Instrumentation for Non-obstetric Surgery During Pregnancy

  • Ali AmiriEmail author
  • Ashley N. Bartalot
  • Ceana H. Nezhat


While the basic ingredients of laparoscopic visualization and instrumentation have not changed, all required components in support of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) have seen improvements in recent years, making potentially challenging procedures technically feasible and safe. Regardless of the new capabilities offered by innovative and enabling technologies, materials, and other parts of medical device manufacturing, the essential purpose of the finished products remains unchanged. First and foremost, new medical and surgical products are intended to support physicians and surgeons in making sound clinical decisions in the office, at the bedside, and in the operating room. Additionally, they are focused on expanding and strengthening the doctors’ capabilities. This chapter will go over the necessary basic and specialized equipment, as well as recent innovations in support of complex MIS surgical intervention during pregnancy.


Laparoscopic visualization Reusable vs. disposable instruments 4K surgical imaging Fetoscopy instrumentation Remote surgical collaboration 


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Lipscomb GH, Givens VM. Preventing electrosurgical energy-related injuries. Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2010;37(3):369–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang CW, Lee CL, Soong YK. Bowel injury by the suction-irrigator during operative laparoscopy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 1995;2(3):353–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moore SS, Green CR, Wang FL, Pandit SK, Hurd WW. The role of irrigation in the development of hypothermia during laparoscopic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;176(3):598–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Landman J, Kerbl K, Rehman J, Andreoni C, Humphrey PA, Collyer W, et al. Evaluation of a vessel sealing system, bipolar electrosurgery, harmonic scalpel, titanium clips, endoscopic gastrointestinal anastomosis vascular staples and sutures for arterial and venous ligation in a porcine model. J Urol. 2003;169(2):697–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carbonell AM, Joels CS, Kercher KW, Matthews BD, Sing RF, Heniford BT. A comparison of laparoscopic bipolar vessel sealing devices in the hemostasis of small-, medium-, and large-sized arteries. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2003;13(6):377–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ethicon Endo-surgery. Accessed 30 Nov 2011.
  8. 8.
    Person B, Vivas DA, Ruiz D, Talcott M, Coad JE, Wexner SD. Comparison of four energy-based vascular sealing and cutting instruments: a porcine model. Surg Endosc. 2008;22(2):534–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harold KL, Pollinger H, Matthews BD, Kercher KW, Sing RF, Heniford BT. Comparison of ultrasonic energy, bipolar thermal energy, and vascular clips for hemostasis of small-, medium-, and large-sized arteries. Surg Endosc. 2003;17(8):1228–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nieboer TE, Hinoul P, Maxson AJ, Maxson AJ, Schwiers ML, Miller CE, et al. Clinical utility of a novel ultrasonic vessel sealing device in transecting and sealing large vessels during laparoscopic hysterectomy using advanced hemostasis mode. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;6(201):135–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hunter JG, Dixon JA. Lasers in cardiovascular surgery-current status. West J Med. 1985;142(4):506–10.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Danielle JF, Gurley LD, Kurtz BR, Chambers JF. The use of an automatic stapling device for laparoscopic appendectomy. Obstet Gynecol. 1991;78(4):721–3.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Possover M, Diebolder H, Plaul K, Schneider A. Laparoscopically assisted vaginal resection of rectovaginal endometriosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(2):304–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Landi S, Pontrelli G, Surico D, Ruffo G, Benini M, Soriano D, et al. Laparoscopic disk resection for bowel endometriosis using a circular stapler and a new endoscopic method to control postoperative bleeding from the stapler line. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207(2):205–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nezhat C, Nezhat F, Seidman DS. Incisional hernias after operative laparoscopy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997;7(2):111–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shaher Z. Port closure techniques. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(8):1264–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Elashry OM, Naked SY, Wolf JS Jr, Figenshau RS, McDougall EM, Clayman RV. Comparative clinical study of port-closure techniques following laparoscopic surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 1996;183(4):335–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ali Amiri
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ashley N. Bartalot
    • 2
  • Ceana H. Nezhat
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Marketing Research and Product DevelopmentKARL STORZ Endoscopy-America, Inc.El SegundoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyNew York Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist HospitalBrooklynUSA
  3. 3.Nezhat Medical CenterAtlantaUSA
  4. 4.Minimally Invasive Surgery and Robotics, Northside HospitalAtlantaUSA
  5. 5.Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Emory UniversityAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations