Abstract
In the mid-1980s, general (abdominal) surgery was relatively stagnant and at risk of being overshadowed by non-surgical specialties performing less invasive procedures for what had previously been major “open” surgical operations. These challenges to general surgery included flexible endoscopy (removal of mucosal tumours and endoscopic treatment of choledocholithiasis, management of gastrointestinal hemorrhage, endoscopic placement of feeding tubes, etc.) and interventional radiology (percutaneous drainage of abscesses, biopsy of tumor masses, etc.). Furthermore, great efforts were being made to develop non-invasive treatment of gallstones by using extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and gallstone dissolution agents. In the late 1980s, surgeons in Germany, France and the United States, working independently, began performing procedures that would revolutionize the practice of general surgery. Using traditional laparoscopic instruments and techniques (CO2 pneumoperitoneum, trocar/sheath assemblies and long narrow instruments), but coupling the laparoscope to a CCD-video camera, the first laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed. Although the academic community was slow to embrace the development, practicing surgeons and patients alike rapidly accepted and even demanded this new “minimally invasive” approach to the treatment of gallstones.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Payne JH, Grininger LM, Izawa MT, et al. Laparoscopic or open inguinal herniorrhaphy? A randomized propective trial. Arch Surg 1994; 129; 973–979.
Trondseu E, Reiertsen O, Andersen OK, Kjaersgeard P. Laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy: A prospective randomized study. Eur J Surg 1993; 159: 217–221.
Shea JA, Healey MJ, Berlin JA, et al. Mortality and complications associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A meta-analysis. Ann Surg 1996; 224: 609–620.
Sietses C, Havenith CEG, Eijsbouts QAJ, et al. Laparoscopic surgery preserves monocyte-mediated tumour cell killing in contrast to the conventional approach. Surg Endose 2000; 14: 456–460.
Allendorph JDF, Bessler M, Cayton ML, et al. Increased tumour establishment and growth after laparotomy versus laparoscopy in a murine model. Arch Surg 1995; 130:649–653.
Cameron JL, Pitt HA, Yeo CJ, et al. 145 consecutive pancreaticoduodenectomies without mortality. Ann Surg 1993; 217: 430–438.
Barkun JS, Barkun AN, Sampalis JS, et al. Randomized controled trial of laparoscopic versus minicholecystectomy. Lancet 1992; 340:1116–1119.
McMahon AJ, Russell IT, Baxter JN, et al. Laparoscopic versus mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy; A randomized trial. Lancet 1994; 343:135–38.
Steiner CA, Bass EB, Tallamini MA, Pitt HA, Steinberg EP. Surgical rates and operative mortality for open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Maryland. N Eng J Med 1994; 330: 403–8.
Nilsson G, Larsson S, Johnsson F, Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open fundoplication; Blind evaluation of recovery and discharge. Brit J Surg 2000; 87: 873–878.
Laine S, Rantala A, Gullichsen R, Ovaska J. Laparoscopic versus conventional Nissen fundoplication. A prospective, randomized study. Surg Endosc 1997; 11: 441–444.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag France
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Soper, N.J. (2003). The Influence of the Laparoscopic Approach in Abdominal Surgery: The Third Surgical Revolution. In: Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair. Springer, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0752-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-2-8178-0752-2_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Paris
Print ISBN: 978-2-287-59755-8
Online ISBN: 978-2-8178-0752-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive