These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Gynecologic laparoscopy and abdominal scars: what approach for the peritoneal cavity?].
    Author: Durand-Réville M, Guichard-Checchi C, Ejnès L, Boulanger JP, Gilly V, Bongain A, Gillet JY.
    Journal: J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris); 2003 Nov; 32(7):625-33. PubMed ID: 14699331.
    Abstract:
    To identify and discuss the advantages of the different methods of entry into the peritoneal cavity during gynecological laparascopy in patients who have previously undergone abdominal surgical procedures. Literature review comparing the strengths of each method of entering the peritoneal cavity during gynecological laparoscopic procedures. Adhesions increase the risks of access into peritoneal cavity during laparoscopy. Many techniques or safety rules have recently been described or re-evaluated as an alternative to using the traditional combination "Veress needle and blind introduction of the first trocar". The most relevant were the "open laparoscopy", the use of optical trocar, the double laparoscopy and the use of microlaparoscope. There remains no clear conclusion regarding the optimal form of laparoscopic entry in high risk patients. Relevant data emphasizes that critical to the surgeon's choice of technique is the immediate ability to recognize accidental injury and the capacity to avoid the scarred area. According to the literature review on the procedures used for entering the peritoneal cavity in high risk patients, we conclude that double laparoscopy may indeed be an underused procedure in such cases.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]