Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Komplikationen nach Laparoskopie

Complications after laparoscopy

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Gynäkologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Die Laparoskopie wird sowohl zur Diagnostik als auch zur Therapie von zahlreichen benignen und malignen gynäkologischen Erkrankungen eingesetzt. Die Anzahl der endoskopisch durchgeführten Operationen steigt dabei stetig an.

Einschätzung

Nebst einer adäquaten Ausbildung der Operateure in Bezug auf Indikationen und Durchführung der Operationen ist insbesondere auch eine Vermittlung potenzieller Komplikationen und Notfälle während und nach einer Laparoskopie von großer Bedeutung. Zwar sind die meisten Komplikationen seltener und die perioperative Morbidität niedriger als nach konventionellen Abdominaleingriffen, aber es gibt auch neue Risiken oder Komplikationen, die spezifisch sind.

Ziel der Arbeit

Ziel dieser Übersichtsarbeit ist es, einerseits häufige, andererseits spezifische Komplikationen während oder nach einer Laparoskopie zusammenzustellen. Zudem sollen praktische Aspekte im Komplikationsmanagement aufgezeigt werden.

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopy has been established as a common procedure for the diagnosis and therapy of many benign and malignant gynecological diseases. The number of endoscopic operations performed is constantly increasing.

Assessment

In addition to adequate training of the operators in terms of indications and the conduct of operations, the capability to identify potential complications and emergencies during and after laparoscopy is of particular importance. Although the perioperative morbidity and complications of laparoscopy are rare and occur significantly less frequently compared with laparotomy, there are specific risks and complications to be aware of.

Aim of the work

This review summarizes common and specific complications during and after laparoscopy. In addition, practical aspects concerning the management of complications are described.

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

Abb. 1
Abb. 2

Literatur

  1. Agdi M, Al-Ghafri W, Antolin R, Arrington J, O’Kelley K, Thomson AJ, Tulandi T (2009) Vaginal vault dehiscence after hysterectomy. Minim Invasive Gynecol 16:313–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ahmad G, O’Flynn H, Duffy JM, Phillips K, Watson A (2012) Laparoscopic entry technique. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD006583

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Arvidsson D, Gerdin E (1991) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy during pregnancy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1:193–194

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bardens D, Solomayer E, Baum S, Radosa J, Graber S, Rody A (2014) Juhasz-Boss I The impact of the body mass index (BMI) on laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign disease. Arch Gynecol Obstet 289:803–807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Beckmann MW, Juhasz-Boss I, Denschlag D, Gass P, Dimpfl T, Harter P, Mallmann P, Renner SP, Rimbach S, Runnebaum I, Untch M, Brucker SY (2015) Wallwiener D Surgical Methods for the Treatment of Uterine Fibroids – Risk of Uterine Sarcoma and Problems of Morcellation: Position Paper of the DGGG. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde. Position Paper of the DGGG. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, Bd. 75. DGGG, Berlin, S 148–164

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bojahr B, Tchartchian G, Ohlinger R (2009) Laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy: a retrospective analysis of 1000 cases. JSLS 13:129–134

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Chandler JG, Corson SL, Way LW (2001) Three spectra of laparoscopic entry access injuries. J Am Coll Surg 192:478–490

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chapron C, Querleu D, Bruhat MA, Madelenat P, Fernandez H, Pierre F, Dubuisson JB (1998) Surgical complications of diagnostic and operative gynaecological laparoscopy: a series of 29,966 cases. Hum Reprod 13:867–872

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Chi DS, Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y, Awtrey C, Hummer A, Venkatraman ES, Franklin CC, Hamilton F, Gemignani ML, Barakat RR (2004) Ten-year experience with laparoscopy on a gynecologic oncology service: analysis of risk factors for complications and conversion to laparotomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191:1138–1145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Comajuncosas J, Hermoso J, Gris P, Jimeno J, Orbeal R, Vallverdu H, Lopez NJL, Urgelles J, Estalella L (2014) Pares D Risk factors for umbilical trocar site incisional hernia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective 3-year follow-up study. Am J Surg 207:1–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Costantino GN, Vincent GJ, Mukalian GG, Kliefoth WL Jr (1994) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in pregnancy. J Laparoendosc Surg 4:161–164

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Harmanli OH, Tunitsky E, Esin S, Citil A, Knee A (2009) A comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic supracervical and total hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 201:536

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Holzinger F, Klaiber C (2002) Trocar site hernias. A rare but potentially dangerous complication of laparoscopic surgery. Chirurg 73(9):899–904

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Iaco PD, Ceccaroni M, Alboni C, Roset B, Sansovini M, D’Alessandro L, Pignotti E, Aloysio DD (2006) Transvaginal evisceration after hysterectomy: is vaginal cuff closure associated with a reduced risk? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 125:134–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jansen FW, Kolkman W, Bakkum EA, de Kroon CD, Trimbos-Kemper TC, Trimbos JB (2004) Complications of laparoscopy: an inquiry about closed- versus open-entry technique. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:634–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jeung IC, Baek JM, Park EK, Lee HN, Kim CJ, Park TC (2010) Lee YS A prospective comparison of vaginal stump suturing techniques during total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 282:631–638

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jiang X, Anderson C (2012) Schnatz PF The safety of direct trocar versus Veress needle for laparoscopic entry: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 22:362–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr L, Garry R (2005) Methods of hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 330:1478

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Juhasz-Boss I, Solomayer E, Strik M (2014) Raspe C Abdominal surgery in pregnancy – an interdisciplinary challenge. Dtsch Arzteblatt Int 111:465–472

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kirchhoff P, Dincler S, Buchmann P (2008) A multivariate analysis of potential risk factors for intra- and postoperative complications in 1316 elective laparoscopic colorectal procedures. Ann Surg 248:259–265

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lemieux P, Rheaume P, Levesque I, Bujold E, Brochu G (2009) Laparoscopic appendectomy in pregnant patients: a review of 45 cases. Surg Endosc 23:1701–1705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mueller A, Renner SP, Haeberle L, Lermann J, Oppelt P, Beckmann MW, Thiel F (2009) Comparison of total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) and laparoscopy-assisted supracervical hysterectomy (LASH) in women with uterine leiomyoma. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 144:76–79

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Park SH, Cho HY (2011) Kim HB Factors determining conversion to laparotomy in patients undergoing total laparoscopic hysterectomy. Gynecol Obstet Invest 71:193–197

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pucci RO, Seed RW (1991) Case report of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the third trimester of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 165:401–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Radosa JC, Meyberg-Solomayer G, Kastl C, Radosa CG, Mavrova R, Graber S, Baum S (2014) MP Influences of different hysterectomy techniques on patients’ postoperative sexual function and quality of life. J Sex Med 11(9):2342–2350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Reedy MB, Galan HL, Richards WE, Preece CK, Wetter PA, Kuehl TJ (1997) Laparoscopy during pregnancy. A survey of laparoendoscopic surgeons. J Reprod Med 42:33–38

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Rosen DM, Lam AM, Chapman M, Carlton M, Cario GM (1998) Methods of creating pneumoperitoneum: a review of techniques and complications. Obstet Gynecol Surv 53:167–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Shepherd JA, Hudgens JL, Yussman MA, Biscette SM (2013) Pasic R Stepwise approach to laparoscopic hysterectomy: evaluation of technique and cost benefit. Surg Technol Int 23:166–175

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Solomayer EF (2015) Minimalinvasive Therapien in der Gynäkologie – quo vadis? Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 75(11):1109–1111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Soriano D, Yefet Y, Seidman DS, Goldenberg M, Mashiach S, Oelsner G (1999) Laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the management of adnexal masses during pregnancy. Fertil Steril 71:955–960

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Spilsbury K, Semmens JB, Hammond I, Bolck A (2006) Persistent high rates of hysterectomy in Western Australia: a population-based study of 83 000 procedures over 23 years. BJOG 113:804–809

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Stang A, Merrill RM (2006) Kuss O Hysterectomy in Germany: a DRG-based nationwide analysis, 2005. Dtsch Arzteblatt Int 108:508–514

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wright JD, Herzog TJ, Tsui J, Ananth CV, Lewin SN, Lu YS, Neugut AI, Hershman DL (2013) Nationwide trends in the performance of inpatient hysterectomy in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 122:233–241

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Frauenheilkunde, Geburtshilfe und Reproduktionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Kirrbergerstr. 100, 66424, Homburg/Saar, Deutschland

    I. Juhasz-Böss & E.-F. Solomayer

Authors
  1. I. Juhasz-Böss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E.-F. Solomayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to I. Juhasz-Böss.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

I. Juhasz-Böss und E.-F. Solomayer geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Additional information

Redaktion

G. Emons, Göttingen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Juhasz-Böss, I., Solomayer, EF. Komplikationen nach Laparoskopie. Gynäkologe 49, 16–23 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-015-3816-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-015-3816-7

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation