Skip to main content
Log in

Designing safety into the minimally invasive surgical revolution

A commentary based on the Jacques Perissat Lecture of the International Congress of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Surgical errors with minimally invasive surgery differ from those in open surgery. Perforations are typically the result of trocar introduction or electrosurgery. Infections include bioburdens, notably enteric viruses, on complex instruments. Retained foreign objects are primarily unretrieved device fragments and lost gallstones or other specimens. Fires and burns come from illuminated ends of fiber-optic cables and from electrosurgery. Pressure ischemia is more likely with longer endoscopic surgical procedures. Gas emboli can occur.

Minimally invasive surgery is more dependent on complex equipment, with high likelihood of failures. Standardization, checklists, and problem reporting are solutions for minimizing failures. The necessity of electrosurgery makes education about best electrosurgical practices important.

The recording of minimally invasive surgical procedures is an opportunity to debrief in a way that improves the reliability of future procedures. Safety depends on reliability, designing systems to withstand inevitable human errors. Safe systems are characterized by a commitment to safety, formal protocols for communications, teamwork, standardization around best practice, and reporting of problems for improvement of the system.

Teamwork requires shared goals, mental models, and situational awareness in order to facilitate mutual monitoring and backup. An effective team has a flat hierarchy; team members are empowered to speak up if they are concerned about problems. Effective teams plan, rehearse, distribute the workload, and debrief.

Surgeons doing minimally invasive surgery have a unique opportunity to incorporate the principles of safety into the development of their discipline.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority (2008) Pennsylvania Patient Safety Authority 2007 Annual Report. Available at: http://www.psa.state.pa.us/psa/lib/psa/annual_reports/annual_report_2007.pdf. April 2008; Accessed 23 June 2008

  2. Fuller J, Ashar BS, Carey-Corrado J (2005) Trocar-associated injuries and fatalities: an analysis of 1399 reports to the FDA. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12:302–307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bhoyrul S, Vierra MA, Nezhat CR, Krummel TM, Way LW (2001) Trocar injuries in laparoscopic surgery. J Am Coll Surg 192:677–683

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Larobina M, Nottle P (2005) Complete evidence regarding major vascular injuries during laparoscopic access. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 15:119–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. van der Voort M, Heijnsdijk EA, Gouma DJ (2004) Bowel injury as a complication of laparoscopy. Br J Surg 91:1253–1258

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Woodfield JC, Rodgers M, Windsor JA (2004) Peritoneal gallstones following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: incidence, complications, and management. Surg Endosc 18:1200–1207

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Tucker RD (1995) Laparoscopic electrosurgical injuries: survey results and their implications. Surg Laparosc Endosc 5:311–317

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Managed Care Weekly Digest (2002) AORN panel cites Encision’s AEM technology as recommended device. Available at: http://www.newsrx.com/newsletters/Managed-Care-Weekly-Digest/2002–05–27/2002052733315MH.html. May 2002; Accessed 23 June 2008.

  9. ECRI (2005) Safety technologies for laparoscopic monopolar electrosurgery; devices for managing burn risks. Health Devices 34:259–272

    Google Scholar 

  10. Groenman FA, Peters LW, Rademaker BM, Bakkum EA (2008) Embolism of air and gas in hysteroscopic procedures: pathophysiology and implication for daily practice. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 15:241–247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Verdaasdonk EG, Stassen LP, van der Elst M, Karsten TM, Dankelman J (2007) Problems with technical equipment during laparoscopic surgery. An observational study. Surg Endosc 21:275–279

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Roberts KH, Yu K, Van Stralen D (2004) Patient safety as an organizational systems issue: lessons from a variety of industries. In: Youngberg BJ, Hatlie MJ (eds) The patient safety handbook. Jones & Bartlett, Sudbury MA, pp 169–186

    Google Scholar 

  13. Marx D (2001) Patient safety and the “just culture”: a primer for health care executives. Available at: http://psnet.ahrq.gov/resource.aspx?resourceID=1582. April 2001; Accessed 23 June 2008.

  14. Christian CK, Gustafson ML, Roth EM, Sheridan TB, Gandhi TK, Dwyer K, Zinner MJ, Dierks MM (2006) A prospective study of patient safety in the operating room. Surgery 139:159–173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Merlin TL, Hiller JE, Maddern GJ, Jamieson GG, Brown AR, Kolbe A (2003) Systematic review of the safety and effectiveness of methods used to establish pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic surgery. Br J Surg 90:668–679

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ahmad G, Duffy JM, Phillips K, Watson A (2008) Laparoscopic entry techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev Apr 16;(2):CD006583

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John R. Clarke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Clarke, J.R. Designing safety into the minimally invasive surgical revolution. Surg Endosc 23, 216–220 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0164-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0164-x

Keywords

Navigation