3 CME REVIEWARTICLE Volume 56, Number 1

OBSTETRICAL AND GYNECOLOGICAL SURVEY

Copyright © 2001
by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

CHIEF EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is the third of 36 that will be published in 2001 for which a total of up to 36 Category 1
CME credits can be earned. Instructions for how credits can be earned appear on the last page of the Table of Contents.

Laparoscopic Surgery During Pregnancy

Mohammad Fatum, MD* and Nathan Rojansky, MD†
* Resident, † Senior Lecturer, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Hadassah Ein-Kerem Medical Center,
The Hebrew University Medical School, Jerusalem, Israel

In the last decade, operative laparoscopic procedures are performed increasingly in both gyne-
cology and general surgery. The major advantages of this newer minimally invasive approach are:
decreased postoperative morbidity, less pain and decreased need for analgesics, early normal
bowel function, shorter hospital stay, and early return to normal activity. With the advancement of
laparoscopic surgery, its use during pregnancy is becoming more widely accepted. The most
commonly reported laparoscopic operation during pregnancy is laparoscopic cholecystectomy
(LC). Other laparoscopic procedures commonly performed during pregnancy include: management
of adnexal mass, ovarian torsion, ovarian cystectomy, appendectomy, and ectopic pregnancy.
The possible drawbacks of laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy may include injury of the
pregnant uterus and the technical difficulty of laparoscopic surgery due to the growing mass of the
gravid uterus. Also, the potential risk of decreased uterine blood flow secondary to the increase in
intraabdominal pressure and the possible risk of carbon dioxide absorption to both the mother and
fetus should be taken into account.
To date, data on laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy are insufficient to draw conclusions on
its safety and exact complication rate. This is due to the few cases reported and the lack of
prospective studies. Furthermore, there is a common tendency to underreport unsuccessful cases.
Finally, most reports in the literature come from centers and surgeons with special interest,
experience, and skills in laparoscopy, and their results may not reflect the real complication rates.
We have reviewed the pertinent English literature from the last decade. The cumulative experience
suggests that laparoscopic surgery may be performed safely during pregnancy, although more
studies are needed to establish its exact rate of adverse events.
Target Audience: Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians
Learning Objectives: After completion of this article, the reader will be able to list the potential
complications of laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy and to outline management strategies to mini-
mize complications of laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy.

The new developments in operative laparoscopy in
gynecology and general surgery have greatly in-
creased its use over the last decade. The minimally
invasive approach is used today in many procedures
that previously required open laparotomy (1). Al-
though once considered an absolute contraindication,
laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy is now more
Address for correspondence: Nathan Rojansky, MD, Depart-
ment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hadassah Ein-Kerem Medi-
cal Center, PO Box 12000, Jerusalem il-91120, Israel. Email:
rojan@cc.huji.ac.il
The authors have disclosed no significant financial or other
relationship with any commercial entity.
50
frequently preformed without apparent increase in
the rate of complications. However, patient selection,
indications and contraindications are still being de-
fined (2).
The major advantages of laparoscopic surgery dur-
ing pregnancy are:
1. Small abdominal incisions result in rapid post-
operative recovery and early mobilization, thus
minimizing the increased risk of thromboem-
bolism associated with pregnancy.
2. Early return of gastrointestinal activity due to
less manipulation of the bowel during surgery,
 Laparoscopic Surgery During Pregnancy Y CME Review Article
which may result in fewer postoperative adhe-
sions and intestinal obstruction.
3. Smaller scars.
4. Fewer incisional hernias.
5. Decreased rate of fetal depression due to de-
creased pain and less narcotic use (2).
6. Shorter hospitalization time and prompt return
to regular life.
It seems that in comparison with laparotomy, lapa-
roscopic procedure may be better tolerated, espe-
cially by the pregnant patient, due to the minimal
postoperative discomfort and the prevention of an
abdominal scar in the presence of a growing uterus.
This has led to enthusiasm for and acceptance of this
minimally invasive surgery during gestation in sev-
eral gynecological and nongynecological procedures.
Some concern have been raised by several authors
that laparoscopy may hold an increased risk to the
fetus: 1) It may decrease uterine blood flow by in-
creasing intraabdominal pressure; 2) it may cause
fetal hypotension and hypoxia because of decreased
maternal venous return and cardiac output, and/or 3)
although not proven in humans, it may cause fetal
acidosis by CO2 absorption.
During the last decade, more than a few case re-
ports and retrospective studies have appeared, eval-
uating the safety and specific risks inherent to lapa-
roscopy during pregnancy. No prospective controlled
studies have been reported yet. We have undertaken
to review the current English literature and summa-
rize the commutative knowledge on this subject. A
MEDLINE search of the last 10 years was performed
using the keywords: laparoscopy, pregnancy. The
most commonly reported laparoscopic procedures
during pregnancy are laparoscopic cholecystectomy,
appendectomy, and management of adnexal masses
such as ovarian detorsion, ovarian cystectomy, and
ectopic pregnancy.
NONGYNECOLOGIC OPERATIONS
Nongynecologic surgery is required in approxi-
mately 2 of each 1000 pregnancies (3). The most
commonly preformed operations in pregnancy are
cholecystectomy and appendectomy, which occur in
0.05% and 0.10%, respectively. We found 37 case
reports and small series for a total of 176 patients
who underwent such procedures during gestation
(Tables 1 and 2). Since surgical treatment of the
pregnant patient has the added potential risk of injury
to two patients—the mother and her fetus—the ob-
stetrician or gynecologist should be involved in the
management of these patients.
51
Cholecystectomy
Pregnancy has been associated with an increased
incidence of cholelithiasis, and although most
women are asymptomatic, biliary colic occurs in
approximately 0.05% to 0.1% of pregnant women
(4). However, timing of surgery in the pregnant pa-
tient with biliary tract disease is a controversial issue.
Patients with obstructive jaundice, acute cholecystitis
unresponsive to medical management, or peritonitis
should undergo prompt operative intervention in any
trimester. Operations on patients with recurrent at-
tacks of biliary colic should be deferred until the
postpartum period if possible. If symptoms are too
frequent and severe, or if they are associated with
gestational weight loss, then the second trimester is
the safest time to perform surgery.
During the second trimester, the miscarriage rate is
only 5.6% compared with 12% in the first trimester.
In addition, the rates of preterm labor are very low
during the second trimester, as compared with the
potential risk of 40% for premature delivery in the
third trimester. Finally, the potential risk of terato-
genesis during the second trimester is very small and
the uterus is still of such proportion that do not
obliterate the operative field as might occur during
the third trimester.
In a retrospective case-control study, Curet et al.
(3) compared 16 pregnant patients who underwent
laparoscopic surgery with 18 control patients who
underwent open laparotomy during their first or sec-
ond trimester (Tables 1 and 2). In the study group, 4
patients underwent appendectomy and 12 underwent
cholecystectomy. They also selected another 41 pa-
tients from a literature survey to make up a total of 57
cases in their series. There was no difference between
laparotomy and laparoscopy outcomes in their series.
Moreover, the incidences of obstetric complications
were in the range seen in pregnant patients who did
not have any surgery. None of the delivery compli-
cations observed was related to the type of surgery
the patient underwent or the method of access into
the abdominal cavity. These data suggest that lapa-
roscopic surgery can be performed safely in the preg-
nant patient during both the first and second
trimester.
Gouldman et al. (4) reported eight laparoscopic
cholecystectomies performed in pregnant patients
(one during the first trimester and seven during the
second trimester). CO2 insufflation pressure was 12
mm Hg, and in seven patients, a Hasson trocar was
used, whereas a Veress needle was used in another
patient. No postoperative complications to mother or
52 Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey

TABLE 1 Cholecystectomy during pregnancy

Author
Adamsen et al. (29)
Amos et al. (24)
Andreoli et al. (30)
Arvidsson and Gerdin (31)
Auabara and Sirinek (32)
Bennett and Estes (33)
Chandra et al. (34)
Comitalo and Lynch (35)
Conron et al. (36)
Constantino et al. (37)
Csaba and Orban (38)
Curet et al. (3)
Edelman (39)
Eichenberg et al. (40)
Elderling (41)
Fabiani et al. (42)
Friedman and Friedman (43)
Geisler et al. (44)
Gouldman et al. (4)
Gurbuz and Peetz (45)
Hart et al. (46)
Lafrati et al. (47)
Jackson and Sigman (48)
Lanzfame (49)
Martin et al. (50)
Morrell et al. (25)
O’Connor et al. (51)
Pucci et al. (19)
Rusher et al. (52)
Schorr (53)
Shaked et al. (54)
Soper et al. (55)
Steinbrook et al. (56)
Weber et al. (57)
Williams et al. (58)
Wilson et al. (59)
Wischner et al. (60)
* Number indicates trimester, unless actual number of weeks are specified.
† The operation was a cholecystectomy (Chol) unless otherwise indicated.
Append ⫽ appendectomy; ERCP ⫽ endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Number of
Week Trimesters* Type of Operation† Cases Follow-up
2nd 2 Uneventful
2nd 4 2 fetal deaths
2 incomplete abortions
2nd 5 appendectomies 10 1 premature contraction
resolved with tocolysis.
5 Chol No preterm labor
2nd 1 Uneventful
1st, 2nd, and 3rd 20 1 spontaneous abortion
2nd 1 Uneventful
1st 1 Uneventful
2nd 4 Uneventful
1st and 2nd Chol, Append, and diagnos- 12 2 spontaneous abortions
tic
2nd 2 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
1st and 2nd Append & Chol 4 Uneventful
12 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
3rd 4 1 preterm labor
1st, 2nd, and 3rd 5 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
14 weeks ERCP, sphincterotomy, stone 1 Uneventful
extraction, & Chol
2nd and 3rd 6 Chol, 2 Append, & 1 diag- 9 Tocolysis started in 6 pa-
nostic tients by attending ob
1st and 2nd 8 Uneventful
1st, 4 patients 10 Uneventful
2nd, 7 patients Append 5 Uneventful
3rd, 4 patients
1st and 2nd 3 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
2nd and 3rd 5 Uneventful
2nd 3 Uneventful
2nd and 3rd 5 Uneventful
1st and 2nd 10 Uneventful, except for 1
conversion to an open
surgery at 26 weeks of
gestation due to size of
the gravid uterus.
3rd 1 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
2nd 2 Uneventful
1st 1 Uneventful
2nd 5 Uneventful
1st, 2nd, and 3rd 10 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
2nd 1 Uneventful
2nd 2 Uneventful
2nd 6 Uneventful

fetus were observed. Eight patients delivered babies and effectively performed for symptomatic choleli-
who were full-term and healthy, with no perinatal thiasis, especially when symptoms are recurrent or
morbidity or mortality. The authors suggest that lapa- persistent. Reedy et al. (5) sent out a questionnaire to
roscopic cholecystectomy in pregnancy can be safely all members of the Society of Laparoendoscopic
 Laparoscopic Surgery During Pregnancy Y CME Review Article
TABLE 2 Appendectomy during pregnancy
Author Trimester Type of operation*
Andreoli (30) 2nd 5 Append
5 Chol
Conron (36) 1st and 2nd Chol, Appendectomy, and
diagnostic
Curet et al. (3) 1st and 2nd Append
Cholecystectomy
Geisler (44) 2nd and 3rd 6 Chol, 2 Append, and 1
diagnostic
Gurbuz (45) 1st (4 patients) Chol
2nd (7 patients) Append
3rd (4 patients)
* Append ⫽ appendectomy; Chol ⫽ cholecystectomy.
Surgeons and obtained complete information on 413
laparoscopic cases. They reported 134 laparoscopic
procedures performed in the first trimester, 224 in the
second trimester, and 54 in the third trimester. Five
postoperative spontaneous abortions were reported in
134 cases performed in the first trimester. There were
no spontaneous abortions reported in the second tri-
mester. The incidence of miscarriage was that re-
ported to occur spontaneously. Three intraoperative
complications considered to be to related to laparo-
scopic surgery were:
1. The placement of a Veress needle inside a
22-weeks gestation uterus. This was identified
before insufflation of CO2 and the needle was
withdrawn and replaced and the procedure
completed. The patient continued her preg-
nancy uneventfully and delivered a healthy in-
fant at term.
2. Enterotomy at an open laparoscopy.
3. Severe upper abdominal pain caused by CO2.
This report is important because it is the first that
addresses the clinical safety and complications of
laparoscopy in pregnancy. The authors concluded
that their data lend support to the assumption that
laparoscopy in pregnancy seems to be safe.
In another study of the same group, Reedy et al. (6)
analyzed 2,015,000 deliveries in Sweden from 1973
to 1993 and found a total of 2181 laparoscopies and
1522 laparotomies performed in singleton pregnan-
cies between the 4th and 20th weeks of gestation. For
infants weighing ⬍2500 gm in both laparoscopy and
laparotomy groups, there was an increased risk of
premature delivery before 37 weeks of gestation and
an increased incidence of growth restriction com-
pared with the total population. However, the authors
could not determine whether this increased risk was
related to the anesthesia, surgical procedure, or the
53
Number of
cases Follow-up
10 1 premature contractions resolved with
tocolytics. No preterm labor
12 2 spontaneous abortions
4 Uneventful
12 Uneventful
9 Tocolysis was begun in 6 patients at the
discretion of the attending obstetrician.
10 Uneventful
5 Uneventful
complication of pregnancy that necessitated the sur-
gical intervention. There was no difference between
laparoscopy and laparotomy in cumulative infant sur-
vival up to 1 year. No difference in the rate of
malformation among laparoscopy, laparotomy, and
the total population was found.
Appendectomy
Appendicitis in the pregnant patient can be difficult
to diagnose and cannot be clearly distinguished by
gastrointestinal tract symptoms, description or loca-
tion of pain, or physical examination. In addition,
leukocytosis is common in pregnancy, and the count
can be as high as 16.0 ⫻ 109 per liter in the third
trimester. A negative exploration rate of 35% to 50%
is commonly seen for symptoms of appendicitis during
the third trimester of pregnancy. The morbidity and
mortality seen in the pregnant patient with appendicitis
usually comes from a delay in diagnosis and treatment.
Patients with suspected appendicitis should undergo
immediate exploration, no matter which trimester of
pregnancy the symptoms occur (3).
GYNECOLOGIC LAPAROSCOPIC
PROCEDURES
Only a few small series and case reports concern-
ing laparoscopic surgery during pregnancy have been
reported. We have found 18 such reports encompass-
ing 132 cases of endoscopic gynecologic procedures
during pregnancy (Tables 3 and 4). Although these
procedures are performed with increasing frequency
to date, the use of laparoscopy during pregnancy is
still uncommon. However, the limited data available
support its safety and efficacy during pregnancy.
54 Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey

Adnexal Torsion safe procedure if special precautions (see “Discus-

sion”) are adhered to and it can be carried out in
Adnexal torsion is an emergency condition where
advanced gestation. In their opinion, laparoscopic
the adnexa rotate on its pedicle compromising its
surgery should not be considered an absolute contra-
blood supply. Early diagnostic and therapeutic lapa-
indication even during advanced pregnancy, but
roscopy is of importance in preserving the adnexa,
there are actually very few cases reported in the
inasmuch as it avoids negative unnecessary laparot-
second trimester and none in the third trimester. One
omy and offers definitive treatment (7) (Table 3).
of the three patients delivered three viable healthy
Torsion of the adnexa has been described as a
premature babies in the 27th week of gestation,
complication of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome
whereas the other two cases delivered at term.
(OHSS). It has been found that 75% of patients with
Morice et al. (13) reported on six pregnant women
OHSS complicated by torsion were pregnant. This
with adnexal torsion that were treated laparoscopi-
observation emphasizes the importance of applying a
cally during 6 to 13 weeks of gestation. No miscar-
minimally invasive therapeutic approach in these
riages occurred. The authors concluded that in the
cases (8, 9). Shalev et al. (10–12) have advocated
hands of the skilled surgeon, laparoscopy is well
laparoscopy for diagnosis and primary treatment of
suited for the diagnosis and treatment of adnexal
torsion. They reported 41 patients, including 10 preg-
torsion occurring during the first trimester of preg-
nant patients, successfully managed by laparoscopy.
nancy. They felt, however, that beyond 16 weeks of
All the pregnant patients had had a favorable out-
gestation, or when there is suspicion of adnexal ma-
come. Others have reported similar favorable results
lignancy, laparotomy is preferable. In the latter case,
(see Table 3). Wittich et al. (7) reported a case of
the authors recommend to carry out an open cystec-
successful laparoscopic detorsion during the first tri-
tomy because removal of the lesion permits a com-
mester of pregnancy where acute appendicitis was
plete pathologic diagnosis and avoids recurrence of
diagnosed initially. The authors noted that pregnancy
torsion.
progressed normally to term. Garzarelli et al. (8)
reported two cases of a patient with an ovarian cyst
with adnexal torsion in the first trimester that were
Adnexal Mass
treated by laparoscopic aspiration of the cysts and
unwinding of adnexa. Progression of pregnancy was The reported incidence of adnexal mass complicat-
uneventful in both cases. Levy et al. (2) reported ing pregnancy ranges from 1 in 81 to 1 in 2500 live
three cases of laparoscopic unwinding of an hyper- births with an average of 1 in 600 (1). Corpus luteum
stimulated adnexa during the second trimester of cysts account for one third of the adnexal masses;
pregnancy. In these cases, ovaries were first aspirated benign cystic teratomas contribute to another third.
and then untwisted and placed in their anatomical Malignancy may occur in 2% to 5% of these patients
position. In one case, bleeding appeared after the (1, 14) (Table 4).
unwinding, which necessitated laparotomy and liga- Currently, conservative management of these sim-
tion of the bleeding vessel. The authors concluded ple cystic masses is recommended until the second
that laparoscopic treatment of ovarian torsion is a trimester. This often results in spontaneous resolu-

TABLE 3 Adnexal torsion during pregnancy

Author Trimester Type of operation Number of cases Follow-up
Bider et al. (61) 1st and 2nd Torsion of hyperstimulated 6 Uneventful
adnexa
Mashiach et al. (9) 1st and 2nd Torsion of hyperstimulated 12 2 missed abortions, one PROM (with
adnexa IUFD) at 25 weeks, 2 ongoing
cases
Morice et al. (13) 6 –13 weeks 4 untwisting followed by 2 OHSS, 3 func- Uneventful
puncture, 1 cystectomy, tional cysts, 1
1 untwisting dermoid cyst
Righi et al. (62) 1st Oophoropexy 1 Uneventful
Shalev and Peleg (11) ? Aspiration and detorsion 10 patients Pregnancy unaffected
Shalev (12) 5–18 weeks Ovarian cyst unwinding 4 Positive outcomes
Wittich et al. (7) 1st Right adnexal detorsion 1 patient Uneventful
* OHSS ⫽ ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome; PROM ⫽ premature rupture of membranes; IUFD ⫽ intrauterine fetal death.
 Laparoscopic Surgery During Pregnancy Y CME Review Article 55

tion of non-neoplastic functional cysts (14, 15).

Uneventful. Except 1 irregular uterine con-

Reported uneventful until 35 weeks gesta-

5 1st trimester miscarriages, 2 congenital

Masses that persist into the second trimester are

1 laparotomy for uncontrolled bleeding

removed to prevent torsion or rupture during preg-

tractions resolved with tocolytics.

One patient delivered at 35 weeks
No abortions or preterm deliveries
nancy, prevent possible obstruction at delivery, and
to rule out malignancy.
One study (16) suggests that elective removal of an
Follow-up

adnexal mass during pregnancy was less morbid than

removal of a symptomatic mass in an emergency
setting. To avoid the potential risks of a surgical

malformations
1 preterm labor
emergency, the authors recommended elective re-
moval of any adnexal mass ⬎6 cm that persists to the
Uneventful
Uneventful

Uneventful
Uneventful
Uneventful

Uneventful
1 normal 16th week of gestation, regardless of its ultrasonic
tion

appearance. Another study by Yuen and Chang (1)

reported on six pregnant women who underwent
laparoscopic surgery for persistent adnexal masses in
7 (another 12 laparoscopies done

the second trimester. Laparoscopic removal of an

adnexal mass was performed in all patients without
any intraoperative or postoperative complications,
due to other indications)
Number of cases

and all patients delivered healthy infants vaginally, at

term. They believe that with attention to the surgical
technique, laparoscopic removal of persistent ad-
nexal mass during the second trimester of pregnancy
17 patients

39 patients

is safe and carries the same benefits over laparotomy

1 patient

as in patients not pregnant. Parker et al. (15) pre-

sented a study in which 12 women who had laparo-
12
3
2

scopic removal of a benign cystic teratoma during

pregnancy (gestational age at surgery ranged from 9
Gasless laparoscopic ovarian

to 17 weeks). No intraoperative or postoperative ma-

Puncture and cystectomy

ternal or fetal complications occurred. From the

Management of adnexal
Type of operation

above mentioned reports, one can infer that laparo-

Dermoid cystectomy
Ovarian cystectomy

Ovarian cystectomy

scopic surgery for treatment of gynecologic condi-

tions during the first and second trimester is probably
cystectomy

Cystectomy

Cystectomy

safe and carries no substantial increase in complica-

masses
Puncture

Puncture

Puncture

tion rate.

DISCUSSION
Ovarian cystectomy during pregnancy

It is difficult to differentiate between the effects of

early pregnancy)
Week/Trimester

1st trimester, 1 (?

surgery during pregnancy and the specific adverse

outcomes of laparoscopy during that period. The
2nd trimester

2nd trimester
12–16 weeks

1st trimester

1st trimester
1st trimester
6 –27 weeks

9 –17 weeks

relative effect of many factors on pregnancy is dif-

16 weeks

16 weeks

ficult to isolate. These include the indication for

surgery, type of surgery, maternal condition, type of
anesthesia, and the anesthetic agents used as well as
many other factors. Mazze and Kallen (17) published
Garzarelli and Marruca (8)

the largest study on adverse outcomes after nonob-

Busine and Murillo (63)

stetric operations in patients who were pregnant.

Several important findings emerged from this study.
Andreoli et al. (30)

Soriano et al. (66)

Nezhat et al. (65)

Shalev et al. (10)

Parker et al. (15)
Author

First, the incidence of stillbirths or congenital anom-

Akira et al. (27)

Lang et al. (64)

Yuen et al. (1)

Levy et al. (2)

alies was not increased in each trimester when com-

TABLE 4

pared with the predicted incidence. Duncan et al. (18)

also reported similar results. Second, there was an
overall increase in low birth weight infants and ne-
56 Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey
onates who died within 7 days of delivery, probably
because of prematurity. The authors did not attribute
this last finding solely to the operation effect itself,
but considered the precipitating illness also as a
significant contributing factor to premature labor.
Finally, and most important, a total of 868 cases of
laparoscopy performed during pregnancy were re-
viewed; 768 in the first trimester, 29 in the second
trimester, and 71 in the third. There was no increased
incidence of adverse outcomes as compared with
matched controls.
The main specific complications of laparoscopy
during pregnancy are related to possible injury to the
enlarged uterus and ovaries situated outside the pel-
vis and to the cardiovascular and respiratory alter-
ations introduced by the pneumoperitoneum pressure
and CO2 absorption.
1. Penetrating injuries are more likely to occur at
the beginning of the procedure when the insuf-
flating needle is placed blindly (2). To avoid
this, the Veress needle, and subsequently the
trocar, should be inserted while simultaneously
pushing away the uterus and ovary or by ele-
vating the abdominal wall to provide counter-
traction and to increase the distance between
the uterus and the abdominal wall. Further-
more, the needle can be inserted with the aid of
ultrasound guidance, pointing it away from the
enlarged uterus or in an alternate site (Palmer
Point). It is also possible to place the trocar by
an open technique or through an alternate site
as well (1, 2). It should be emphasized that no
instruments are inserted into the uterine cervix
or onto it for uterine manipulation during the
procedure.
2. Adequate pneumoperitoneum is essential for
visualization and performance of laparoscopic
procedures. However, this may be hazardous to
the pregnant woman who already has an altered
cardiovascular and respiratory function. The
Trendelenburg position and increased intraab-
dominal pressure might decrease the total lung
compliance and the functional residual capac-
ity. The use of positive-pressure ventilation and
lower intraabdominal pressure overcome these
effects. In addition, high intraabdominal pres-
sure might decrease venous return and cardiac
output resulting in reduction of uteroplacental
blood flow. The Trendelenburg position here
favors venous return, and an intraabdominal
pressure level below 15 mm Hg can minimize
this complication.
3. Another possible adverse effect is the rapid
CO2 absorption with an increase in arterial CO2
pressure and a concomitant possible decrease in
arterial pH that might affect the fetus. To date,
there is no evidence to support any detrimental
effect of the CO2 pneumoperitoneum on the
human fetus. Furthermore, it has been demon-
strated that operative laparoscopy has little ef-
fect on maternal blood gases (1, 19). Given the
hyperdynamic nature of the pregnant circula-
tion, any CO2 that diffuses across the placenta
should rapidly be removed. Nevertheless, con-
trolled mechanical ventilation can effectively
maintain normal CO2 pressure in the majority
of patients (2). A study on the fetal response to
CO2 pneumoperitoneum in the pregnant ewe
confirms the lack of adverse effects of CO2
insufflation on the fetal placental perfusion and
blood gases (20). In the animal model, some
studies have shown a possible effect of CO2 on
fetal blood gases. Maternal and fetal hypox-
emia, acidosis, and hypercarbia have been
noted in both sheep and baboons during insuf-
flation with CO2. Southerland et al. (21)
showed decreased arterial oxygen tension and
pH and increased arterial to end-tidal CO2 gra-
dient in the ewe and its fetus. Galan et al. (22)
in a study of four pregnant baboons found ma-
ternal respiratory acidosis in three of the four
animals. Fetal umbilical artery Doppler studies,
however, were unaltered immediately after in-
sufflation compared with baseline
measurements.
A significant fetal bradycardia occurred in one
baboon at 20 mm Hg of intraabdominal pressure.
Normal interval growth was shown by ultrasound 2
weeks after the procedure. Although showing possi-
ble alteration in fetal blood gases or pulse, these
reports were not related to poor perinatal outcome.
Furthermore, slight acidosis was reported to be nor-
mal and even beneficial (23). However, the effects of
moderate acidosis on the fetus are still unknown.
The absolute safety of laparoscopic surgery during
pregnancy in humans has yet to be established. In
1996, Amos et al. (24) reported seven cases of preg-
nant patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery—
three appendectomies and four cholecystectomies.
There were four fetal deaths among them, three dur-
ing the first operative week and another, 4 weeks
postoperative. Of five pregnant patients who under-
went laparotomy for similar reasons, four subse-
quently progressed to term and one was lost to fol-
 Laparoscopic Surgery During Pregnancy Y CME Review Article
low-up. The authors recommend caution when
considering nonobstetrical laparoscopic surgery in
pregnant women, and they speculate that the bad
outcomes in their series may be related to the pneu-
moperitoneum effect, demonstrated in animal stud-
ies, showing physiologic alterations in fetal blood
pressure and pulse with both tachycardia and brady-
cardia. Contrary to the very small series by Amos et
al. (24), the majority of studies and case reports
found in the literature report a favorable outcome. It
should be remembered, however, that any surgery
during pregnancy is not an innocent procedure, and
caution should always be exercised. Experienced
laparoscopic surgeons with strict adherence to good
technical and anesthetic principles have been suc-
cessful in diminishing pregnancy-related laparo-
scopic complications, and together with good obstet-
rical management, successful outcomes can be
achieved in most patients (2, 3).
Suggested precautions that should be exercised
when laparoscopic surgery is performed in pregnant
patients include:
1. Intraoperative fetal monitoring may be per-
formed routinely in these patients so that if fetal
distress develops, the pneumoperitoneum pres-
sure can be diminished or the patient can be
hyperventilated in an attempt to correct the
problem. Intraoperative transvaginal ultrasound
fetal monitoring may be used, because transab-
dominal ultrasound monitoring may be imprac-
tical and problematic if the signal is lost during
abdominal insufflation.
2. The patient should be positioned in the left
lateral decubitus position to prevent uterine
compression of the inferior vena cava. This
may prevent further compromise in uteropla-
cental blood supply. Morrell et al. (25) have
suggested lateral rotation of the operating table
to displace the uterus.
3. A Hasson trocar open technique is safer to
prevent inadvertent puncture of the uterus, es-
pecially with increasing gestational age, al-
though this point has not been investigated.
Ultrasonic guidance during insertion of a Ver-
ess needle can decrease the danger of injury to
the uterus.
4. Intraabdominal pressure should be kept as low
as possible and should be no higher than 15 mm
Hg.
5. Maternal end-tidal volume CO2 should be mon-
itored and kept within the normal range. End-
57
tidal CO2 may not be sensitive enough to reflect
acute changes in arterial PCO2. Hence, it may
not be adequate as a guide to adjust pulmonary
ventilation during laparoscopic surgery. Conse-
quently, arterial PaCO2 monitoring has been
recommended. Others (26) have suggested con-
tinuous transcutaneous CO2 pressure measure-
ments as well as squeeze end-tidal CO2 pres-
sure (at large tidal volume) to be of clinical
value in trending and preventing hypercarbia
during laparoscopic surgery. In experimental
animals, hyperventilation has not been suffi-
cient to prevent hypercarbia and acidosis (21–
23). Also, maintenance of maternal end-tidal
CO2 in the low to mid-30s did not prevent
adverse events in the report by Amos et al. (24).
However, laparoscopy in Amos series was per-
formed for conditions generally felt to increase
the risk of fetal loss. Gasless laparoscopy was
proposed by Akira et al. (27) and Tanaka et al.
(28) as a safe alternative to standard laparos-
copy during pregnancy. Whether this newer
approach is better for this purpose is unclear
and awaits additional data.
6. Tocolytic agents need not be used prophylacti-
cally, but can be administered if the patient dem-
onstrates uterine irritability or contractions.
7. A gestational age of 26 to 28 weeks seems to be
the limit for successful completion of laparo-
scopic surgery. Late in the second trimester, the
size of the uterus interferes with adequate vi-
sualization of intraabdominal organs. The in-
creasing uterine size may necessitate changes
in port-site placement to other places rather
than periumbilical site as the pregnancy
progresses.
In conclusion, surgical procedures during preg-
nancy are uncommon and laparoscopic procedures
are even less common. Many doctors still hesitate to
use the minimally invasive approach due to lack of
solid data on its safety and possible adverse effects
on gestation. From this literature review, it seems
that laparoscopic surgery is safe and advantageous
for both the mother and her fetus when performed
by an experienced team. A final conclusion, how-
ever, can be reached only when far more experi-
ence has been gained to evaluate the safety, appro-
priate indications, patient selection, efficacy, and
complication rate of this new surgical approach
during pregnancy.
References (29–66) can be found in the tables.
58 Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey
REFERENCES
1. Yuen PM, Chang AMZ. Laparoscopic management of adnexal
mass during pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997;76:
173–176.
2. Levy T, Dicker D, Shalev J et al. Laparoscopic unwinding of
hyperstimulated ischemic ovaries during the second trimester
of pregnancy. Hum Reprod 1995;10:1478–1480.
3. Curet MJ, Allen D, Josloff RK et al. Laparoscopy during preg-
nancy. Arch Surg 1996;31:546–551.
4. Gouldman JW, Sticca RP, Rippon MB et al. Laparoscopic
cholecystectomy in pregnancy. Am Surg 1998;64:93–97.
5. Reedy MB, Galan HL, Richards WE et al. Laparoscopy during
pregnancy: A study of laparoendoscopic surgeons. J Reprod
Med 1997;42:33–38.
6. Reedy MB, Kallen B, Keuhl TJ. Laparoscopy during preg-
nancy: A study of five fetal outcome parameters with use of
the Swedish Health Registry. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;177:
673–679.
7. Wittich AC, Lockrow EG, Fox JT. Laparoscopic management
of adnexal torsion in early pregnancy. A case report. Mil Med
1994;159:254–255.
8. Garzarelli S, Marruca N. One laparoscopic puncture for treat-
ment of ovarian cysts with adnexal torsion in early pregnancy.
A report of two cases. J Reprod Med 1994;39:985–986.
9. Mashiach S, Bider D, Moran O et al. Adnexal torsion of hy-
perstimulated ovaries in pregnancies after gonadotropin ther-
apy. Fertil Steril 1990;53:76–80.
10. Shalev E, Rahav D, Romano S. Laparoscopic relief of adnexal
torsion in early pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:
853–854.
11. Shalev E, Peleg D. Laparoscopic treatment of adnexal torsion.
Surg Gynecol Obstet 1993;176:448–450.
12. Shalev E. Laparoscopic unwinding of hyperstimulated ovaries
during the second trimester of pregnancy [lettr]. Hum Reprod
1996;11:460.
13. Morice P, Christine LS, Chapron C et al. Laparoscopy for
adnexal torsion in pregnant women. J Reprod Med 1997;42:
435–439.
14. Struyk APHB, Treffers PE. Ovarian tumors in pregnancy. Acta
Obstet Gynecol Scand 1984;63:421–424.
15. Parker WH, Childers JM, Canis M et al. Laparoscopic man-
agement of benign cystic teratomas during pregnancy. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 1996;174:1499–1501.
16. Hess L, Peaceman A, O’Brien W et al. Adnexal mass occurring
with intrauterine pregnancy: Report of fifty-four patients re-
quiring laparotomy for definitive management. Am J Obstet
Gynecol 1988;158:1029–1034.
17. Mazze RI, Kallen B. Reproductive outcome after anesthesia
and operation during pregnancy: A registry study of 5405
cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989;161:1187–1185.
18. Duncan PG, Pope WDB, Cohen M et al. The safety of anes-
thesia and surgery during pregnancy. Anesthesiology 1986;
64:790–794.
19. Pucci RO, Seed RW. Case report of laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy in the third trimester of pregnancy. Am J Obstet
Gynecol 1991;165:401–402.
20. Bernard JM, Chaffin D, Droste S et al. Fetal response to
carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum in the pregnant ewe. Ob-
stet Gynecol 1995;85:669–674.
21. Southerland LC, Duke T, Gollagher JM et al. Cardiopulmonary
effects of abdominal insufflation in pregnancy: Fetal and ma-
ternal parameters in the sheep model. Can J Anaesth 1994;
41:59–64.
22. Galan HL, Reedy MB, Bean JD et al. Maternal and fetal effects
of laparoscopic insufflation. Anesthesiology 1994;81:1159–
1163.
23. Hunter J, Swanstorm L, Thornburgh K. Carbon dioxide pneu-
moperitoneum induces fetal acidosis in a pregnant ewe
model. Surg Endosc 1995;9:272–279.
24. Amos JD, Schorr SJ, Norman PF et al. Laparoscopic surgery
during pregnancy. Am J Surg 1996;171:435–437.
25. Morrell DG, Mullins JR, Harrison PB. Laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy during pregnancy in symptomatic patients. Surgery
1992;112:856–859.
26. Bhavani-Shankar K, Steinbrook RA, Mushlin PS et al. Trans-
cutaneous monitoring during laparoscopic cholecystectomy
in pregnancy. Can J Anaesth 1998;45:164–169.
27. Akira S, Yamanaka A, Ishihara T et al. Gasless laparoscopic
ovarian cystectomy during pregnancy: Comparison with lap-
arotomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;180:554–557.
28. Tanaka H, Futamura N, Takubo S et al. Gasless laparoscopy
under epidural anesthesia for adnexal cysts during preg-
nancy. J Reprod Med 1999;44:929–932.
29. Adamsen S, Jacobsen B, Pentzon N. Laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy during pregnancy. Ugeskr Laeger 1993;155:2215–
2216.
30. Andreoli M, Servakov M, Meyers P et al. Laparoscopic surgery
during pregnancy. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1999;6:
229–233.
31. Arvidsson D, Gerdin E. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy during
pregnancy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1991;1:193–194.
32. Auabara S, Gross GWW, Sirinek K. Laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy during pregnancy is safe for both mother and fetus.
J Gastrointest Surg 1997;1:48–52.
33. Bennett L, Estes E. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the
second trimester of pregnancy: A case report. J Reprod Med
1993;38:833–834.
34. Chandra M, Shapiro SJ, Gordon LA. Laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy in the first trimester of pregnancy. Surg Laparosc
Endosc 1994;4:68–69.
35. Comitalo JB, Lynch D. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the
pregnant patient. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1994;4:268–271.
36. Conron RW Jr, Abruzzi K, Cochrane SO et al. Laparoscopic
procedures in pregnancy. Am Surg 1999;65:259–263.
37. Constantino GN, Vincent GJ, Mucalian GG et al. Laparoscopic
cholecystectomy in pregnancy. J Laparoendosc Surg 1994;4:
161–163.
38. Csaba J, Orban I. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the
25th week of pregnancy (Hungarian). Orv Hetil 1994;135:
1421–1422.
39. Edelman DS. Alternative laparoscopic technique for cholecys-
tectomy during pregnancy. Surg Endosc 1994;8:794–796.
40. Eichenberg BJ, Vanderlinden J, Miguel C et al. Laparoscopic
surgery in the third trimester of pregnancy. Am Surg 1996;62:
874–877.
41. Elderling SC. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in pregnancy.
Am J Surg 1993;165:625–627.
42. Fabiani P, Bongain A, Persch M et al. Endoscopic surgery
during pregnancy. A case report of cholecystectomy (in
French). J Obstet Biol Reprod 1993;22:317–319.
43. Friedman RL, Friedman IH. Acute cholecystitis with calculous
biliary duct obstruction in the gravid patient. Management by
ERCP, papillotomy, stone extraction, and laparoscopic cho-
lecystectomy. Surg Endosc 1995;9:910–913.
44. Geisler JP, Rose SL, Rose SL et al. Nongynecologic laparos-
copy in second and third trimester pregnancy: Obstetric im-
plications. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg 1998;2:235–238.
45. Gurbuz AT, Peetz ME. The acute abdomen in the pregnant
patient. Is there a role for laparoscopy? Surg Endosc 1997;
11:98–102.
46. Hart RO, Tamadon A, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr et al. Open laparo-
scopic cholecystectomy in pregnancy. Surg Laparosc Endosc
1993;3:13–16.
47. Lafrati MD, Yarnell R, Schwaitzberg SD. Gasless laparoscopic
cholecystectomy in pregnancy. J Laparoendosc Surg 1995;5:
127–130.
48. Jackson SJ, Sigman HH. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in
pregnancy. J Laparoendosc Surg 1993;3:35–39.
 Laparoscopic Surgery During Pregnancy Y CME Review Article
49. Lanzfame RJ. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy during preg-
nancy. Surgery 1995;118:627–633.
50. Martin IG, Dexter SPL, McMahon MJ. Laparoscopic chole-
cystectomy in pregnancy: A safe option in the second trimes-
ter? Surg Endosc 1996;10:508–510.
51. O’Connor LA, Kavena CF, Horton S. The Phoenix Indian Med-
ical Center experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy
during pregnancy. Surg Laparoendosc 1996;6:441–444.
52. Rusher AH, Fields B, Henson K. Laparoscopic cholecystec-
tomy in pregnancy: contraindicated or indicated? J Arkansas
Med Soc 1993;89:383–384.
53. Schorr RT. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and pregnancy. J
Laparoendosc Surg 1994;4:65–67.
54. Shaked G, Twena M, Charuzi I. Laparoscopic cholecystec-
tomy for empyema of gall- bladder during pregnancy. Surg
Laparosc Endosc 1994;4:65–67.
55. Soper NJ, Hunter JG, Petrie RH. Laparoscopic cholecystec-
tomy during pregnancy. Surg Endosc 1992;6:115–117.
56. Steinbrook RA, Brooks DC, Datta S. Laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy during pregnancy. Surg Endosc 1996;10:511–515.
57. Weber AM, Bloom GP, Allan TR et al. Laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy during pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1991;78:958–959.
58. Williams JK, Rosemurgy S, Albrink MH et al. Laparoscopic
cholecystectomy during pregnancy. A case report. J Reprod
Med 1995;40:243–245.
59
59. Wilson RB, McKenzie RJ, Fisher JW. Laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy in pregnancy. Two case reports. Aust NZ J Surg
1994;64:647–649.
60. Wischner JD, Zolfaghari D, Wohlgemuth SD et al. Laparo-
scopic cholecystectomy in pregnancy. A case report of six
cases and a review of the literature. Surg Endosc 1996;10:
314–318.
61. Bider D, Ben-Rafael Z, Goldenberg M et al. Outcome of preg-
nancy after unwinding of ischemic hemorrhagic adnexum.
Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989;96:428–432.
62. Righi RV, McComb PF, Flucker MR. Laparoscopic oopho-
ropexy for recurrent adnexal torsion. Hum Reprod 1995;10:
3136–3138.
63. Busine A, Murillo D. Conservative laparoscopic treatment of
adnexal torsion during pregnancy. J Obstet Biol Reprod (Par-
is) 1994;23:918–921.
64. Lang PF, Tamussino K, Winter R. Laparoscopic management
of adnexal torsion during the second trimester (lettr). Int J
Gynaecol Obstet 1992;73:51–52.
65. Nezhat FR, Tazuke S, Nezhat CH et al. Laparoscopy during
pregnancy. A literature review. J Soc Laparoendosc Surg
1997;1:17–27.
66. Soriano D, Yefet Y, Seidman D et al. Laparoscopy versus
laparotomy in the management of adnexal masses during
pregnancy. Fertil Steril 1999;71:955–960.