Effect of Intra-abdominal Pressure Level on Gastric Intramucosal pH During Pneumoperitoneum

Low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

It has been previously demonstrated that the rise of intra-abdominal pressures and prolonged exposure to such pressures can produce changes in the cardiovascular and pulmonary dynamic which, though potentially well tolerated in the majority of healthy patients with adequate cardiopulmonary reserve, may be less well tolerated when cardiopulmonary reserve is poor.

Nevertheless, theoretically lowering intra-abdominal pressure could reduce the impact of pneumoperitoneum on the blood circulation of intra-abdominal organs as well as cardiopulmonary function. However, the evidence remains weak, and as such, the debate remains unresolved. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to demonstrate the current knowledge around the effect of pneumoperitoneum at different pressures levels during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Materials and methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis were reported according to the recommendations of the 2020 updated Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions.

Results

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 44 randomized controlled trials that compared different pressures of pneumoperitoneum in the setting of elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Length of hospital, conversion rate, and complications rate were not significantly different, whereas statistically significant differences were observed in post-operative pain and analgesic consumption. According to the GRADE criteria, overall quality of evidence was high for intra-operative bile spillage (critical outcome), overall complications (critical outcome), shoulder pain (critical outcome), and overall post-operative pain (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was moderate for conversion to open surgery (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 1 day (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 3 days (important outcome), and bleeding (critical outcome). Overall quality of evidence was low for operative time (important outcome), length of hospital stay (important outcome), post-operative pain at 12 h (critical outcome), and was very low for post-operative pain at 1 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 4 h (critical outcome), post-operative pain at 8 h (critical outcome), and post-operative pain at 2 days (critical outcome).

Conclusions

This review allowed us to draw conclusive results from the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with an adequate quality of evidence.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09201-1.

Relationship between Gastric pH Measurement and Intra-abdominal Pressure in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Surgery

Objectives:

Laparoscopic surgery (LS) is a safe and widely used technique. During LS, carbon dioxide insufflation may produce significant hemodynamic and ventilatory consequences, such as elevated intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) and hypercarbia. Splanchnic and cardiovascular blood flow can be affected by the elevated IAP, which can result in ischemia in the splanchnic region prior to hemodynamic changes. Changes in gastric pH may be an early precursor of changes in splanchnic blood circulation. This study investigated the relationship between gastric pH measurement and IAP in patients undergoing LS.

Methods:

This study included 49 patients aged 18–65 years with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I – III who were undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A gastric pH tonometer probe was applied using an orogastric catheter. Simultaneously, insufflation pressure, cardiac apex beat (CAB), and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) values were recorded. Indirect IAP was then measured through the bladder. Measurements were performed at baseline; at 15, 30, and 60 minutes after onset of insufflation (AI 15, AI 30, and AI 60, respectively); and at the end of insufflation (EI). Two pH measurements were obtained with a gastric tonometer pH probe, using an automated function of the gastric tonometer to improve measurement reliability.

Results:

IAP was significantly higher than baseline at AI 15, AI 30, AI 60, and EI (p<0.001). The pH₁ and pH₂ levels were significantly lower at AI 15 and AI 30, compared with baseline (p<0.001). There were no significant differences between pH₁ and pH₂ measurements at AI 60 and EI. Compared with baseline, CAB was significantly lower at AI 15, AI 30, AI 60, and EI (p=0.001, p<0.001, p=0.006). There were no statistically significant differences in MAP changes at any time point.

Conclusion:

Elevated IAP caused by CO₂ insufflation during LS led to reductions of pH₁ and pH₂. There was a correlation between gastric pH measurement and IAP. Measurement of gastric pH may be useful to assess blood circulation in the splenic area during LS.

What is the evidence for the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum? A systematic review

Background

Laparoscopic surgery has several advantages when compared to open surgery, including faster postoperative recovery and lower pain scores. However, for laparoscopy, a pneumoperitoneum is required to create workspace between the abdominal wall and intraabdominal organs. Increased intraabdominal pressure may also have negative implications on cardiovascular, pulmonary, and intraabdominal organ functionings. To overcome these negative consequences, several trials have been performed comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

Methods

A systematic review of all randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

Results and conclusions

Quality assessment showed that the overall quality of evidence was moderate to low. Postoperative pain scores were reduced by the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. With appropriate perioperative measures, the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum does not seem to have clinical advantages as compared to standard pressure on cardiac and pulmonary function. Although there are indications that low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is associated with less liver and kidney injury when compared to standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum, this does not seem to have clinical implications for healthy individuals. The influence of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on adhesion formation, anastomosis healing, tumor metastasis, intraocular and intracerebral pressure, and thromboembolic complications remains uncertain, as no human clinical trials have been performed. The influence of pressure on surgical conditions and safety has not been established to date. In conclusion, the most important benefit of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is lower postoperative pain scores, supported by a moderate quality of evidence. However, the quality of surgical conditions and safety of the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum need to be established, as are the values and preferences of physicians and patients regarding the potential benefits and risks. Therefore, the recommendation to use low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopy is weak, and more studies are required.

Successful interventional management of abdominal compartment syndrome caused by blunt liver injury with hemorrhagic diathesis

We report that a case of primary abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS), caused by blunt liver injury under the oral anticoagulation therapy, was successfully treated. Transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) was initially selected, and the bleeding point of hepatic artery was embolized with N-Butyl Cyanoacylate (NBCA). Secondary, percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) was performed for massive hemoperitoneum. There are some reports of ACS treated with TAE. However, combination treatment of TAE with NBCA and PCD for ACS has not been reported. Even low invasive interventional procedures may improve primary ACS if the patient has hemorrhagic diathesis or coagulopathy discouraging surgeon from laparotomy.

Low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

A pneumoperitoneum of 12 to 16 mm Hg is used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lower pressures are claimed to be safe and effective in decreasing cardiopulmonary complications and pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of low pressure pneumoperitoneum compared with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2013 to identify randomised trials,using search strategies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised clinical trials, irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status for inclusion in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified trials and independently extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with RevMan 5 based on available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1092 participants randomly assigned to the low pressure group (509 participants) and the standard pressure group (583 participants) in 21 trials provided information for this review on one or more outcomes. Three additional trials comparing low pressure pneumoperitoneum with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum (including 179 participants) provided no information for this review. Most of the trials included low anaesthetic risk participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. One trial including 140 participants was at low risk of bias. The remaining 20 trials were at high risk of bias. The overall quality of evidence was low or very low. No mortality was reported in either the low pressure group (0/199; 0%) or the standard pressure group (0/235; 0%) in eight trials that reported mortality. One participant experienced the outcome of serious adverse events (low pressure group 1/179, 0.6%; standard pressure group 0/215, 0%; seven trials; 394 participants; RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.14 to 65.90; very low quality evidence). Quality of life, return to normal activity, and return to work were not reported in any of the trials. The difference between groups in the conversion to open cholecystectomy was imprecise (low pressure group 2/269, adjusted proportion 0.8%; standard pressure group 2/287, 0.7%; 10 trials; 556 participants; RR 1.18; 95% CI 0.29 to 4.72; very low quality evidence) and was compatible with an increase, a decrease, or no difference in the proportion of conversion to open cholecystectomy due to low pressure pneumoperitoneum. No difference in the length of hospital stay was reported between the groups (five trials; 415 participants; MD -0.30 days; 95% CI -0.63 to 0.02; low quality evidence). Operating time was about two minutes longer in the low pressure group than in the standard pressure group (19 trials; 990 participants; MD 1.51 minutes; 95% CI 0.07 to 2.94; very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be completed successfully using low pressure in approximately 90% of people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, no evidence is currently available to support the use of low pressure pneumoperitoneum in low anaesthetic risk patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety of low pressure pneumoperitoneum has to be established. Further well-designed trials are necessary, particularly in people with cardiopulmonary disorders who undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Low-pressure versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The feasibility and safety of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy remain unclear.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing low-pressure with standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1,263 patients were included. Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum was associated with significantly decreased postoperative pain. The requirement for increased pressure was significantly greater in the low-pressure group (risk ratio = 6.16; P < .001). Operative time was similar, with only a slight statistical significance (weighted mean difference = 2.07; P < .001). Length of hospital stay was shorter in the low-pressure group (weighted mean difference = -.27; P = .01). No significant differences were found in surgical complications or conversion to open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is feasible and safe and results in reduced postoperative pain and near-equal operative time compared with standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum. More studies are required to investigate the potential benefits of the reduced length of hospital stay.

Low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

A pneumoperitoneum of 12 to 16 mmHg is used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lower pressures are claimed to be safe and effective in decreasing cardiopulmonary complications and pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of low pressure pneumoperitoneum compared with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until November 2008 for identifying randomised trials using search strategies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised clinical trials, irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status were considered for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified trials and independently extracted data on mortality, morbidity, conversion to open cholecystectomy, pain, analgesic requirement, operating time, hospital stay, patient satisfaction, additional measures to increase vision, and cardiopulmonary parameters. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models with RevMan 5 based on available case-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials randomised 690 patients to low pressure (n = 336) and standard pressure (n = 354). All the trials were of high risk of bias. There was no difference in the mortality, morbidity, or conversion to open cholecystectomy between the groups. The intensity of pain was lower in the low pressure group at various time points. The incidence of shoulder pain was lower in the low pressure group (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.90). The analgesic consumption was also lower. The operating time was similar between the groups (MD 2.30 minutes; 95% CI 0.42 to 4.18). Because of the high risk of bias due to incomplete outcome data in seven trials, it was not possible to conclude about the safety of low pressure pneumoperitoneum.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low pressure pneumoperitoneum appears effective in decreasing pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety of low pressure pneumoperitoneum has to be established.

Effects of pneumoperitoneum and positioning on respiratory mechanics in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients during Nissen fundoplication

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of pneumoperitoneum and patient positioning on respiratory mechanics and blood gases in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.

METHODS

After the approval of the Ethical Committee, 32 patients were divided into 2 groups as COPD patients (n=16) and normal patients (n=16). Dynamic respiratory compliance (Cdyn), airway resistance, and peak inspiratory pressure were monitored. Measurements were made in 5 time points: after intubation (intubation), Trendelenburg position (Trendelenburg), during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication surgery after pneumoperitoneum with the Fowler position (Fowler), right before the desufflation with Fowler position (Fowler-end), and after the desufflation in supine position (supine). Samples of arterial blood gases were collected at the same periods.

RESULTS

At all periods, there was a significant decrease in Cdyn and arterial oxygen pressure in 2 groups. Although pneumoperitoneum did not exist during Trendelenburg position, the Cdyn (38+/-13 mL cm H2O(-1)) found to be significantly decreased in COPD patients. In 2 groups, the lowest Cdyn value detected during the Fowler-end period was 43+/-8 mL cm H2O(-1) in control group and 34+/-11 mL cm H2O(-1) in COPD group. Whereas the pH decreased at Fowler, Fowler-end, and supine period, arterial carbon dioxide pressure increased (P<0.05). There was no difference for the other parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

In COPD patients, Trendelenburg position has negative effect on respiratory mechanics. Pneumoperitoneum and other positions have similar effect on respiratory mechanics in COPD and control patients.

Influence of CO2 pneumoperitoneum on intracellular pH and signal transduction in cancer cells

OBJECT

The authors studied the influence of CO(2) pneumoperitoneum on intracellular pH and signal transduction arising from cancer cell multiplication in laparoscopic tumor operation.

METHOD

They set up a simulation of pneumoperitoneum under different CO(2) pressure, and then measured the variation of intracellular pH (pHi) at different time and the activity of protein kinase C (PKC) and protein phosphatase 2a (PP2a) at the end of the pneumoperitoneum. After 1 week, the concentration of cancer cells in the culture medium was calculated.

RESULT

When the pressure of CO(2) pneumoperitoneum was 0, 10, 20, 30 mmHg respectively, the average pHi was 7.273, 7.075, 6.783, 6.693 at the end of the pneumoperitoneum; PKC activity was 159.4, 168.5, 178.0, 181.6 nmol/(g.min) and PP2a was 4158.3, 4066.9, 3984.0, 3878.5 nmol/(g.min) respectively. After 1 week, the cancer cells concentration was 2.15 x 10(5), 2.03 x 10(5), 2.20 x 10(5), 2.18 x 10(5) L(-1).

CONCLUSION

CO(2) pneumoperitoneum could promote acidosis in cancer cells, inducing the activation of protein kinase C and deactivation of protein phosphatase 2a, but it could not accelerate the mitosis rate of the cancer cells.