Preperitoneal insufflation pressure of the abdominal wall in a porcine model

Authors

Riley E. Reynolds, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Benjamin Wankum, University of Nebraska-LincolnFollow
Sean J. Crimmins, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Mark A. Carlson, University of Nebraska Medical Center, OmahaFollow
Benjamin S. Terry, University of Nebraska - LincolnFollow

Date of this Version

2021

Citation

Published in Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques 2021

doi:10.1007/s00464-020-08275-z

Comments

Copyright © 2021 the authors, under exclusive license to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature. Used by permission.

Abstract

Background Most complications and adverse events during laparoscopic surgery occur during initial entry into the peritoneal cavity. Among them, preperitoneal insufflation occurs when the insufflation needle is incorrectly placed, and the abdominal wall is insufflated. The objective of this study was to find a range for static pressure which is low enough to allow placement of a Veress needle into the peritoneal space without causing preperitoneal insufflation, yet high enough to separate abdominal viscera from the parietal peritoneum.

Methods A pressure test was performed on twelve fresh porcine carcasses to determine the minimum preperitoneal insufflation pressure and the minimum initial peritoneal cavity insufflation pressure. Each porcine model had five needle placement categories. One category tested the initial peritoneal cavity insufflation pressure beneath the umbilicus. The four remaining categories tested the preperitoneal insufflation pressure at four different anatomical locations on the abdomen that can be used for initial entry. The minimum initial insufflation pressures from each carcass were then compared to the preperitoneal insufflation pressures to obtain an optimal range for initial insufflation.

Results Increasing the insufflation pressure increased the probability of preperitoneal insufflation. Also, there was a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between the initial peritoneal cavity insufflation pressures (8.83 ± 4.19 mmHg) and the lowest preperitoneal pressures (32.54 ± 7.84 mmHg) (mean ± SD).

Conclusion Pressures greater than 10 mmHg resulted in initial cavity insufflation and pressures greater than 20 mmHg resulted in preperitoneal insufflation in porcine models. By knowing the minimum pressure required to separate the layers of the abdominal wall, the risk of preperitoneal insufflation can be mitigated while obtaining safe and efficient entry into the peritoneal cavity. The findings in this research are not a guideline for trocar or Veress needle placement, but instead reveal preliminary data which may lead to more studies, technology, etc.