Small Animal Laparoscopy and Thoracoscopy. Группа авторов

Small Animal Laparoscopy and Thoracoscopy - Группа авторов


Скачать книгу
4.18), inflatable flanges to help with retention, and optical trocars (Figure 4.19). Optical trocars have a transparent plastic sleeve, into which the laparoscope may be fitted before insertion of the trocar, enabling the surgeon to monitor the passage of the instrument through the layers of the abdominal wall. The internal surface of the sleeve must be nonreflective to avoid light from the laparoscope interfering with the surgeon's view.

Photo depicts disposable bladeless cannula with a safety shield. Photo depicts disposable optical view cannula–trocar with an internal flange and balloon for improved retention. Photo depicts different sizes of smooth stainless steel reusable cannulas.

      Source: © 2014 Photo courtesy of KARL STORZ SE & CO, KG.

Photo depicts a Ternamian (i.e., threaded) EndoTIP stainless steel reusable cannula.

      Source: © 2014 Photo courtesy of KARL STORZ SE & CO, KG.

Photo depicts multiple types of plastic reusable thoracic ports.

      Source: © 2014 Photo courtesy of KARL STORZ SE & CO, KG.

Photo depicts reusable Thoracoport.

      Source: Photo courtesy of Dr. Philipp Mayhew.

      Most insertional complications can be avoided with special attention to detail and do not usually require the need for conversion to an open procedure. Complications associated with trocar placement and insufflation include damage to intraabdominal organs, vascular injury, subcutaneous insufflation (emphysema), fatal air embolism, and insufflation of falciform fat [15]. Insertion of the Veress needle via the intercostal technique in one article was associated with 35% grade 1 complications (subcutaneous emphysema, omental or falciform injuries), 10.7% grade 2 complications (liver of splenic injuries), and 1.7% grade 3 complications (pneumothorax) [16]. Insertion of the Veress needle and primary trocar for initial entry remains the most hazardous part of laparoscopy, accounting for 40% of all laparoscopic complications and the majority of the fatalities [17]. Despite decades of research and development to find safer methods for initial laparoscopic entry, major vessel injuries have been reported using virtually all types of trocar insertion methods. The overall morbidity and mortality rates related to laparoscopic access are low. The life‐threatening complications include injury to the bowel, bladder, and major abdominal vessels. A recent Cochrane review included 17 randomized controlled trials concerning 3040 individuals undergoing laparoscopy. Overall, there was no evidence of advantage using any single abdominal access technique in terms of preventing major complications [18].

      Vascular injury can occur regardless of the method of access, and most vascular injuries (up to 80%) occur at the initial access. Recent studies have suggested that the incidence of major vascular injury is slightly higher with the closed technique (Veress and direct trocar insertion) as opposed to the open (Hasson) technique. Molloy et al. [4] suggest that the open technique decreased the rate of vascular injury to 0.01% compared with a rate of 0.04% associated with closed techniques using a Veress needle. Although the incidence of major vascular injuries is low, the mortality rate arising from these lesions reportedly ranges between 8 and 17%. Vessel injuries attributable to trocars are usually more obvious and catastrophic than injuries related to Veress needle insertion. An expanding retroperitoneal hematoma, hemodynamic instability in the face of active bleeding, and active intraabdominal hemorrhage that cannot be managed laparoscopically are all indications for conversion to laparotomy and exploration or vascular repair.

      Although studies have suggested that the open technique of initial trocar placement may be associated with a lower incidence of major vascular injuries, the same cannot be said for visceral injuries [14]. The incidence of this complication is about 0.05% of all open access procedures [19]. The main difference between bowel injuries occurring during the open technique compared with the closed technique is that with the open procedure, it is more likely that the injury will be immediately obvious and repaired without delay. Veress needle injuries to the large and small bowel may be associated with a higher incidence of peritonitis and other complications than injuries to the stomach, which can often be managed conservatively.

Image described by caption.
Скачать книгу