Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jan;36(1):300-306.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-08275-z. Epub 2021 Jan 22.

Preperitoneal insufflation pressure of the abdominal wall in a porcine model

Riley E Reynolds #  1 , Benjamin P Wankum #  2 , Sean J Crimmins  1 , Mark A Carlson  3 , Benjamin S Terry  1
Affiliations

Preperitoneal insufflation pressure of the abdominal wall in a porcine model

Riley E Reynolds et al. Surg Endosc. 2022 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Most complications and adverse events during laparoscopic surgery occur during initial entry into the peritoneal cavity. Among them, preperitoneal insufflation occurs when the insufflation needle is incorrectly placed, and the abdominal wall is insufflated. The objective of this study was to find a range for static pressure which is low enough to allow placement of a Veress needle into the peritoneal space without causing preperitoneal insufflation, yet high enough to separate abdominal viscera from the parietal peritoneum.

Methods: A pressure test was performed on twelve fresh porcine carcasses to determine the minimum preperitoneal insufflation pressure and the minimum initial peritoneal cavity insufflation pressure. Each porcine model had five needle placement categories. One category tested the initial peritoneal cavity insufflation pressure beneath the umbilicus. The four remaining categories tested the preperitoneal insufflation pressure at four different anatomical locations on the abdomen that can be used for initial entry. The minimum initial insufflation pressures from each carcass were then compared to the preperitoneal insufflation pressures to obtain an optimal range for initial insufflation.

Results: Increasing the insufflation pressure increased the probability of preperitoneal insufflation. Also, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between the initial peritoneal cavity insufflation pressures (8.83 ± 4.19 mmHg) and the lowest preperitoneal pressures (32.54 ± 7.84 mmHg) (mean ± SD).

Conclusion: Pressures greater than 10 mmHg resulted in initial cavity insufflation and pressures greater than 20 mmHg resulted in preperitoneal insufflation in porcine models. By knowing the minimum pressure required to separate the layers of the abdominal wall, the risk of preperitoneal insufflation can be mitigated while obtaining safe and efficient entry into the peritoneal cavity. The findings in this research are not a guideline for trocar or Veress needle placement, but instead reveal preliminary data which may lead to more studies, technology, etc.

Keywords: Insufflation; Laparoscopic surgery; Pneumoperitoneum; Preperitoneal insufflation; Pressure profile test; Veress needle.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Sakamoto A, Kikuchi I, Shimanuki H, Tejima K, Saito J, Sakai K, Kumakiri J, Kitade M, Takeda S (2017) Initial closed trocar entry for laparoscopic surgery: technique, umbilical cosmesis, and patient satisfaction. Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther 6:167–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gmit.2017.04.001 - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Molloy D, Kaloo PD, Cooper M, Nguyen TV (2002) Laparoscopic entry: a literature review and analysis of techniques and complications of primary port entry. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 42:246–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0004-8666.2002.00246.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vilos GA, Ternamian A, Dempster J, Laberge PY, Vilos G, Lefebvre G, Allaire C, Arneja J, Birch C, Dempsey T, Dempster J, Laberge PY, Leduc D, Turnbull V, Potestio F (2007) Laparoscopic entry: a review of techniques, technologies, and complications. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 29:433–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)35496-2 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pickett SD, Rodewald KJ, Billow MR, Giannios NM, Hurd WW (2010) Avoiding major vessel injury during laparoscopic instrument insertion. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 37:387–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2010.05.002 - DOI - PubMed
    1. van der Voort M, Heijnsdijk EAM, Gouma DJ (2004) Bowel injury as a complication of laparoscopy. BJS (Brit J Surg) 91:1253–1258. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4716 - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources