Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
5-Year IF – 2.0, IF – 1.9, JCI (2024) – 0.43
Scopus CiteScore – 4.3
Q1 in SJR 2024, SJR score – 0.598, H-index: 49 (SJR)
ICV – 161.00; MNiSW – 70 pts
Initial editorial assessment and first decision within 24 h

ISSN 1899–5276 (print), ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2015, vol. 24, nr 5, September-October, p. 775–781

doi: 10.17219/acem/60541

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

CO2 Flow Dynamics of Bladder Injury During Laparoscopy and the Effect of the Content of the Abdominal Viscera During Injury – Experimental Study

Kahraman Ülker1,A,B,C,D,E,F, Özgür Aksoy2,A,B,D, Kürşat Çeçen3,A,E,F, Celal Ş. Ermutlu2,A,B,D, İsmail Temur1,C,D,F, Engin Kiliç2,B,D

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kafkas University School of Medicine, Kars, Turkey

2 Department of Surgery, Kafkas University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Kars, Turkey

3 Department of Urology, Kafkas University School of Medicine, Kars, Turkey

Abstract

Background. Despite the well-known and easily recognizable signs of bladder injury during laparoscopy, some injuries remain unnoticed. Intra-operative diagnosis of a urinary bladder injury provides the opportunity to repair and prevent later complications involving the formation of fistula, infection, ascites and impairment of renal function. Small and unrecognized bladder injuries increase the chance of morbidity and permanent organ dysfunctions.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to evaluate the CO2 flow dynamics of bladder injury occurring during laparoscopy and the effect of the content of the abdominal viscera during injury.
Material and Methods. The study involved eight male New Zealand rabbits. Following urinary catheterization of the rabbits with an 8-gauge urinary catheter connected securely to a urinary drainage bag, pneumoperitoneum was created at a pressure level of 12 mm Hg. The experiment consisted of three phases. After the observational phase (Phase 1), the anterior wall of the urinary bladder was perforated with the tip of a 21 G needle (Phase 2) and methylene blue was administrated to evaluate the CO2 flow dynamics (Phase 3).
Results. The amount of CO2 consumption and accumulation in the urinary drainage bags differed significantly among the three phases of the experiment (p < 0.05). There was no CO2 consumption or accumulation in the urinary drainage bags during Phase 1. The amount of CO2 consumption and accumulation in the urinary drainage bags during Phase 2 was significantly higher than during Phase 3.
Conclusion. Urinary catheterization helps in the diagnosis of small or unnoticed urinary bladder injuries occurring during laparoscopy. CO2 flow and consumption is lower if the viscosity of the content overlying the injury site is higher.

Key words

animal experimentation, catheterization, intraoperative complications, laparoscopy, urinary bladder

References (9)

  1. Vagenas K, Spyrakopoulos P, Karanikolas M, Sakelaropoulos G, Maroulis I, Karavias D: Mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: which way to go? SurgLaparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2006, 16, 321–324.
  2. Joris J, Hinque V, Laurent P, Desaive C, Lamy M: Pulmonary function and pain after gastroplasty performed via laparotomy or laparoscopy in morbidly obese patients. Br J Anaesth 1998, 80, 283–288.
  3. Karabacak O, Tiras MB, Taner MZ, Guner H, Yildiz A, Yildirim M: Small diameter versus conventional laparoscopy: a prospective, self-controlled study. Hum Reprod 1997, 12, 2399–2401.
  4. Ülker K, Ersöz M, Hüseyinoğlu Ü: Management of a giant ovarian cyst by keyless abdominal rope-lifting surgery (KARS). Kafkas J Med Sci 2011, 1, 25–29.
  5. Ulker K, Huseyinoglu U, Kilic N: Management of benign ovarian cysts by a novel, gasless, single-incision laparoscopic technique: keyless abdominal rope-lifting surgery (KARS). Surg Endosc 2013, 27, 189–198.
  6. Chapron C, Querleu D, Bruhat MA: Surgical complications of diagnostic and operative gynaecological laparoscopy: a series of 29,966 cases. Hum Reprod 1998, 13, 867–872.
  7. Chapron C, Pierre F, Harchaoui Y: Gastrointestinal injuries during gynaecological laparoscopy. Hum Reprod 1999, 14, 333–337.
  8. Jansen FW, Kapiteyn K, Trimbos‐Kemper T, Hermans J, Trimbos J: Complications of laparoscopy: a prospective multicentre observational study. BJOG 1997, 104, 595–600.
  9. Casati A, Valentini G, Ferrari S, Senatore R, Zangrillo A, Torri G: Cardiorespiratory changes during gynaecological laparoscopy by abdominal wall elevation: comparison with carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum. Br J Anaesth 1997, 78, 51–54.
© Wroclaw Medical University