File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Prospective randomized trial on low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy

TitleProspective randomized trial on low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Authors
KeywordsDay surgery centre
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum
Postoperative pain
Standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum
Issue Date2006
PublisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.surgical-laparoscopy.com
Citation
Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy And Percutaneous Techniques, 2006, v. 16 n. 6, p. 383-386 How to Cite?
AbstractInpatient low-pressure pneumoperitoneum laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LPLC) has been shown to have less postoperative pain (especially shoulder-tip pain). No report so far has documented the use of lower-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). A prospective randomized trial was conducted in Tung Wah Hospital, Day Surgery Centre from January 2004 to December 2004. A total of 40 patients were recruited and 20 of whom were allocated to each arm. Outcome measures included operation time, treatment-related morbidity, mortality, postoperative pain (eg, shoulder-tip pain), consumption of analgesics, and level of satisfaction. All patients in both groups could be discharged on the same day. Patients' demographics and operation time were comparable in both groups. There were no treatment-related morbidity and mortality, nor was there any significant difference in postoperative pain. Less shoulder-tip pain was observed in the LPLC group though without significant difference (5% vs. 20%; P=0.151). Three patients in the LPLC group needed higher insufflation pressure (12 mm Hg) because of inadequate exposure and adhesions, and the operations were successful in all of them. Otherwise, no conversion to open procedure was noted in both groups. The consumption of analgesics was minimal and a high level of satisfaction was achieved in both groups of patients. The present study demonstrated no difference in LPLC and standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the outcomes of outpatient LC. Routine use of lower-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient LC would not be recommended unless in selected straightforward cases. © 2006 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/83555
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.019
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.574
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChok, KSHen_HK
dc.contributor.authorYuen, WKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLau, Hen_HK
dc.contributor.authorFan, STen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T08:42:26Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T08:42:26Z-
dc.date.issued2006en_HK
dc.identifier.citationSurgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy And Percutaneous Techniques, 2006, v. 16 n. 6, p. 383-386en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1530-4515en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/83555-
dc.description.abstractInpatient low-pressure pneumoperitoneum laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LPLC) has been shown to have less postoperative pain (especially shoulder-tip pain). No report so far has documented the use of lower-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). A prospective randomized trial was conducted in Tung Wah Hospital, Day Surgery Centre from January 2004 to December 2004. A total of 40 patients were recruited and 20 of whom were allocated to each arm. Outcome measures included operation time, treatment-related morbidity, mortality, postoperative pain (eg, shoulder-tip pain), consumption of analgesics, and level of satisfaction. All patients in both groups could be discharged on the same day. Patients' demographics and operation time were comparable in both groups. There were no treatment-related morbidity and mortality, nor was there any significant difference in postoperative pain. Less shoulder-tip pain was observed in the LPLC group though without significant difference (5% vs. 20%; P=0.151). Three patients in the LPLC group needed higher insufflation pressure (12 mm Hg) because of inadequate exposure and adhesions, and the operations were successful in all of them. Otherwise, no conversion to open procedure was noted in both groups. The consumption of analgesics was minimal and a high level of satisfaction was achieved in both groups of patients. The present study demonstrated no difference in LPLC and standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the outcomes of outpatient LC. Routine use of lower-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient LC would not be recommended unless in selected straightforward cases. © 2006 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.surgical-laparoscopy.comen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofSurgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy and Percutaneous Techniquesen_HK
dc.rightsSurgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy and Percutaneous Techniques. Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.en_HK
dc.subjectDay surgery centreen_HK
dc.subjectLaparoscopic cholecystectomyen_HK
dc.subjectLow-pressure pneumoperitoneumen_HK
dc.subjectPostoperative painen_HK
dc.subjectStandard-pressure pneumoperitoneumen_HK
dc.titleProspective randomized trial on low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomyen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=1530-4515&volume=16&issue=6&spage=383&epage=386&date=2006&atitle=Prospective+randomized+trial+on+low-pressure+versus+standard-pressure+pneumoperitoneum+in+outpatient+laparoscopic+cholecystectomyen_HK
dc.identifier.emailFan, ST: stfan@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityFan, ST=rp00355en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/01.sle.0000213748.00525.1een_HK
dc.identifier.pmid17277653-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-33847648866en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros125962en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-33847648866&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume16en_HK
dc.identifier.issue6en_HK
dc.identifier.spage383en_HK
dc.identifier.epage386en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000243068300002-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChok, KS=6508229426en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYuen, WK=7102761292en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLau, H=7201497812en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridFan, ST=7402678224en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats