Insufflation pressure above 25 mm Hg confers no additional benefit over lower pressure insufflation during posterior retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy: a retrospective multi-centre propensity score-matched analysis.
Adrenalectomy
Minimally invasive surgical procedures
Retroperitoneal space
Surgery
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2021
02 2021
Historique:
received:
16
07
2019
accepted:
13
02
2020
pubmed:
26
2
2020
medline:
23
6
2021
entrez:
26
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Insufflation pressures of or in excess of 25 mm Hg CO To determine whether high pressure (≥ 25 mm Hg) compared with lower pressure (< 25 mm Hg) retroperitoneoscopy reduces operating time and complications. A multi-centre retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected over a period of almost one decade (1st November 2008 until 1st February 2018) from surgical centres in Germany. A total of 1032 patients with benign adrenal tumours were identified. We compared patients undergoing PRA with insufflation pressures of < 25 mm Hg (G20 group) versus ≥ 25 mm Hg (G25 group). A propensity score matching analysis was performed using BMI, tumour size and surgeon's experience as independent variables. The main outcomes were (1) the incidence of perioperative complications and (2) the length of operating time. The baseline patient characteristics were similar in both groups, with the exception of tumour size, BMI and surgeon's experience in PRA. After propensity score matching, perioperative outcomes, especially perioperative complications (3.7% vs. 5.5% in G20 and G25, respectively; p = 0.335) and operation duration (47 min vs. 45 min in G20 and G25, respectively; p = 0.673), did not significantly differ between the groups. Neither patient safety nor operative success was compromised when PRA was performed with insufflation pressures below 25 mm Hg. Prospective studies are required to determine whether an optimal insufflation pressure exists that maximizes patient safety and minimizes the risks of post-surgical complications. Nevertheless, our results call for a careful re-evaluation of the routine use of high insufflation pressures during PRA. In the absence of prospective data, commencing PRA with lower insufflation pressures, with the option of increasing insufflation pressures to counter intraoperative bleeding or exposition difficulties, may represent a reasonable strategy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Insufflation pressures of or in excess of 25 mm Hg CO
OBJECTIVE
To determine whether high pressure (≥ 25 mm Hg) compared with lower pressure (< 25 mm Hg) retroperitoneoscopy reduces operating time and complications.
METHODS
A multi-centre retrospective cohort study was performed using data collected over a period of almost one decade (1st November 2008 until 1st February 2018) from surgical centres in Germany. A total of 1032 patients with benign adrenal tumours were identified. We compared patients undergoing PRA with insufflation pressures of < 25 mm Hg (G20 group) versus ≥ 25 mm Hg (G25 group). A propensity score matching analysis was performed using BMI, tumour size and surgeon's experience as independent variables. The main outcomes were (1) the incidence of perioperative complications and (2) the length of operating time.
RESULTS
The baseline patient characteristics were similar in both groups, with the exception of tumour size, BMI and surgeon's experience in PRA. After propensity score matching, perioperative outcomes, especially perioperative complications (3.7% vs. 5.5% in G20 and G25, respectively; p = 0.335) and operation duration (47 min vs. 45 min in G20 and G25, respectively; p = 0.673), did not significantly differ between the groups.
CONCLUSION
Neither patient safety nor operative success was compromised when PRA was performed with insufflation pressures below 25 mm Hg. Prospective studies are required to determine whether an optimal insufflation pressure exists that maximizes patient safety and minimizes the risks of post-surgical complications. Nevertheless, our results call for a careful re-evaluation of the routine use of high insufflation pressures during PRA. In the absence of prospective data, commencing PRA with lower insufflation pressures, with the option of increasing insufflation pressures to counter intraoperative bleeding or exposition difficulties, may represent a reasonable strategy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32095951
doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07463-1
pii: 10.1007/s00464-020-07463-1
pmc: PMC7819942
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
891-899Références
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2014 Feb;24(1):62-6
pubmed: 24487160
Br J Surg. 2012 Dec;99(12):1639-48
pubmed: 23023976
World J Surg. 1996 Sep;20(7):769-74
pubmed: 8678949
Surgery. 2018 May;163(5):1128-1133
pubmed: 29395236
Adv Surg. 2009;43:147-57
pubmed: 19845175
Surgery. 2008 Dec;144(6):1008-14; discussion 1014-5
pubmed: 19041011
N Engl J Med. 1992 Oct 1;327(14):1033
pubmed: 1387700
Anesth Analg. 1993 Mar;76(3):622-6
pubmed: 8452278
Chirurg. 2015 Jan;86(1):29-32
pubmed: 25502499
World J Urol. 2014 Jun;32(3):723-8
pubmed: 23907661
Surgery. 2006 Dec;140(6):943-8; discussion 948-50
pubmed: 17188142
Anesthesiology. 2000 Jun;92(6):1568-80
pubmed: 10839905
Updates Surg. 2017 Jun;69(2):267-270
pubmed: 28612211
Int J Surg. 2016 Apr;28 Suppl 1:S118-23
pubmed: 26708860
World J Surg. 2017 Nov;41(11):2746-2757
pubmed: 28634842
Am J Surg. 1999 Feb;177(2):164-6
pubmed: 10204563
Eur Urol. 1999 Nov;36(5):413-7
pubmed: 10516452
Surg Endosc. 2013 Nov;27(11):4147-52
pubmed: 23708723
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Br J Surg. 2005 Jun;92(6):719-23
pubmed: 15856491
Ann Surg. 2014 Nov;260(5):740-7; discussion 747-8
pubmed: 25243546
Anesth Analg. 1996 Apr;82(4):827-31
pubmed: 8615505
Surgery. 2012 Dec;152(6):1090-5
pubmed: 23158180
World J Surg. 2007 Jan;31(1):65-71
pubmed: 17180554
Surg Endosc. 2013 Mar;27(3):854-63
pubmed: 23052505
Br J Surg. 2018 Apr;105(5):544-551
pubmed: 29493779
Chirurg. 2012 Jun;83(6):536-45
pubmed: 22653137
Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Aug;19(8):2629-34
pubmed: 22526902