Skip to main content
Log in

Intraabdominal humidity and electromyographic activity of the gastrointestinal tract

Laparoscopy versus laparotomy

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to observe electromyographic activity of stomach, small bowel, and colon during and early after identical laparoscopic and conventional operations to compare the operative trauma. In nine dogs a cholecystectomy was performed laparoscopically (n=5) or by laparotomy (n=4). Analysis of electromyographic activity focused on rhythm, frequency, and amplitudes of slow waves. Furthermore, oxygenation of blood and tissue, intestinal impedance, intraabdominal humidity, and temperature were documented to investigate their influence on slow waves. Open cholecystectomy caused an evident decrease of frequency and amplitude of colonic slow waves in comparison to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arrhythmic slow waves were observed only in the stomach during conventional cholecystectomy. Stomach and small intestine showed no significant difference of frequency and amplitude of slow waves in both operation groups. Intraabdominal humidity and intestinal impedance differed significantly in laparoscopy and laparotomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy proceeded with a minor abdominal trauma documented by smaller alterations of slow waves. This may be caused by reduced peritoneal desiccation.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alvarez WC, Mahoney LJ (1922) Action currents in stomach and intestine. Am J Physiol 58: 476–493

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bass P, Code CF, Lambert EH (1961) Electric activity of gastroduodenal junction. Am J Physiol 201: 587–592

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bueno L, Fioramonti J, Ruckebusch Y (1978) Postoperative intestinal motility in dogs and sheep. Dig Dis 23: 682–689

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dubois F, Berthelot G, Levard H (1989) Cholecystectomie par coelioskopie. Presse Med 18: 980–982

    Google Scholar 

  5. Grace PA, Quereshi A, Coleman J, Keane R, McEntee G, Broe P, Osborne H, Bouchier-Hayes D (1991) Reduced postoperative hospitalization after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 78: 160–162

    Google Scholar 

  6. Frazee RC, Roberts JW, Okeson GC, Symmonds R, Snyder S Hendricks J, Smith R (1991) Open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparison of postoperative pulmonary function. Ann Surg 213: 651–654

    Google Scholar 

  7. Joris J, Cigarini I, Legrand M, Jacquet N, De Groote D, Franchimont P, Lamy M (1992) Metabolic and respiratory changes after cholecystectomy performed via laparotomy or laparoscopy. Br J Anaesth 69: 1061–1064

    Google Scholar 

  8. McIntyre JA, Deitel M, Baida M, Jalil S (1969) The human electrogastrogram at operation: a preliminary report. Can J Surg 12: 275–284

    Google Scholar 

  9. McMahon AJ, O'Dwyer PJO, Cruikshank AM, McMillan DC, O'Reilly DSTJ, Lowe GDO, Rumley A, Logans RW, Baxter JN (1993) Comparison of metabolic responses to laparoscopic and minilaparotomy cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 80: 1255–1258

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mealy K, Gallagher H, Barry M, Traynor O, Hyland J (1992) Physiological and metabolical responses to open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 79: 1061–1064

    Google Scholar 

  11. Sarna SK, Bowes KL, Daniel EE (1974) Postoperative gastric electrical activity in man. In: Daniel EE (ed) Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on gastrointestinal motility. Mitchell Press, Vancouver, pp 73–83

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schamaun M (1966) Experimentelle Elektromyographische Untersuchungen zur Pathophysiologie der Dünndarmmotorik bei chirurgischen Krankheitsbildern. Z Ges Exp Med 141: 89–162

    Google Scholar 

  13. Schippers E, Braun J, Erhardt W, Schumpelick V (1990) Frühe postoperative Motilität nach abdominalchirurgischen Eingriffen. Lang Arch 375: 175–180

    Google Scholar 

  14. Schippers E, Hölscher AH, Bollschweiler E, Siewert JR (1991) Return of interdigestive motor complex after abdominal surgery—end of postoperative ileus? Dig Dis Sci 36: 621–626

    Google Scholar 

  15. Schippers E, Öttinger AP, Anurov M, Polivoda M, Schumpelick V (1993) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a minor operative trauma? World J Surg 17: 539–543

    Google Scholar 

  16. The Southern Surgeons Club (1991) A prospective analysis of 1518 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. N Engl J Med 324: 1073–1079

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tittel A, Schippers E, Treutner KH, Anurov M, Polivoda M, Öttinger A, Schumpelick V (1994) Laparoskopie versus Laparotomie. Eine tierexperimentelle Studie zum Vergleich der Adhäsionsbildung im Hund. Langenbecks Arch Chir 379: 95–98

    Google Scholar 

  18. Woods JH, Erickson LW, Condon RE, Schulte WJ, Sillin LF (1978) Postoperative ileus: a colonic problem? Surg 84: 527–533

    Google Scholar 

  19. You CH, Chey WY (1984) Study of electromechanical activity of the stomach in humans and dogs with particular attention to tachygastria. Gastroenterology 86: 1460–1468

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tittel, A., Schippers, E., Grablowitz, V. et al. Intraabdominal humidity and electromyographic activity of the gastrointestinal tract. Surg Endosc 9, 786–790 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00190082

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00190082

Key words

Navigation