Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing Hemodynamic Symptoms and the Level of Abdominal Pain in High- Versus Low-Pressure Carbon Dioxide in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard to treat gallstone. To view the surgical site in this type of operations better, carbon dioxide is used with a certain pressure. The current study aimed to compare the hemodynamic symptoms and the level of abdominal pain due to using high- and low-pressure carbon dioxide in patients undergoing LC. The current double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted on 60 patients with the age range of 20–70 years old undergoing LC. The first and second groups experienced PaCO2 of 7–10 and 12–14 mmHg, respectively. The hemodynamic symptoms, abdominal pain, shoulder-tip pain, nausea and vomiting after the surgery, and the mean of liver function tests were evaluated. Data were analyzed using T test, Chi-square test, and repeated measures ANOVA by SPSS 16. Information of 60 patients in two groups was analyzed. There was a significant difference between the groups regarding the mean of systolic blood pressure (P < 0.05). The mean of heart rate was significantly higher in the high-pressure group during surgery and 1 h after that (P < 0.05). The frequency of pain in shoulder-tip and abdomen was higher in the high-pressure group. Frequency of nausea and vomiting 12 h after the surgery between two groups was significant (P < 0.05). The mean of alkaline phosphatase was higher in the low-pressure group than the high-pressure group (P < 0.05). Considering the good performance and low side effects of low-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to those of high-pressure, this method can be replaced by high-pressure in LC.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Johansson M, Thune A, Blomqvist A et al (2003) Management of acute cholecystitis in the laparoscopic era: results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial. J GastrointestSurg 7(5):642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Van Der Linden W, Edlund G (1981) Early versus delayed cholecystectomy: the effect of a change in management. Br J Surg 68(11):753–757. doi:10.1002/bjs.1800681102

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Brunicardi CF, Andersen DK, Billiar TR et al (2005) Schwartz’s principles of surgery. Vol 2. 8th ed. McGraw Hill, New York, pp. 1194–1204

    Google Scholar 

  4. Uen YH, Chen Y, Kuo CY et al (2007) Randomized trial of low pressure carbon dioxide elicited pneumoperitoneum versus abdominal wall lifting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Chin Med Assoc 70:324–330. doi:10.1016/S1726-4901(08)70013-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chok KS, Yuen WK, Lau H et al (2006) Prospective randomized trial on low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy. SurgLaparoscEndoscPercutan Tech 16:383–386. doi:10.1097/01.sle.0000213748.00525.1e

    Google Scholar 

  6. Koc M, Ertan T, Tez M et al (2005) Randomized prospective comparison of postoperative pain in lowversus- high pressure pneumoperitoneum. ANZ J Surg 75:693–696. doi:10.1111/j.1445-2197.2005.03496.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Esmat ME, Elsebae MM, Nasr MM et al (2006) Combined low pressure pneumoperitoneum and intraperitoneal infusion of normal saline for reducing shoulder tip pain following laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg 30:1969–1973

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Catani M, Guerricchio R, De Milito R et al (2004) "Low-pressure" laparoscopic cholecystectomy in high risk patients (ASA III and IV): our experience. Chir Ital 56(1):71–80

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Joris J, Cigarini I, Legrand M et al (1992) Metabolic and respiratory changes after cholecystectomy performed via laparotomy or laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth 63:341–345. doi:10.1093/bja/69.4.341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Baraka A, Jabbour S, Hammond R et al (1994) End tidal carbon dioxide tension during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Anaesthesia 49:403–406. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2044..tb14178.x

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kanwer DB, Kaman L, Nedounsejiane M et al (2009) Comparative study of low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy—a randomised controlled trial. Trop Gastroenterol 30(3):171–174

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Pakravan M, Roshani M, Yazdani S et al (2012) Pregabalin and gabapentin for postphotorefractive keratectomy pain: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Ophthalmol 22(Suppl 7):S106–S113. doi:10.5301/ejo.5000143

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Imani F, Nezafati M, Heidarian M et al (2012) Effect of single dose premedication with pregabaline on pain after minor surgery(Persian). J Anesth Pain 2(8):180–185

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vezakis A, Davides D, Gibson JS et al (1999) Randomized comparison between low-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy and gasless laparoscopic cholecystectomy. SrugEndosc 13(9):890–893. doi:10.1007/s004649901127

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Al-Dabbagh A, Ismaeel NH (2010) Randomized, prospective comparison of post-operative pain in low- versus high-pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Zanco J Med Sci 14(2):35–40 http://www.zjms-hmu.org/files/articles/280211014423.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sayadi S, Ebrahimi M, Khalilian A et al (2013) Effect of different carbon dioxide pressure on liver enzyme in laparoscopic cholecystectomy and open cholecystectomy. J MazandaranUniv Med Sci 23(98):92–96

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hasukiæ S (2005) Postoperative changes in liver function tests: randomized comparisons of low and high pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomy. SurgEndosc 19:1451–1455

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Authors of this paper are thankful for the valuable cooperation of the Clinical Research Development Unit of Velayat hospital in Qazvin province, Iran.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Velayat Hospital, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran

    A. R. Mohammadzade & F. Esmaili

  2. Velayat Clinical Research Development Unit, Velayat Hospital, 22 Bahman Blvd, P.O.BOX 34719-76161, Qazvin, Iran

    A. R. Mohammadzade

Authors
  1. A. R. Mohammadzade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Esmaili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. R. Mohammadzade.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Statement

The current study was registered in the Iranian Clinical Trial Registry (code number: IRCT2014121420309N1).

Funding

This report received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

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

Mohammadzade, A.R., Esmaili, F. Comparing Hemodynamic Symptoms and the Level of Abdominal Pain in High- Versus Low-Pressure Carbon Dioxide in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Indian J Surg 80, 30–35 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-016-1552-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-016-1552-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation