Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Novel Strategy of Laparoscopic Insufflation Rate Improving Shoulder Pain: Prospective Randomized Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Aims and scope

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic surgery is the main trend method in a variety of surgical fields. Post-operative shoulder pain remains a bothersome issue although many surgical techniques have been applied to minimize it. A simple novel approach to reduce shoulder pain without adverse effects during and after laparoscopic surgery is desired.

Methods

This prospective randomized controlled study was conducted to enroll a total of 140 patients to evaluate the efficacy of low flow rate (1 L/min) for induction followed by high flow rate (10 L/min) for maintaining 12 mmHg pneumoperitoneum (group A, n = 70) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), compared to the continuous high flow rate group (group B, n = 70) in postoperative shoulder pain and other clinical features. The 10-visual analog scale (VAS) was applied for the severity of shoulder pain and scores were obtained at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h after LC.

Results

There was no obvious difference in baseline characteristics as well as operative time, occurrence of bradycardia, or hospital stay between groups. The incidence of shoulder pain was not significantly different (group A 45.7% vs group B 48.6%, p = 0.866). However, the patients in group A with shoulder pain reported significantly less pain scores (p < 0.001) at 12 and 24 h after surgery, compared with those in group B.

Conclusions

Applying the strategy of low flow rate to induce pneumoperitoneum followed by high flow rate to maintain the pressure provides advantages to reduce the severity of shoulder pain for patients who underwent LC and then experienced shoulder pain.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buia A, Stockhausen F, Hanisch E. Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review. World J Methodol. 2015;5(4):238–54. doi:https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v5.i4.238.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Harrell AG, Heniford BT. Minimally invasive abdominal surgery: lux et veritas past, present, and future. Am J Surg. 2005;190(2):239–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.05.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Himal HS. Minimally invasive (laparoscopic) surgery. Surg Endosc. 2002;16(12):1647–52. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-8275-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kandil TS, El Hefnawy E. Shoulder pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: factors affecting the incidence and severity. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2010;20(8):677–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2010.0112.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Donatsky AM, Bjerrum F, Gogenur I. Surgical techniques to minimize shoulder pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(7):2275–82. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2759-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Slim K, Pezet D, Stencl J, Jr., Lechner C, Le Roux S, Lointier P et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an original three-trocar technique. World J Surg. 1995;19(3):394–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Strasberg SM, Hertl M, Soper NJ. An analysis of the problem of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;180(1):101–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Roumm AR, Pizzi L, Goldfarb NI, Cohn H. Minimally invasive: minimally reimbursed? An examination of six laparoscopic surgical procedures. Surg Innov. 2005;12(3):261–87. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/155335060501200313.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sandhu T, Yamada S, Ariyakachon V, Chakrabandhu T, Chongruksut W, Ko-iam W. Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum versus standard pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a prospective randomized clinical trial. Surg Endosc. 2009;23(5):1044–7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0119-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tsimoyiannis EC, Siakas P, Tassis A, Lekkas ET, Tzourou H, Kambili M. Intraperitoneal normal saline infusion for postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg. 1998;22(8):824–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nyerges A. Pain Mechanisms in Laparoscopic Surgery. Semin Laparosc Surg. 1994;1(4):215–8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1053/SLAS00100215.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nursal TZ, Yildirim S, Tarim A, Noyan T, Poyraz P, Tuna N et al. Effect of drainage on postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2003;388(2):95–100. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-003-0374-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hawasli A, Brown E. The effect of drains in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1994;4(6):393–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lindgren L, Koivusalo AM, Kellokumpu I. Conventional pneumoperitoneum compared with abdominal wall lift for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Anaesth. 1995;75(5):567–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Koivusalo AM, Kellokumpu I, Lindgren L. Gasless laparoscopic cholecystectomy: comparison of postoperative recovery with conventional technique. Br J Anaesth. 1996;77(5):576–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Barczynski M, Herman RM. A prospective randomized trial on comparison of low-pressure (LP) and standard-pressure (SP) pneumoperitoneum for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2003;17(4):533–8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-9121-2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gurusamy KS, Samraj K, Davidson BR. Low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009(2):CD006930. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006930.pub2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yasir M, Mehta KS, Banday VH, Aiman A, Masood I, Iqbal B. Evaluation of post operative shoulder tip pain in low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgeon. 2012;10(2):71–4. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2011.02.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jorgensen JO, Gillies RB, Hunt DR, Caplehorn JR, Lumley T. A simple and effective way to reduce postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Aust N Z J Surg. 1995;65(7):466–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Atak I, Ozbagriacik M, Akinci OF, Bildik N, Subasi IE, Ozdemir M et al. Active gas aspiration to reduce pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2011;21(2):98–100. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0b013e318213c301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Uchiyama K, Tani M, Kawai M, Terasawa H, Hama T, Yamaue H. Clinical significance of drainage tube insertion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2007;14(6):551–6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00534-007-1221-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Aitola P, Airo I, Kaukinen S, Ylitalo P. Comparison of N2O and CO2 pneumoperitoneums during laparoscopic cholecystectomy with special reference to postoperative pain. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1998;8(2):140–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Daskalakis M, Scheffel O, Weiner RA. High flow insufflation for the maintenance of the pneumoperitoneum during bariatric surgery. Obes Facts. 2009;2 Suppl 1:37–40. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000198252.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Berberoglu M, Dilek ON, Ercan F, Kati I, Ozmen M. The effect of CO2 insufflation rate on the postlaparoscopic shoulder pain. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1998;8(5):273–7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.1998.8.273.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, No. 325, Sec. 2, Cheng-Kung Road, Neihu, 114, Taipei, Taiwan

    Kuo-Feng Hsu, Cheng-Jueng Chen, Jyh-Cherng Yu, Si-Yuan Wu, Teng-Wei Chen, Chung-Bao Hsieh & De-Chuan Chan

  2. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan

    Bao-Chung Chen & Chih-Wei Yang

Authors
  1. Kuo-Feng Hsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cheng-Jueng Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jyh-Cherng Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Si-Yuan Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bao-Chung Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chih-Wei Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Teng-Wei Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Chung-Bao Hsieh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. De-Chuan Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

1. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: De-Chuan Chan, Cheng-Jueng Chen, and Jyh-Cherng Yu

2. Material support: Teng-Wei Chen, Chung-Bao Hsieh, and De-Chuan Chan

3. Study concept and design and analysis and interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript, statistical analysis, and writing: Kuo-Feng Hsu, Si-Yuan Wu, Bao-Chung Chen, and Chih-Wei Yang

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Cheng-Jueng Chen or De-Chuan Chan.

Ethics declarations

All patients (64 men and 76 women) between 19 and 84 years of age (mean age, 56.9 years) were blinded and randomly divided into low flow rate (1 L/min) for induction followed by high flow rate (10 L/min) for maintaining 12 mmHg pneumoperitoneum (group A, n = 70) and the continuous high flow rate group (group B, n = 70) by computer-based sequential allocation.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hsu, KF., Chen, CJ., Yu, JC. et al. A Novel Strategy of Laparoscopic Insufflation Rate Improving Shoulder Pain: Prospective Randomized Study. J Gastrointest Surg 23, 2049–2053 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-3896-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-3896-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation