Laparoscopic or robotic intraoperative management to minimize aerosol dispersion: Adaptations to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. / Manejo intraoperatório em cirurgia laparoscópica ou robótica para minimizar a dispersão de aerossóis: Adaptações ao contexto da pandemia por COVID-19.

The coronavirus infection, also known as SARS-COV2, has proven to be potentially fatal, representing a major global health problem. Its spread after its origin in the city of Wuhan, China has resulted in a pandemic with the collapse of the health system in several countries, some with enormous social impact and expressive number of deaths as seen in Italy and Spain. Extreme intra and extra-hospital measures have been implemented to decrease the transmission and dissemination of the COVID-19. Regarding the surgical practice, a huge number of procedures considered non-essential or elective were cancelled and postponed until the pandemic is resolved. However, urgent and oncological procedures have been carried out. In this publication, we highlight and teach adaptations to be made with commonly used materials in laparoscopy to help prevent the spread and contamination of the healthcare team assisting surgical patients.

A infecção pelo coronavírus determinante da doença COVID-19, também conhecida como SARS-COV2 foi classificada nos últimos meses como pandemia. Essa é potencialmente fatal, representando enorme problema de saúde mundial. A disseminação, após provável origem zoonótica na cidade de Wuhan, China, resultou em colapso do sistema de saúde de diversos países, alguns com enorme impacto social e número grande de mortes descritas na Itália e Espanha. Medidas extremas intra e extra-hospitalares têm sido implementadas a fim de conter a transmissão e disseminação da COVID-19. No âmbito cirúrgico, enorme quantidade de procedimentos considerados não essenciais ou eletivos foram prorrogados ou suspensos até resolução da pandemia. No entanto, cirurgias de urgência e oncológicas não permitem que o paciente espere. Nesta publicação, sugerimos e ensinamos adaptação a ser feita com materiais de uso corriqueiro em laparoscopias para evitar a contaminação ou a disseminação entre as equipes assistenciais e os pacientes.

Recommendations of the Brazilian College of Surgeons for laparoscopic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. / Recomendações do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões para cirurgia videolaparoscópica durante a pandemia por COVID-19.

During the current COVID-19 pandemic, the surgical community faces the possible risk of infection of health care professionals involved in the surgical procedure. This leaves to concerns and questions referred to the most adequate surgical approach at this moment. With the objective of guiding surgeons, and based in many different protocols published until now, the Brazilian College of surgeons brings recommendations about this subject. The aim of this technical note is, trough a compilaton of publications and recommendations from Scientific Societies of Surgery worldwide, to provide guidelines regarding laparoscopic access during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Diante do quadro de pandemia da COVID-19, a comunidade cirúrgica enfrenta o possível risco de contágio de profissionais envolvidos no ato operatório; gerando preocupações e dúvidas referentes a escolha da via de acesso mais adequada nesse momento. Com objetivo de orientar os cirurgiões, baseado em diversos protocolos publicados até o momento, o Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões traz recomendações acerca deste assunto. O objetivo desta nota técnica é, através de uma compilação de publicações e recomendações de Sociedades Científicas de Cirurgia de todo mundo, trazer orientações relativas ao acesso laparoscópico durante a pandemia por COVID-19.

Recomendações do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões para cirurgia videolaparoscópica durante a pandemia por COVID-19 / Recommendations of the Brazilian College of Surgeons for laparoscopic surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic

RESUMO Diante do quadro de pandemia da COVID-19, a comunidade cirúrgica enfrenta o possível risco de contágio de profissionais envolvidos no ato operatório; gerando preocupações e dúvidas referentes a escolha da via de acesso mais adequada nesse momento. Com objetivo de orientar os cirurgiões, baseado em diversos protocolos publicados até o momento, o Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões traz recomendações acerca deste assunto. O objetivo desta nota técnica é, através de uma compilação de publicações e recomendações de Sociedades Científicas de Cirurgia de todo mundo, trazer orientações relativas ao acesso laparoscópico durante a pandemia por COVID-19.

ABSTRACT During the current COVID-19 pandemic, the surgical community faces the possible risk of infection of health care professionals involved in the surgical procedure. This leaves to concerns and questions referred to the most adequate surgical approach at this moment. With the objective of guiding surgeons, and based in many different protocols published until now, the Brazilian College of surgeons brings recommendations about this subject. The aim of this technical note is, trough a compilaton of publications and recommendations from Scientific Societies of Surgery worldwide, to provide guidelines regarding laparoscopic access during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Manejo intraoperatório em cirurgia laparoscópica ou robótica para minimizar a dispersão de aerossóis: Adaptações ao contexto da pandemia por COVID-19 / Laparoscopic or robotic intraoperative management to minimize aerosol dispersion: Adaptations to the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

RESUMO A infecção pelo coronavírus determinante da doença COVID-19, também conhecida como SARS-COV2 foi classificada nos últimos meses como pandemia. Essa é potencialmente fatal, representando enorme problema de saúde mundial. A disseminação, após provável origem zoonótica na cidade de Wuhan, China, resultou em colapso do sistema de saúde de diversos países, alguns com enorme impacto social e número grande de mortes descritas na Itália e Espanha. Medidas extremas intra e extra-hospitalares têm sido implementadas a fim de conter a transmissão e disseminação da COVID-19. No âmbito cirúrgico, enorme quantidade de procedimentos considerados não essenciais ou eletivos foram prorrogados ou suspensos até resolução da pandemia. No entanto, cirurgias de urgência e oncológicas não permitem que o paciente espere. Nesta publicação, sugerimos e ensinamos adaptação a ser feita com materiais de uso corriqueiro em laparoscopias para evitar a contaminação ou a disseminação entre as equipes assistenciais e os pacientes.

ABSTRACT The coronavirus infection, also known as SARS-COV2, has proven to be potentially fatal, representing a major global health problem. Its spread after its origin in the city of Wuhan, China has resulted in a pandemic with the collapse of the health system in several countries, some with enormous social impact and expressive number of deaths as seen in Italy and Spain. Extreme intra and extra-hospital measures have been implemented to decrease the transmission and dissemination of the COVID-19. Regarding the surgical practice, a huge number of procedures considered non-essential or elective were cancelled and postponed until the pandemic is resolved. However, urgent and oncological procedures have been carried out. In this publication, we highlight and teach adaptations to be made with commonly used materials in laparoscopy to help prevent the spread and contamination of the healthcare team assisting surgical patients.

Low pressure gynecological laparoscopy (7mmHg) with AirSeal® System versus a standard insufflation (15mmHg): A pilot study in 60 patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate feasibility of performing benign gynecologic pathology low pressure (7mmHg) laparoscopy (LPL) with AirSeal® system and to study benefits in terms of postoperative pain, when compared to a standard insufflation group (15mmHg). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective randomized pilot study, 60 patients had laparoscopy for gynecologic benign pathology: 30 with 7mmHg and AirSeal system, and 30 with 15mmHg standard insufflator. The primary endpoint was incidence of shoulder pain. A postoperative questionnaire was completed by each patient to assess shoulder pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS], from 0 to 10) at H4, H8, H24, and consumption of morphinics was notified. During each procedure, anesthesia parameters were collected (peak airway pressure, systolic blood pressure, end tidal CO2). RESULTS: Laparoscopy was performed on 30 patients in AirSeal®-LP group without need to increase pressure above 7mmHg, and no complication was reported. Incidence of shoulder pain was significantly lower in the AirSeal®-LP group (23.3% vs. 73.3%, P<0.001). NRS shoulder pain was significantly lower in AirSeal® LP group at hour 4, 8 and 24. Maximal values of ETCO2, systolic blood pressure, and peak airway pressure were significantly lower in AirSeal®-LP group. CONCLUSION: LP (7mmHg) laparoscopy with AirSeal® platform allows laparoscopic surgery with less postoperative shoulder pain. These results could facilitate the development of ambulatory laparoscopy.

Gas embolism in laparoscopic hepatectomy: what is the optimal pneumoperitoneal pressure for laparoscopic major hepatectomy?

Laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) has become popular as a surgical treatment for liver diseases, and numerous recent studies indicate that it is safe and has advantages in selected patients. Because of the magnified view offered by the laparoscope under pneumoperitoneal pressure, LH results in less bleeding than open laparotomy. However, gas embolism is an important concern that has been discussed in the literature, and experimental studies have shown that LH is associated with a high incidence of gas embolism. Major hepatectomies are done laparoscopically in some centers, even though the risk of gas embolism is believed to be higher than for minor hepatectomy due to the wide transection plane with dissection of major hepatic veins and long operative time. At many high-volume centers, LH is performed at a pneumoperitoneal pressure less than 12 mmHg, and reports indicate that the rate of clinically severe gas embolism is low. However, more studies will be necessary to elucidate the optimal pneumoperitoneal pressure and the incidence of gas embolism during LH.

Standardizing pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic entry. Time, volume, or pressure: which is best?

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To establish whether time, pressure, or volume is the most reliable indicator of adequate pneumoperitoneum and, hence, the best parameter to use for safe trocar entry. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2). SETTING: Department of Endogynecology, Royal Hospital for Women, Sydney, Australia. PATIENTS: One hundred thirty-three consecutive patients having gynecologic laparoscopy were recruited for the study. Of these, 100 patients were included in the analysis, and 33 were excluded. INTERVENTION: Laparoscopic surgery. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After umbilical Veress needle entry, pressure and volume were recorded every 20 seconds until insufflation pressure of 20 mm Hg was reached. Following trocar entry, the gas was then expelled with the patient lying flat. The depth of pneumoperitoneum was measured at intra-abdominal pressure of 5, 10, 15, and 20 mm Hg. Random effects models were used to predict the depth of pneumoperitoneum based on pressure, time, and volume. A comparison was made of the standard deviation of pneumoperitoneum distance produced at pressure of 20 mm Hg (8.56 ± 0.59) compared with that produced by a volume of 3 L (4.96 ± 1.13). Compared with volume, pressure was significantly more reliable in estimating depth of pneumoperitoneum (p < .001) because it exhibited the least variance. Further comparison was made of the standard deviation of pneumoperitoneum distance produced at pressure of 20 mm Hg (8.56 ± 0.59) compared with that produced at 3 minutes (7.82 ± 1.19). Compared with time, pressure was significantly more reliable in depth of pneumoperitoneum (p < .001) because it exhibited the least variance. These results demonstrate that, compared with volume and time, pressure is the most reliable predictor of pneumoperitoneum depth because it exhibits the least variance (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Pressure is the most reliable predictor of pneumoperitoneum before trocar entry in laparoscopic surgery.

New nomogram for safe laparoscopic entry to reduce vascular injury.

A nomogram is developed to determine the length of Veress needle that could be safely inserted to achieve pneumoperitoneum to reduce the risk of vascular injury during laparoscopic entry. Axial images of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used to measure the vertical distance between umbilicus and retroperitoneal vessels (STR). This distance was correlated with body mass index and a nomogram was developed to exactly measure the safe distance for the length of Veress needle insertion. The fitted equation was STR (skin to rectus sheath) = 31.6 + 3.952 × BMI with adjusted R(2) = 94.5%. The abdominal cavity depth showed a correlation with adjusted R(2) = 84.2%. This showed a significant relation between body mass index and prediction of cavity depth. Using the mean regression line for STP (skin to peritoneum), a safe insertion distance was identified and a nomogram developed which can be used to objectively predict the depth of the peritoneal cavity.

Open versus closed method of establishing pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of the Hasson cannula (open) and Veress needle (closed) method to gain access in the abdominal cavity for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled study. PLACE AND DURATION OF STUDY: Ward 26, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre, Karachi, from January to December 2007. METHODOLOGY: All patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the study period were enrolled. Younger (< 20 years) and elderly (> 65 years) patients and those with co-morbid conditions were excluded. The remaining were randomized into two study groups. In one group, the Hasson cannula was used, while in the other Veress needle was used to establish pneumoperitoneum. Surgeries were performed by experienced surgeons of the ward. Variables comparing the safety and efficacy of the two methods were studied. RESULTS: There were a total of 60 patients in each group. In the Hasson cannula group 15 (25%) had complications of gas leakage, one developed a port-site hematoma and two patients developed wound infections. No complications occurred in the Veress needle arm. The mean access time in the Hasson cannula group (4.6+/-1.1 minutes) was less than that of for the Veress needle arm (5.4+/-0.7 minutes). Complications of visceral or vascular injury, port-site hernia or gas embolism did not occur in either arm. CONCLUSION: Although complications occurred using the Veress needle technique, the Hasson cannula technique was faster. Further studies on larger sample sizes are necessary to establish corroborative evidence and formulate guidelines.

Three simple steps during closed laparoscopic entry may minimize major injuries.

OBJECTIVES: To describe three steps: (1) the initial Veress pressure (VIP-Pressure), (2) transient high-pressure pneumoperitoneum (HIP-Entry) prior to trocar/cannula insertion, and (3) visual entry with a trocarless cannula during closed laparoscopic entry, which may reduce major injuries. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort study (Canadian Task Force Classification II-2). SETTING: University-affiliated teaching hospital. INTERVENTIONS: VIP-Pressure. During laparoscopic entry, the initial VIP pressure was measured and correlated against the body habitus and parity of 365 consecutive women. HIP-Entry was performed in 2,498 consecutive cases. In 100 women, the CO(2) volume, heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and pulmonary compliance were recorded at pressures of 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 mmHg. Visual entry with a trocarless blunt cannula was performed in 776 women. The cannula, housing a 0 degrees laparoscope, was rotated clockwise applying minimal downward force. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: VIP-Pressure. Pneumoperitoneum was established after one, two or three Veress needle attempts at the umbilicus in 82.4%, 10.9%, and 4.0% of women, respectively. In seven (2.2%), pneumoperitoneum was established at the left upper quadrant (LUQ) during the fourth attempt, and in two (0.6%) entry was abandoned. Median initial Veress pressure was 4 mmHg (range 2-10 mmHg). The VIP pressure correlated positively with women's weight (r = 0.518, p < 0.001) and body mass index (BMI) (r=0.545, p<0.001), and negatively with parity (r= -0.179, p<0.001). HIP-Entry. The abdomen was insufflated to 25-30 mmHg prior to primary trocar/cannula insertion. There were no changes in cardiovascular parameters between 15 and 30 mmHg. A 21% decrease in pulmonary compliance from 15 to 30 mmHg was of no clinical significance. No injury has been experienced with the visual cannula in 776 cases. CONCLUSIONS: (1) A VIP-Pressure (<10 mmHg) indicates intraperitoneal placement of the Veress needle. (2) The use of transient HIP-Entry does not adversely affect cardiopulmonary function in healthy women. (3) Visual cannula offers an additional step towards safer entry.

Evaluation of the positioning of the tip of the Veress needle during creation of closed pneumoperitoneum in pigs

OBJETIVO: Estabelecer parâmetros fidedignos do posicionamento adequado da agulha de Veress na cavidade peritoneal durante o estabelecimento do pneumoperitônio pela técnica fechada. MÉTODOS: Em 11 porcos a agulha foi introduzida na cavidade peritoneal através do hipocôndrio esquerdo. Provas de posicionamento da ponta do instrumento foram efetuadas. Insuflou-se CO2 e registraram-se periodicamente pressões, fluxos e volumes. A posição intraperitoneal da agulha foi confirmada e esta foi retirada, sendo re-introduzida no hipocôndrio direito e posicionada sob visão direta no espaço pré-peritoneal. Os mesmos parâmetros foram aferidos. RESULTADOS: A prova do escoamento foi sempre positiva no peritônio. Não se encontrou resistência à introdução de soro no peritônio em nenhum caso, mas sim em 45,5% dos casos no pré-peritônio. Soro algum foi recuperado em 63,5% no peritônio e em 54,5% no pré-peritônio. O gotejamento fluiu livremente em 66,6% das vezes no peritônio e em 45,5% dos casos no pré-peritônio. No peritônio, pressões iniciais de 5,20 mmHg aumentaram progressivamente durante 123 segundos até atingir 15 mmHg. No pré-peritônio a pressão inicial foi de 15,60 mmHg e oscilou entre 12 e 15,60 mmHg. O volume de gás injetado no peritônio foi de 1500 ml e de 100 ml no pré-peritônio. CONCLUSÕES: Aspiração e observação do escoamento e do gotejamento são importantes; recuperar ou não o soro é inconclusivo. Pressão inicial d" 5 mm é indicativo da ponta da agulha no peritônio, onde devem caber dez vezes mais gás que no pré-peritônio. No peritônio os aumentos das pressões e dos volumes pode ser previstos mediante estatísticas.

[Open pneumoperitoneum for the sake of Quality Assurance]. / Pneumopéritoine en "ouvert" au nom de l'Assurance Qualité.

The establishment of a pneumoperitoneum for coelioscopy is a maneuver which may have lethal consequences. The open or Hasson technique involves dissection of the abdominal wall layers and insertion of a blunt trocar under direct vision. The conclusions of a recent study comparing "open" and "blind" trocar insertion recommends that the "open" technique be routinely used as a measure of Quality Assurance. A programmed, standardized approach is the only way to prevent undesired complications. Surgeons often plead that the uniqueness of each patient argues against a rigidly standardized technique. But isn't this argument of patient variability just an alibi to avoid adherence to explicit and proven standards? When it comes to guaranteeing patient safety, shouldn't the demonstration that a technique diminishes risk be considered an adequate level of proof if there is no demonstrated benefit to the more dangerous approach? In laparoscopy, where are the proven benefits which would mitigate the undeniable increased risks of "blind" trocar insertion? Initial trocar insertion for laparoscopy by the "open" technique should be standard practice for reasons of safety. The calculus is simple. Given the innumerable laparoscopic surgeries performed every day, there are patients who die daily as a result of "blind" trocar insertion.

[Standardized positioning and trocar placement for laparoscopic interventions in urology]. / Standardisierte Lagerung und Trokarplatzierungen für laparoskopische Eingriffe in der Urologie.

Over the last few years, laparoscopy has become more common in urology. Nevertheless only a few centres carry out more than 40 laparoscopies a year. A reduction to two standard techniques has led to the simplification and time optimisation in preparation for surgery and thus to an increase in quality. Two standard positionings and trocar placements are described for all important urological laparoscopies. At the same time, operations involving the small pelvis and the retroperitoneum are differentiated.

Systematic review of the safety and effectiveness of methods used to establish pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgery.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review was conducted to determine which of the methods of obtaining peritoneal access and establishing pneumoperitoneum is the safest and most effective. METHODS: Studies that met the inclusion criteria were identified from six bibliographic databases up to May 2002, the internet, hand-searches and reference lists. They were critically appraised using a validated checklist and data were extracted using standardized protocols. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of prospective, non-randomized studies of open versus closed (needle/trocar) access indicated a trend during open access towards a reduced risk of major complications (pooled relative risk (RR(p)) 0.30, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.09 to 1.03). Open access was also associated with a trend towards a reduced risk of access-site herniation (RR(p) 0.21, 95 per cent c.i. 0.04 to 1.03) and, in non-obese patients, a 57 per cent reduced risk of minor complications (RR(p) 0.43, 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.92) and a trend for fewer conversions to laparotomy (RR(p) 0.21, 95 per cent c.i. 0.04 to 1.17). Data on major complications in studies of direct trocar versus needle/trocar access were inconclusive. Minor complications in randomized controlled trials were fewer with direct trocar access (RR(p) 0.19, 95 per cent c.i. 0.09 to 0.40), predominantly owing to a reduction in extraperitoneal insufflation. CONCLUSION: The evidence on the comparative safety and effectiveness of the different access methods was not definitive, but there were trends in the data that merit further exploration.

The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery clinical practice guideline on the pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic surgery.

BACKGROUND: The pneumoperitoneum is the crucial element in laparoscopic surgery. Different clinical problems are associated with this procedure, which has led to various modifications of the technique. The aim of this guideline is to define the scientifically proven standards of the pneumoperitoneum. METHODS: Based on systematic literature searches (Medline, Embase, and Cochrane), an expert panel consensually formulated clinical recommendations, which were graded according to the strength of available literature evidence. RECOMMENDATIONS: Preoperatively, all patients should be assessed for the presence of cardiac, pulmonary, hepatic, renal, or vascular comorbidity. Presupposing appropriate perioperative measures and surgical technique, there is no reason to contraindicate pneumoperitoneum in patients with peritonitis or intraabdominal malignancy. During laparoscopy, monitoring of end tidal CO2 concentration is mandatory. The available data on closed- (Veress needle) and open-access techniques do not allow us to principally favor the use of either technique. Using 2 to 5-mm instead of 5 to 10-mm trocars improves cosmetic result and postoperative pain marginally. It is recommended to use the lowest intraabdominal pressure allowing adequate exposure of the operative field, rather than using a routine pressure. In patients with limited cardiac, pulmonary, or renal function, abdominal wall lifting combined with low-pressure pneumoperitoneum might be an alternative. Abdominal wall lifting devices have no clinically relevant advantages compared to low-pressure (5-7 mmHg) pneumoperitoneum. In patients with cardiopulmonary diseases, intra- and postoperative arterial blood gas monitoring is recommended. The clinical benefits of warmed, humidified insufflation gas are minor and contradictory. Intraoperative sequential intermittent pneumatic compression of the lower extremities is recommended for all prolonged laparoscopic procedures. For the prevention of postoperative pain a wide range of treatment options exists. Although all these options seem to reduce pain, the data currently do not justify a general recommendation.

Resultado del tratamiento de las eventraciones abdominales / Surgical reparation of incisional hernias: results

Antecedentes: Existe controversia en el uso de mallas en la reparación quirúrgica de las eventraciones. Objetivo: Especificar las indicaciones del uso de prótesis en la reparación de las hernias incisionales comparando dos grupos de enfermos en los que se usaron técnicas con y sin el uso de mallas. Lugar: Servicio de Cirugía. Clínica privada. Diseño: Se trata de un estudio retrospectivo consecutivo. Población: Entre el 1 de julio de 1990 y el 30 de junio de 1995 se trataron 133 eventraciones y pudieron controlarse 60 o el 44 por ciento. Correspondieron al sexo femenino 41 y 19 al masculino, con una proporción de 2,1 a 1. Las edades oscilaron entre los 25 y los 79 años, con una media de 52 años. Método: Se compararon 37 pacientes operados con plástica anatómica con 23 en los que se utilizó malla protésica. Resultados: El control de los resultados alejados se efectuó entre los 12 y los 72 meses de la operación reparadora, con una media de 42 meses. En total se hallaron 17 recurrencias (28,3 por ciento). En el primer grupo, sin malla, habían recidivado 16 de 37 (43,2 por ciento) y en el segundo grupo, con malla, había recidivado 1 de 23 (4,6 por ciento) diferencia estadísticamente significativa (p = 0,001). Conclusiones: En nuestro medio es conveniente tratar la mayoría de las hernias de incisiones quirúrgicas mediante el uso de mallas sintéticas irreabsorbibles. Se puede optar por el procedimiento anatómico en las eventraciones menores de 4 cm ubicadas en el abdomen inferior y que pueden ser efectuadas sin tensión. La eventración de la incisión de Mc Burney debe ser tratada en primera instancia, en la mayoría de los casos, con plásticas anatómicas. En el resto de las eventraciones somos partidarios de la plástica madiante malla de polipropileno (AU)