Comparison between Simple and Classical Techniques to Create Closed Pneumoperitoneum.

Area of Science:

• Urology
• Surgical Techniques
• Minimally Invasive Surgery

Background:

• Closed pneumoperitoneum using a Veress needle is a standard surgical procedure.
• The classical closed technique is widely adopted, while the simple technique represents a modification.
• Comparing these techniques is crucial for optimizing surgical procedures.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the efficacy, safety, and reproducibility of the simple technique versus the classical technique for closed pneumoperitoneum.
• To evaluate the time taken for pneumoperitoneum creation and associated complications.

Main Methods:

• A randomized study involving 114 patients comparing simple and classical closed pneumoperitoneum techniques.
• Data collected included time for pneumoperitoneum creation, complications, and failure rates.
• Statistical analysis used Chi-square, Fischer exact, and Student t-tests (p < 0.05 significance).

Main Results:

• The simple technique required significantly less time for pneumoperitoneum creation (108.07±21.14 seconds) compared to the classical technique (189.70±32.21 seconds; p < 0.001).
• Both techniques demonstrated similar complication rates (6% each) and no failed pneumoperitoneum.
• Omental injury and retroperitoneal insufflation rates were comparable between the groups.

Conclusions:

• The simple technique is a safe, reproducible, and effective alternative to the classical technique for closed pneumoperitoneum.
• This modified approach offers a faster method for achieving pneumoperitoneum without compromising safety.