scholarly journals Comparison of surgical smoke between open surgery and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal disease in the COVID-19 era

Author(s):  
Hitoshi Kameyama ◽  
Tetsuya Otani ◽  
Toshiyuki Yamazaki ◽  
Akira Iwaya ◽  
Hiroaki Uehara ◽  
...  
BMC Surgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Voraboot Taweerutchana ◽  
Tharathorn Suwatthanarak ◽  
Asada Methasate ◽  
Thawatchai Akaraviputh ◽  
Jirawat Swangsri ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The SARS-CoV2 virus has been identified in abdominal cavity of the COVID-19 patients. Therefore, the potential viral transmission from any surgical created smoke in these patients is of concern especially in laparoscopic surgery. This study aimed to compare the amount of surgical smoke and surgical field contamination between laparoscopic and open surgery in fresh cadavers. Methods Cholecystectomy in 12 cadavers was performed and they were divided into 4 groups: laparoscopic approach with or without smoke evacuator, and open approach with or without smoke evacuator. The increased particle counts in surgical smoke of each group were analyzed. In the model of appendectomy, surgical field contamination under ultraviolet light and visual contamination scale between laparoscopic and open approach were compared. Results Open cholecystectomy significantly produced a greater amount of overall particle sizes, particle sizes < 5 μm and particle sizes ≥ 5 μm than laparoscopic cholecystectomy (10,307 × 103 vs 3738 × 103, 10,226 × 103 vs 3685 × 103 and 81 × 103 vs 53 × 103 count/m3, respectively at p < 0.05). The use of smoke evacuator led to decrease in the amount of overall particle sizes of 58% and 32.4% in the open and laparoscopic chelecystectomy respectively. Median (interquatile range) visual contamination scale of surgical field in open appendectomy [3.50 (2.33, 4.67)] was significantly greater than laparoscopic appendectomy [1.50 (0.67, 2.33)] at p < 0.001. Conclusions Laparoscopic cholecystectomy yielded less smoke-related particles than open cholecystectomy. The use of smoke evacuator, abeit non-significantly, reduced the particles in both open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic appendectomy had a lower degree of surgical field contamination than the open approach.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Adrianus de Leeuw ◽  
Nicole Birgit Burger ◽  
Marcello Ceccaroni ◽  
Jian Zhang ◽  
Jurriaan Tuynman ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND The current coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is holding the world in its grip. Epidemiologists have shown that the mortality risks are higher when the health care system is subjected to pressure from COVID-19. It is therefore of great importance to maintain the health of health care providers and prevent contamination. An important group who will be required to treat patients with COVID-19 are health care providers during semiacute surgery. There are concerns that laparoscopic surgery increases the risk of contamination more than open surgery; therefore, balancing the safety of health care providers with the benefit of laparoscopic surgery for the patient is vital. OBJECTIVE We aimed to provide an overview of potential contamination routes and possible risks for health care providers; we also aimed to propose research questions based on current literature and expert opinions about performing laparoscopic surgery on patients with COVID-19. METHODS We performed a scoping review, adding five additional questions concerning possible contaminating routes. A systematic search was performed on the PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases, adding results from gray literature as well. The search not only included COVID-19 but was extended to virus contamination in general. We excluded society and professional association statements about COVID-19 if they did not add new insights to the available literature. RESULTS The initial search provided 2007 records, after which 267 full-text papers were considered. Finally, we used 84 papers, of which 14 discussed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Eight papers discussed the added value of performing intubation in a low-pressure operating room, mainly based on the SARS outbreak experience in 2003. Thirteen papers elaborated on the risks of intubation for health care providers and SARS-CoV-2, and 19 papers discussed this situation with other viruses. They conclude that there is significant evidence that intubation and extubation is a high-risk aerosol-producing procedure. No papers were found on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 and surgical smoke, although 25 papers did provide conflicting evidence on the infection risk of human papillomavirus, hepatitis B, polio, and rabies. No papers were found discussing tissue extraction or the deflation risk of the pneumoperitoneum after laparoscopic surgery. CONCLUSIONS There seems to be consensus in the literature that intubation and extubation are high-risk procedures for health care providers and that maximum protective equipment is needed. On the other hand, minimal evidence is available of the actual risk of contamination of health care providers during laparoscopy itself, nor of operating room pressure, surgical smoke, tissue extraction, or CO<sub>2</sub> deflation. However, new studies are being published daily from current experiences, and society statements are continuously updated. There seems to be no reason to abandon laparoscopic surgery in favor of open surgery. However, the risks should not be underestimated, surgery should be performed on patients with COVID-19 only when necessary, and health care providers should use logic and common sense to protect themselves and others by performing surgery in a safe and protected environment.


10.2196/18928 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e18928 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Adrianus de Leeuw ◽  
Nicole Birgit Burger ◽  
Marcello Ceccaroni ◽  
Jian Zhang ◽  
Jurriaan Tuynman ◽  
...  

Background The current coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic is holding the world in its grip. Epidemiologists have shown that the mortality risks are higher when the health care system is subjected to pressure from COVID-19. It is therefore of great importance to maintain the health of health care providers and prevent contamination. An important group who will be required to treat patients with COVID-19 are health care providers during semiacute surgery. There are concerns that laparoscopic surgery increases the risk of contamination more than open surgery; therefore, balancing the safety of health care providers with the benefit of laparoscopic surgery for the patient is vital. Objective We aimed to provide an overview of potential contamination routes and possible risks for health care providers; we also aimed to propose research questions based on current literature and expert opinions about performing laparoscopic surgery on patients with COVID-19. Methods We performed a scoping review, adding five additional questions concerning possible contaminating routes. A systematic search was performed on the PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase databases, adding results from gray literature as well. The search not only included COVID-19 but was extended to virus contamination in general. We excluded society and professional association statements about COVID-19 if they did not add new insights to the available literature. Results The initial search provided 2007 records, after which 267 full-text papers were considered. Finally, we used 84 papers, of which 14 discussed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Eight papers discussed the added value of performing intubation in a low-pressure operating room, mainly based on the SARS outbreak experience in 2003. Thirteen papers elaborated on the risks of intubation for health care providers and SARS-CoV-2, and 19 papers discussed this situation with other viruses. They conclude that there is significant evidence that intubation and extubation is a high-risk aerosol-producing procedure. No papers were found on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 and surgical smoke, although 25 papers did provide conflicting evidence on the infection risk of human papillomavirus, hepatitis B, polio, and rabies. No papers were found discussing tissue extraction or the deflation risk of the pneumoperitoneum after laparoscopic surgery. Conclusions There seems to be consensus in the literature that intubation and extubation are high-risk procedures for health care providers and that maximum protective equipment is needed. On the other hand, minimal evidence is available of the actual risk of contamination of health care providers during laparoscopy itself, nor of operating room pressure, surgical smoke, tissue extraction, or CO2 deflation. However, new studies are being published daily from current experiences, and society statements are continuously updated. There seems to be no reason to abandon laparoscopic surgery in favor of open surgery. However, the risks should not be underestimated, surgery should be performed on patients with COVID-19 only when necessary, and health care providers should use logic and common sense to protect themselves and others by performing surgery in a safe and protected environment.


2014 ◽  
Vol 207 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jie Ding ◽  
Yu Xia ◽  
Guo-qing Liao ◽  
Zhong-min Zhang ◽  
Sheng Liu ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
pp. 99-105
Author(s):  
Huu Tri Nguyen ◽  
Loc Le ◽  
Doàn Van Phu Nguyen ◽  
Nhu Thanh Dang ◽  
Thanh Phuc Nguyen

Background: Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is increasingly used in surgery and in the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer. The aim of this study was to evaluate technical factors for perforated duodenal ulcer repair by SPLS. Methods: A prospective study on 42 consecutive patients diagnosed with perforated duodenal ulcer and treated with SPLS at Hue university of medicine and pharmacy hospital and Hue central hospital from January 2012 to February 2015. Results: The mean age was 48.1 ± 14.2 (17 - 79) years. 40 patients were treated with suture of the perforation by pure SPLS. There was one case (2.4%) in which one additional trocar was required. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in one patient (2.4%) in which the perforation was situated on the posterior duodenal wall. Two patients (4.8%) with history of abdominal surgery were successfully treated by pure SPLS. The size of perforation was correlated with suturing time (correlation coefficient r = 0.459) and operative time (correlation coefficient r = 0.528). Considering suture type, X stitches were used in 95.5% cases, simple stitches were used in one case (2.4%) while Graham patch repair technique was utilized in one case (2.4%) with large perforation. Most cases (95.1%) required only simple suture without omental patch. Peritoneal drainage was spared in most cases (90.2%). Conclusions: SPLS is a safe method for the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer. Posterior duodenal location is the main cause of conversion to open surgery. Factor related to operative time is perforation size. Key words: perforated duodenal ulcer, single port laparoscopic repair, single port laparoscopy


Author(s):  
Isaac Cheruiyot ◽  
Prabjot Sehmi ◽  
Brian Ngure ◽  
Musa Misiani ◽  
Paul Karau ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 155335062110148
Author(s):  
Umberto Bracale ◽  
Vania Silvestri ◽  
Emanuele Pontecorvi ◽  
Immacolata Russo ◽  
Maria Triassi ◽  
...  

Background. The COVID-19 pandemic leads to several debates regarding the possible risk for healthcare professionals during surgery. SAGES and EAES raised the issue of the transmission of infection through the surgical smoke during laparoscopy. They recommended the use of smoke evacuation devices (SEDs) with CO2 filtering systems. The aim of the present study is to compare the efficacy of different SEDs evaluating the CO2 environmental dispersion in the operating theater. Methods. We prospectively evaluated the data of 4 group of patients on which we used different SEDs or standard trocars: AIRSEAL system (S1 group), a homemade device (S2 group), an AIRSEAL system + homemade device (S3 group), and with standard trocars and without SED (S4 group). Quantitative analysis of CO2 environmental dispersion was carried out associated to the following data in order to evaluate the pneumoperitoneum variations: a preset insufflation pressure, real intraoperative pneumoperitoneum pressure, operative time, total volume of insufflated CO2, and flow rate index. Results. 16 patients were prospectively enrolled. The [CO2] mean value was 711 ppm, 641 ppm, 593 ppm, and 761 ppm in S1, S2, S3, and S4 groups, respectively. The comparison between data of all groups showed statistically significant differences in the measured ambient CO2 concentration. Conclusion. All tested SEDs seem to be useful to reduce the CO2 environmental dispersion respect to the use of standard trocars. The association of AIRSEAL system and a homemade device seems to be the best solution combining an adequate smoke evacuation and a stable pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic surgery.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document