PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

U H Holthausen

Publications and source records attributed to U H Holthausen.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

CO(2) pneumoperitoneum: what we know and what we need to know.

The development of the laparoscopic technique in surgery was so overwhelming that scientific evaluation could not keep in step. While investigators were still discussing the effects of the pneumoperitoneum on the healthy organism, laparoscopy was already performed in patients with an acute abdomen due to trauma or disease. Therefore, there is an urgent need of further experimental and clinical studies with relevant endpoints to gain external evidence concerning the benefits of diagnostic or therapeutic laparoscopy for critically ill patients. In experiments with pigs we have shown that even in a healthy organism perfusion and energy metabolism of the small bowel is impaired by a pneumoperitoneum with carbon dioxide. Under the conditions of a systemic inflammatory response syndrome induced by infusion of endotoxin, the negative effects of the pneumoperitoneum were significantly amplified. Furthermore, we found that the increased intracranial pressure as caused by a head injury was further enhanced during a pneumoperitoneum but not by the alternative method of mechanical wall retraction. The current literature dealing with the effects of a pneumoperitoneum in critically ill patients is still controversial. Our data support the results of those authors who hold the opinion that creating a pneumoperitoneum in patients with acute abdominal problems means an additional serious burden that in single cases may lead to a disaster. As evidence is lacking, the current extension of laparoscopy into the field of intensive care medicine is still a human experiment that must be performed with high responsibility, extensive monitoring, and according to the rules of a clinical study.

Abdomen, Acute↗

Pregnancy: A contraindication?

According to David L. Sackett evidence-based medicine is the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence when making decisions about the care of individual patients. It means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external evidence from systematic research. On the basis of this idea in medicine the following communication summarizes and evaluates current statements and literature on laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy. The topic is an example for excellent individual clinical performance on one hand, as gynecologists have perform laparoscopic procedures during pregnancy for decades. On the other hand, pregnancy is considered to be a contraindication for laparoscopic surgery by clinicians, because no excellent external evidence from systematic research is available. To find an answer to the question of whether pregnancy is a contraindication for laparoscopic surgery we performed a literature search and gained information by conducting interviews with several experts in gynecology and endoscopic operations. We concluded that there are almost no "scientific" data about endoscopic surgery during pregnancy, but gynecologists representing the "real world" seem to have no fear of the procedure for their patients. Between the two extremes, performing laparoscopic operations during pregnancy might be advantageous for maximal patient-friendly surgery, but considering pregnancy as a contraindication for the laparoscopic approach might be the safer treatment. The reader may decide that the subject on endoscopic surgery in pregnancy is still open.

Appendectomy↗