Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Abdominal wall dimensions and umbilical position vary widely with BMI and should be taken into account when choosing port locations

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Many surgeons rely on the umbilicus when determining the location of ports for laparoscopic procedures and falsely assume that it is located in the vertical midline. The purpose of this study was to assess the degree of variation in umbilical position and abdominal dimensions in the general population.

Methods

Torso length, abdominal girth, weight, and height were recorded for 259 patients over a 9-month period. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated and used to classify patients into four groups: underweight, normal, overweight, and obese.

Results

Average umbilical position for all BMI groups was below the true vertical midpoint and dropped further caudally as BMI increased. In addition, average abdominal dimensions increased with increasing BMI. There was no statistical difference between males and females in each BMI group regarding umbilical position or abdominal dimensions.

Conclusion

There is a clear relationship between increasing BMI and a drop in umbilical position as well as an increase in abdominal dimensions. We recommend determining umbilical position and abdominal dimensions prior to placing ports and shifting port positions toward target quadrants.

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
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ballantyne G (2000) Atlas of laparoscopic surgery, 1st edn. Philadelphia: WB Saunders

  2. Wexner S (1999) Laparoscopic colorectal surgery, 1st edn. New York: Wiley-Liss

  3. Zucker K (1991) Surgical laparoscopy. St. Louis: Quality Medical Publishing, Inc.

  4. Hurd WW, Bude RO, DeLancey JO, Pearl ML (1992) The relationship of the umbilicus to the aortic bifurcation: implications for laparoscopic technique. Obstet Gynecol 80(1):48–51

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nezhat F, Brill AI, Nezhat CH, Nezhat A, Seidman DS, Nezhat C (1998) Laparoscopic appraisal of the anatomic relationship of the umbilicus to the aortic bifurcation. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 5(2):135–140

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chee SS, Godfrey CD, Hurteau JA, Schilder JM, Rothenberg JM, Hurd WW (1998) Location of the transverse colon in relationship to the umbilicus: implications for laparoscopic techniques. J am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 5(4):385–388

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Rohrich RJ, Sorokin ES, Brown SA, Gibby DL (2003) Is the umbilicus truly midline? Clinical and medicolegal implications. Plastic Reconstruct Surg 112(1):259–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, New York Presbyterian-Columbia Campus, 177 Fort Washington Avenue, New York, NY, 10032, USA

    S. Ambardar, J. Cabot, V. Cekic, K. Baxter, T. D. Arnell, K. A. Forde, A. Nihalani & R. L. Whelan

Authors
  1. S. Ambardar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Cabot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. Cekic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Baxter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. D. Arnell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. K. A. Forde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A. Nihalani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. R. L. Whelan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Cabot.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ambardar, S., Cabot, J., Cekic, V. et al. Abdominal wall dimensions and umbilical position vary widely with BMI and should be taken into account when choosing port locations. Surg Endosc 23, 1995–2000 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9965-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9965-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation