients) had a history of prior abdominal surgery, and 3.5% (39 patients) had undergone two previous surgical procedures. Only 0.1% (1 patient) had undergone three or more abdominal surgeries.
Discussion: In conclusion, no clear superiority of one initial entry technique over another has been proven. Despite the extensive literature on laparoscopic entry, debates regarding the most effective method to prevent significant complications continue.
Publisher
Cagdas Tip Dergisi: Journal of Contemporary Medicine
Reference12 articles.
1. 1. Namnoum AB, Murphy AA: Diagnostic and Operaative Laparoscopy. In: Rock JA, Jones HW, editors. Te Linde’s Operative Gynecology. Philedelphia, Lippincott Company (9. ed.) 2003. Ch 16, p. 353-354.
2. 2. Larsen CR, Grantcharov T, Aggarwal R, Tully A, Sorensen JL, Dalsgaard T, et al. Objective assessment of gynecologic laparoscopic skills using the LapSimGyn virtual reality simulator. Surg Endosc. 2006 Sep;20(9):1460-6.
3. 3. Munz Y, Kumar BD, Moorthy K, Bann S, Darzi A. Laparoscopic virtual reality and box trainers: is one superior to the other? Surg Endosc. 2004 Mar;18(3):485-94.
4. 4. Aggarwal R, Tully A, Grantcharov T, Larsen CR, Miskry T, Farthing A, et al. Virtual reality simulation training can improve technical skills during laparoscopic salpingectomy for ectopic pregnancy. BJOG. 2006 Dec;113(12):1382-7.
5. 5. Azevedo JL, Azevedo OC, Miyahira SA, Miguel GPS, Becker OM, Hypolito OHM, et al. Injuries caused by Veress needle insertion for creation of pneumoperitoneum: a systematic literature review. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:1428–1432.