RSS-Feed abonnieren
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1256559
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
Natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is sufficient and is associated with an improved cardiopulmonary response (PressurePig Study)
Publikationsverlauf
submitted 20 October 2011
accepted after revision 6 March 2011
Publikationsdatum:
05. Juli 2011 (online)
Background and aims: The aim of this randomized trial in the acute porcine model was to compare the quality of transgastric peritoneoscopy with the use of low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum and to evaluate the respective associated cardiopulmonary changes.
Methods: For transgastric peritoneoscopy, carbon dioxide was insufflated via the endoscope for a constant intraperitoneal pressure of 6 mmHg or 12 mmHg in 9 pigs each. The quality of transgastric peritoneoscopy was rated on a visual analog scale (0 mm, min.; 100 mm, max.) by the endoscopist, who was blinded to the intraperitoneal pressure. The cardiac index and global end-diastolic volume index (GEDVI, reflecting preload) were measured every 3 minutes by transpulmonary thermodilution. The following were also recorded: heart rate, mean arterial pressure (MAP), systemic vascular resistance index (SVRI, reflecting afterload), peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), pH, PCO2, and PO2.
Results: The quality of transgastric peritoneoscopy with the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum was not inferior to that obtained using standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum (87.0 mm vs. 87.3 mm; P < 0.05). In both groups we observed a statistically significant rise in MAP and SVRI. The increase in SVRI was less pronounced during low-pressure peritoneum (P = 0.042), indicating a reduced stress response in comparison to standard-pressure peritoneum. There were no relevant differences between the groups in relation to cardiac index, GEDVI, and heart rate. An intra-abdominal pressure of 6 mmHg also led to better oxygenation (P = 0.031 for difference in PO2 between the two groups) due to lower peak inspiratory pressure (P < 0.001 for difference). There were only slight differences between the groups with regard to pH and PCO2.
Conclusions: Pneumoperitoneum of 12 – 16 mmHg is used for standard laparoscopy. For NOTES, low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is sufficient and is associated with an improved cardiopulmonary response compared to standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.
References
- 1 Bingener J, Krishnegowda N K, Michalek J E. Immunologic parameters during NOTES compared with laparoscopy in a randomized blinded porcine trial. Surg Endosc. 2009; 23 178-181
- 2 Bingener J, Michalek J, van Sickle K, Schwesinger W. Randomized blinded trial shows relative thrombocytopenia in natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery compared with standard laparoscopy in a porcine survival model. Surg Endosc. 2008; 22 2067-2071
- 3 McGee M F, Schomisch S J, Marks J M et al. Late phase TNF-alpha depression in natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) peritoneoscopy. Surgery. 2008; 143 318-328
- 4 Trunzo J A, McGee M F, Cavazzola L T et al. Peritoneal inflammatory response of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) versus laparoscopy with carbon dioxide and air pneumoperitoneum. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24 1727-1736
- 5 Dubcenco E, Assumpcao L, Dray X et al. Adhesion formation after peritoneoscopy with liver biopsy in a survival porcine model: comparison of laparotomy, laparoscopy, and transgastric natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). Endoscopy. 2009; 41 971-978
- 6 von Delius S, Sager J, Feussner H et al. Carbon dioxide versus room air for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and comparison with standard laparoscopic pneumoperitoneum. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 72 161-169
- 7 Rattner D W. SAGES/ASGE Joint Committee on NOTES. NOTES: Where have we been and where are we going?. Surg Endosc. 2008; 22 1143-1145
- 8 McGee M F, Rosen M J, Marks J et al. A reliable method for monitoring intraabdominal pressure during natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2007; 21 672-676
- 9 von Delius S, Wilhelm D, Feussner H et al. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: cardiopulmonary safety of transesophageal mediastinoscopy. Endoscopy. 2010; 42 405-412
- 10 Rocca G D, Costa M G, Pietropaoli P. How to measure and interpret volumetric measures of preload. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2007; 13 297-302
- 11 Huber W, Umgelter A, Reindl W et al. Volume assessment in patients with necrotizing pancreatitis: a comparison of intrathoracic blood volume index, central venous pressure, and hematocrit, and their correlation to cardiac index and extravascular lung water index. Crit Care Med. 2008; 36 2348-2354
- 12 Kantsevoy S V, Jagannath S B, Niiyama H et al. A novel safe approach to the peritoneal cavity for per-oral transgastric endoscopic procedures. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 65 497-500
- 13 Bergstrom M, Swain P, Park P O. Measurements of intraperitoneal pressure and the development of a feedback control valve for regulating pressure during flexible transgastric surgery (NOTES). Gastrointest Endosc. 2007; 66 174-178
- 14 Neudecker J, Sauerland S, Neugebauer E et al. The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery clinical practice guideline on the pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc. 2002; 16 1121-1143
- 15 von Delius S, Huber W, Feussner H et al. Effect of pneumoperitoneum on hemodynamics and inspiratory pressures during natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): an experimental, controlled study in an acute porcine model. Endoscopy. 2007; 39 854-861
- 16 Meireles O, Kantsevoy S V, Kalloo A N et al. Comparison of intraabdominal pressures using the gastroscope and laparoscope for transgastric surgery. Surg Endosc. 2007; 21 998-1001
- 17 Mutoh T, Lamm W J, Embree L J et al. Abdominal distension alters regional pleural pressures and chest wall mechanics in pigs in vivo. J Appl Physiol. 1991; 70 2611-2618
- 18 Moran E A, Gostout C J, McConico A L, Bingener J. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery used for perforated viscus repair is feasible using lower peritoneal pressures than laparoscopy in a porcine model. J Am Coll Surg. 2010; 210 474-479
- 19 Voermans R P, Sheppard B, van Berge H enegouwen et al. Comparison of transgastric NOTES and laparoscopic peritoneoscopy for detection of peritoneal metastases. Ann Surg. 2009; 250 255-259
- 20 Bergman S, Fix D J, Volt K et al. Do gastrotomies require repair after endoscopic transgastric peritoneoscopy? A controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71 1013-1017
- 21 Ko C W, Shin E J, Buscaglia J M et al. Preliminary pneumoperitoneum facilitates transgastric access into the peritoneal cavity for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: a pilot study in a live porcine model. Endoscopy. 2007; 39 849-853
S. von DeliusMD
Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München
II. Medizinische Klinik
Ismaninger Str. 22
81675 Munich
Germany
Fax: +49-89-41404905
eMail: stefan_ruckert@yahoo.de