PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 8924006

Emergency laparoscopic procedures.

Abstract

Emergency laparoscopic procedures (ELPs) have been performed since the 1960s. It never caught on due to limitations inherent in the actual procedure. Technological innovations notably in camera, electronic insufflators and light systems were key to the rebirth of laparoscopy in the late 1980s. This was mostly confined to elective indications where its benefits were most obvious. With increasing experience, the benefits of minimally access surgery (MAS) are being applied to emergency indications such as evaluation of peritonitis and abdominal pain, appendectomy, repair of perforated ulcers and other acute conditions. ELP offers good training for surgeons but requires a trained laparoscopist to perform more complicated procedures. As there is not much time for thorough patient evaluation, patient selection and resuscitation are key to safe ELP. It should be done the same way as in open surgery; the difference is in the access. Visibility and technical difficulties are more likely and where further progress is limited or patient's condition changes, then early conversion is wise. Conversion rate in ELP is higher and the tolerance level for this should be much lower than in elective circumstances. However, the benefits of ELPs can be seen in decreased wound and other complications, and earlier mobilisation. Hospitalisation is not very much shorter in most instances as managing the disease process itself requires this. With time, more emergency procedures will be done laparoscopically for demand and knowledge will increase as patients and surgeons become familiar with MAS.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T Ravintharan. 1996. Emergency laparoscopic procedures.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8924006/

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Common abdominal emergency cases a the end of the 20th century].

Despite the marked decline in mortality of acute appendicitis over the past 50 years, the rate of perforation and negative appendectomy remains unchanged. The most effective means of controlling human suffering and economic cost associated with appendicitis is the identification and correction of factors responsible for perforation. Negative appendectomy rates have been relatively stable over the decades. Progress in diagnosis and diagnostic imaging still has not provided a foolproof non-invasive test to rule out the presence of appendicitis accurately. Clinical assessment determines the treatment and the clinical observation should be done by the surgeon. The use of H2-receptor antagonists has not reduced emergency admission of patients with duodenal ulcer. Mortality associated with perforated peptic ulcer remains high in spite of advances in surgical management. The patients with acute obstructed cholecystitis usually reach the surgeon with more advanced stage of the disease which results in increased morbidity and subsequently increased cost for undergoing cholecystectomy. If the patient develops severe diffuse peritonitis, the mortality could reach 30%. This is in spite of aggressive surgical treatment, potent antibiotics, modern intensive care and diagnostic procedures. To improve the results, more advanced treatment to avoid the development of peritonitis and more effective antibiotics to control the inflammation will be needed.

Abdomen, Acute

[Cecum volvulus].

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Abdomen, Acute