medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Revista Mexicana de Cirugía Endoscópica

ISSN 1665-2576 (Print)
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
    • Send manuscript
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2007, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Cir Endoscop 2007; 8 (4)

Traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy with multipurpose clamp

Dávila ÁF, Heredia JNM, Sandoval RJ, Dávila ÁU, Domínguez RVH, Lemus AJ
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 164-171
PDF size: 217.06 Kb.


Key words:

Laparoscopy, cholecystectomy, clamp, technic, cost.

ABSTRACT

Background: A new laparoscopic instrument appears (clamp multipurpose) that it simplifies to conventional laparoscopic instruments, since with a single clamp multipurpose, can replace 12 instruments or functions to perform a cholecystectomy.
Aims: Compare advantages of the multipurpose endoscopic clamp with traditional laparoscopic instruments.
Material and methods: Since January of 1996 to January of 1997, 50 patients were operated of cholecystectomy using the multipurpose laparoscopic clamp (Group A). They were compared in retrospective form with a group of 50 operated patients of laparoscopic cholecystectomy with traditional instruments (Group B). In the group «A» was used ties instead of staples and cannula of irrigation-suction, stapler, knot pusher dissector and monopolar hook, were replaced by the clamp multipurpose. Surgical time and costs were analyzed.
Results: The surgical time in the Group «A» was of 67 minutes in average against 66 minutes in Group «B». The multifunctionality of the clamp does possible to do without some laparoscopic instruments and staples of use in laparoscopic surgery, resulting in costs reduction. There was statistically no significant difference between the surgical time in both groups.
The clamp multipurpose can perform a laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the same surgical time as when is performed with traditional laparoscopic instruments, but allows to reduce costs.


REFERENCES

  1. Halsted W. Blind-end circular suture of the large ntestine, closed ends abutted and the double diaphragma punctured with a knife, introduced per rectum. Ann Surg 1922; 36: 356-64.

  2. Cameron JL. William Stewart Halsted, our surgical heritage. Ann Surg 1997; 225: 445-58.

  3. Dubois F, Icard P, Berthelor G, Levard H. Celioscopic cholecystectomy-preliminary report of 36 cases. Ann Surg 1989; 211: 60-62.

  4. Perissat J. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the european experience. Am J Surg 1993; 165: 444-9.

  5. Perissat J, Collet D, Belliard R, Desdphautez J, Magne E. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the state of the art. A report of 700 consecutive cases. World J Surg 1992; 16: 1074-82.

  6. Reardon PR, Kamelgard JI, Applebaum BA, Brunicardi FC. Minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy: validating a new approach. Laparoendos Adv Surg Tech A 1999; 9: 227-32.

  7. Reddik EJ, Olsen DO. Laparoscopic laser cholecystectomy. A comparison with mini-lap cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 1989; 3: 131-3.

  8. Fullartin GM, Darling K, Williams J, MacMillan R, Bell G. Evaluation of the cost of laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 1994; 81: 124-26.

  9. Bass EB, Pitt HA, Lilemoe KD. Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus open cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 1993; 165: 466-471.

  10. Holcomb GW 3erd, Sharp KW, Neblet WW 3erd, Morgan WM 3erd, Piestch JB. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in infants and children: modifications and cost analysis. J Pediatr Surg 1994; 29: 900-904.

  11. Ure BM, Lefering G, Troidl H. Costs of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Analysis of potential savings. Surg Endosc 1995; 9: 401-6.

  12. Hall MJ, Lawrence L. Ambulatory surgery in the United States 1996. Adv Data 1998: 1-16.

  13. Santa Cruz R, Auge B, Lallas C, Preminger G, Polascik T. Use of bipolar laparoscopic forceps to occlude and transect the retroperitoneal vasculature: a porcine model. Journal of Endourology 2003; 17: 181-85.

  14. Pongchairerks P, Srisawasdi S. New multipurpose endoknot device for laparoscopic surgery. Journal of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Surgery 1994; 1: 390-94.

  15. Berguer R, Forkey D, Smith W. Ergonomic problems associated with laparoscopic surgery. 1999; 13: 466-468.

  16. Ballantayne GH, Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence and telemonitoring. Surg Endosc 2002; 16: 1389-1402.

  17. Gutierrez RL, Grau CM, Rojas MA. Mozqueda TJ. Colecistectomía por laparoscopia. Informe del primer caso realizado en México. Endoscopia. 1990; 3: 99-102.

  18. Gutiérrez L, Pérez-Corona T, Sanchez-García M. Punzón Multiusos UDIQ para cirugía con mini instrumentos. Revista Mexicana de Cirugía Endoscópica 2002; 3: 145-148.

  19. Heredia JNM., Cirugía de invasión mínima. 2ª Edición, Intersistemas, México, 1997: 106-107.

  20. Dávila AF. Cirugía sin Huella. 1ª Edición, UNAM FES Iztacala, 2002: 39-44.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Rev Mex Cir Endoscop. 2007;8