Laparoscopic Access in General Surgery: the Closed (Veress Needle) Technique Versus the Open (Hasson) Technique

Overview

A randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing the closed (Veress needle) with the open (Hasson) laparoscopic entry technique in haemodynamically stable patients undergoing either emergency or elective surgical procedures was conducted over a 13-month period. The success rate and complications related to the technique were recorded and analysed.

A randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted at the single academic tertiary institution (Dr George Mukhari Academic Hospital (DGMAH), South Africa). Patients were recruited over a 13-month period (from 1st November 2014 to 30th November 2015). All haemodynamically stable patients undergoing either emergency or elective laparoscopic procedures were offered to participate in the study. General surgical patients 18 years or older who were eligible to provide an informed written consent were included in the study. Patients younger than 18 years old and haemodynamically unstable patients were excluded from the study. The success rate and complications related to the technique were recorded and analysed. All included patients were randomised by computer program into one of two arms of the study: the arm A (Veress needle) or the arm B (Hasson). Participating surgeons were fully proficient with both techniques. The periumbilical area and the left hypochondrium (Palmer's point) were the recommended sites of entry, however, depending on clinical situation a surgeon could opt the other areas. In the A arm, a standard reusable Veress needle was used guided by tactile clicks feeling and water drop test. After pneumoperitoneum was established, the trocar was introduced in the same area. In the B arm, the standard open Hasson technique was used by dissecting tissues and dividing peritoneum between two forceps and introducing the port (a sleeve) without a trocar under direct visualization. Failed entry was defined as an inability to access the peritoneal cavity by a surgeon using the access technique initially selected. An anonymized data collection form was completed by the general surgeon responsible for the procedure. Patients' age, gender, height, weight, diagnosis, type of surgery, previous abdominal surgery, previous abdominal tuberculosis (TB), primary port site placement, a surgeon, intraabdominal findings, complications and their type were recorded. Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated and patients were categorised into weight groups: BMI above 30 and below 30. All patients were followed up in 24 hours to detect the early entry-site complications. The complication after 24 hours, including surgical site infection and port-site hernia were not included in the design of this study.

Conditions

Interventions

Eligibility

Outcomes