Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The influence of intraoperative complications on adhesion formation during laparoscopic and conventional cholecystectomy in an animal model

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

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent of postoperative adhesion formation after laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy.

Materials and methods

Qualified surgeons performed 60 experimental laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LC) in dogs with the aim to acquire the laparoscopic technique. To assess the relation between the complications during the operation (bleeding, laceration of the liver bed, or gallbladder perforation) and the formation of adhesions, surviving animals were divided into four groups according to the type of complication occurred. Assessment of the results was made by second-look laparoscopy 4 weeks after LC using the adhesion index (AI; score range, 0–4). The animals then were killed so the extent of adhesion formation could be measured. As a control, open cholecystectomy was performed in 15 dogs without intraoperative complications. The Mann-Whitney rank-sum test and Dunn’s method were used for statistical analysis.

Results

No adhesion formation or intraoperative complications were registered in the laparoscopic group I. In all the cases wherein bleeding or laceration of the liver bed occurred and was managed with electrocoagulation, adhesions formed. Adhesion formation in these groups was significantly higher than in “ideal LC” or cases of gallbladder perforation alone (p<0.01). All the animals in the control group developed significantly more adhesions than those in the experimental group (p<0.05).

Conclusions

It seems that LC has a lower rate of adhesion formation than the conventional open technique. Complications such as bleeding or laceration of the liver bed during LC can enhance adhesion formation. No adhesion formation can be mentioned in relation to gallbladder perforation during LC.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aziz R (1993) Microsurgery alone or with Interceed Absorbable Barrier for pelvic sidewall adhesion re-formation: the INTERCEED Adhesion Barrier Study Group II. Surg Gynecol Obstet 177: 135–139

    Google Scholar 

  2. Buckman RF, Sargent L, Gervin AS (1976) A unifying pathologic mechanism in the etiology of intraperitoneal adhesions. J Surg Res 20: 1–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bulleti C, Polli V, Giacomucci E, Flamigni C (1996) Adhesion formation after laparoscopic myomectomy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 3: 533–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. De Iaco PA, Stefanetti M, Pressato D, Piana S, Dona M, Pavesio A, Bovicelli L (1998) A novel hyaluronan-based gel in laparoscopic adhesion formation. Fertil Steril 69: 318–323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ellis H (1982) The causes and prevention of intestinal adhesions. Br J Surg 69:241–243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ellis H (1997) The clinical significance of adhesions: focus on intestinal obstruction. Eur J Surg Suppl 577: 5–9

    Google Scholar 

  7. Garrard CL, Clements RH, Nanney L, Davidson JM, Richards WO (1999) Adhesion formation is reduced after laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 13: 10–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Halverson AL, Barrett WL, Bhanot P, Phillips JE, Iglesias AR, Jacobs LK, Sackier JM (1999) Intraabdominal adhesion formation after preperitoneal dissection in murine model. Surg Endosc 13: 14–16

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hansen K, Lowman L, Fiedler EP, Tho SP, Martindale R, McDonough PG (1999) Pelvic adhesion formation after intraperitoneal instillation of gallstones in a rabbit model. Fertil Steril 72: 868–872

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Holmdahl L, Risberg B, Beck DE, Burns JW, Chegini N, diZerega GS, Ellis H (1977) Adhesions: pathogenesis and prevention-panel discussion and summary. Eur J Surg Suppl 577: 56–62

    Google Scholar 

  11. Luijendijk RW, de Lange DC, Wauters CC, Hop WC, Duron JJ, Pailler JL, Camprod Holmdahl L, van Deldorp HJ, Jeekel J (1996) Foreign material in postoperative adhesions. Ann Surg 223: 242–248

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. O’Leary DP, Coakley JB (1992) The influence of suturing and sepsis on the development of postoperative peritoneal adhesions. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 74: 134–137

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Reissman P, Teoh TA, Skinner K, Burns JW, Wexner SD (1996) Adhesion formation after laparoscopic anterior resection in a porcine model: a pilot study. Surg Laparosc Endosc 6: 136–139

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Risberg B (1997) Adhesions: preventive strategies. Eur J Surg Suppl 577: 32–39

    Google Scholar 

  15. Schafer M, Krahenbuhl L, Büchler MW (1998) Comparison of adhesion formation in open and laparoscopic surgery. Dig Surg 15: 148–152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Scott-Coombes DM, Vipond MN, Thompson JN (1993) General surgeon’s attitudes to the treatment and prevention of abdominal adhesions. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 75: 123–128

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Thompson J (1998) Pathogenesis and prevention of adhesion formation. Dig Surg 15: 153–157

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Tulandi T (1997) How can we avoid adhesions after laparoscopic surgery? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 9: 239–243

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Zorluoglu A, Ozguc H, Yilmazlar T, Guney N (1997) Is it necessary to retrieve gallstones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Surg Endosc 11: 64–68

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Faculty of Health Sciences, Semmelweis University Budapest, Szaboles u. 35, 1135, Budapest, Hungary

    E. M. Gamal & J. Kiss

  2. Department of Operative Techniques and Surgical Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

    P. Metzger, G. Y. Szabó, E. Bráth, K. Petö, I. Furka & I. Mikó

  3. Department of Surgery, Petz Aladár County Hospital, Györ, Hungary

    A. Oláh

Authors
  1. E. M. Gamal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Metzger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. Y. Szabó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. E. Bráth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. K. Petö
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. Oláh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. J. Kiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. I. Furka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. I. Mikó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Online publication: 7 May 2001

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gamal, E.M., Metzger, P., Szabó, G.Y. et al. The influence of intraoperative complications on adhesion formation during laparoscopic and conventional cholecystectomy in an animal model. Surg Endosc 15, 873–877 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640000358

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640000358

Key words

Search

Navigation