PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 15221573

Positioning on surgical table.

Claudio Schonauer·Antonio Bocchetti·Giuseppe Barbagallo·Vincenzo Albanese·Aldo Moraci
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Positioning on the surgical table is one of the most important steps in any spinal surgical procedure. The "prone position" has traditionally been and remains the most common position used to access the dorsolumbar-sacral spine. Over the years, several authors have focused their attention on the anatomy and pathophysiology of both the vascular system and ventilation in order to reduce the amount of venous bleeding, as well as to prevent other complications and facilitate safe posterior approaches. The present paper reviews the pertinent literature with the aim of highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of various frames and positions currently used in posterior spinal surgery.

Explore related subjects

Blood Loss, SurgicalHumansLumbosacral RegionPostoperative ComplicationsPostureProne PositionRisk FactorsSpineJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Claudio Schonauer, Antonio Bocchetti, Giuseppe Barbagallo, Vincenzo Albanese, Aldo Moraci. 2004-06-22. Positioning on surgical table.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-004-0728-y

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Retropubic versus perineal radical prostatectomy in early prostate cancer: eight-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is the most common malignancy in men and the second leading cause of cancer death. A randomized study was performed on patients with localized prostate cancer and treated with radical prostatectomy using the perineal or the retropubic approach comparing oncological outcomes, cancer control, and functional results. STUDY DESIGN: Between 1997 and 2004, in a randomized study 200 patients underwent a radical prostatectomy performed by retropubic (100 patients) or perineal (100 patients) approach. RESULTS: Differences between hospital stay, duration of catheter drainage, intraoperative blood loss, and transfusion requirements were statistically significant in favor of perineal prostatectomy. Differences between positive surgical margins and urinary continence in the two groups were not statistically significant at 6 and 24 months. Differences between erectile function at 24 months were statistically significant in favor of retropubic prostatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Radical perineal prostatectomy is an excellent alternative approach for radical surgery in the treatment of early prostate cancer.

Blood Loss, Surgical↗
PubMed2006

Bipolar pulse coagulation for resection of the cirrhotic liver.

BACKGROUND: The major technical challenge of liver surgery is controlling bleeding during transection of the parenchyma. The Gyrus hand piece (GHP) is a bipolar diathermy pulsation instrument that is similar in design to a large hemostat (Péan) clamp that divides tissue while the clamp remains closed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the peri-operative data from 10 patients with early cirrhosis (stage 1-4) who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular cancer between February 2004 and July 2005. Five consecutive patients who underwent resection using the GHP were compared to five other patients who underwent resection using the traditional "crush clamp technique" (CCT). Six patients underwent minor hepatectomy (<3 segments) and four underwent major hepatectomy (>3 segments). RESULTS: When the GHP was used, the mean Pringle time was 13 +/- 5 min, mean blood loss was 520 mL +/- 118, and mean operative time was 252 +/- 15 min. When the CCT was used, the average Pringle time was 13 +/- 3 min, mean blood loss was 630 +/- 67 mL, and mean operative time was 312 +/- 29 min. There were 2 major complications in the GHP group and 3 in the CCT group. Major complications included transient hepatic failure (i.e., ascites/encephalopathy) and biloma formation. CONCLUSIONS: One patient from each group suffered a minor wound complication. The average hospital stay was 8 days (range, 6-9) for the GHP group, and 8 days (range, 7-10) for CCT group. The operative mortality rate was 0%. Our preliminary results demonstrate that GHP provides an excellent and safe alternative to CCT for dividing the liver parenchyma in cirrhotic patients.

Blood Loss, Surgical↗