Professional Documents
Culture Documents
SURGICAL TECHNIQUE
1 These methods have been described previously by other authors. 2-4 After appropriate
general or local anesthesia, 5 and with a urinary bladder catheter and nasogastric tube in
place, abdominal access is achieved by either the direct-puncture or open technique.
Pneumoperitoneum is established to 15 mm Hg with carbon dioxide gas. An umbilical
trocar is placed for an angled operative laparoscope (5 mm). A full exploration is performed
and the stomach is visualized. Placing the patient in reverse Trendelenburg position helps
facilitate this exploration. A second port is placed in the left upper abdomen for manipula-
tion of the stomach and eventual placement of the gastrostomy tube. An appropriate site is
selected along the anterior greater curve, and the gastric wall is elevated to the ventral
abdominal wall to estimate the site of tube entry.
260 Farrell and Koruda
"T" fasteners
die
~mach
Live
er
,j
O
Guidewire
Postoperative Care 2. Duh QY, Way LW: Laparoscopic gastrostomy using T-fasteners as
retractors and anchors. Surg Endosc 7:60-63, 1993
The gastrostomy tube is left to gravity drainage until evi- 3. Murayama KM, Schneider PD, Thompson JS: Laparoscopic gas-
dence of normal gastric emptying is apparent. The tube is trostomy: A safe method for obtaining enteral access. J Surg Res
flushed as necessary to maintain patency. Sutures are left 58:1-5, 1995
in place for 3 weeks, after which time the tube may be 4. Modesto VL, Harkins B, Cahon WC, et al: Laparoscopic gas-
safely changed as an outpatient. trostomy using four-point fixation. Am J Surg 167:273-276,
1994
5. Duh QY, Senokozlieff-Englehart AL, Choe YS, et al: Laparoscopic
Outcomes gastrostomy and jejunostomy: Safety and cost with local vs. gen-
Mean operative times range between 20.5 and 39 min- eral anesthesia. Arch Surg 134:151-156, 1999
utes. 6'7 Mortality is exceedingly low, and complication 6. Murayama KM, Johnson TJ, Thompson JS: Laparoscopic gastros-
tomy and jejunostomy are safe and effective for obtaining enteral
rates range from 8% to 18.3%. Complications include
access. AmJ Surg 172:591-595, 1996
leakage, bleeding, wound infection, failed placement, and 7. Edelman DS, Unger SW: Laparoscopic gastrostomy and jeju-
loss of tube function. 6'&9 In one retrospective series, lapa- nostomy: Review of 22 cases. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4:297-300,
roscopic gastrostomy was less likely to result in compli- 1994
cations than open gastrostomy (18.3% vs. 24.9%), and 8. Hin PC: Laparoscopic-assisted gastrostomy in 26 patients: In-
was similar to PEG (17.1%). l~ dications and outcome at 2 years. J Laparoendosc Surg 6:25-28,
1996
9. Peitgen K, Walz MK, Krause U, et al: First results of laparoscopic
REFERENCES gastrostomy. Surg Endosc 11:658-662, 1997
1. Gauderer MWL, Ponsky JL, Izant RJ: Gastrostomy without lapa- 10. Ho HS, Ngo H: Gastrostomy for enteral access. A comparison
rotomy: A percutaneous endoscopic technique. J Pediatr Surg among placement by laparotomy, laparoscopy, and endoscopy.
15:872-875, 1980 Surg Endosc 13:991-994, 1999