Skip to main content
Log in

Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: is a knife really necessary?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
World Journal of Pediatrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy (LP) is currently accepted as a suitable treatment modality for infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (IHPS). In this report, we describe some technical modifications of LP using a 3- or 5-mm hook with electrocautery as a substitute for a knife for incising the pylorus. The outcomes of LP using a standard retractable pyloromyotomy knife are compared with those of LP using a hook electrocautery.

Methods

The patients with ultrasound proven IHPS who had undergone LP in a single institution from December 2008 to April 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. Incision on the pylorus was made with a 3-mm pyloromyotomy knife in the initial 12 cases. However, in the latter part of the study, a 3- or 5-mm hook with electrocautery was used for the incision. A Maryland dissector was used for completing the pyloromyotomy. The results were compared in terms of duration of surgery, complications, time taken to establish the first full feed, requirement of analgesics, postoperative emesis, and postoperative stay in the hospital. Independent sample t test and the Chi-square test were used for statistical analysis.

Results

Of the 27 patients analyzed, 12 underwent LP using a pyloromyotomy knife and the remaining 15 patients were operated on using a hook with electrocautery instead of the knife. The operating time, time taken to establish the first full feed, and duration of hospital stay were comparable among the two groups with no statistically significant difference. No complications were recorded in either group.

Conclusions

Use of hook electrocautery for incising the pylorus provides a bloodless field without affecting the postoperative recovery and outcome. It also obviates any need of specialized instruments like a pyloromyotomy knife or other sharp instruments for pyloric incision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  1. Ladd WE, Gross RE. Congenital hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. In: Ladd WE, eds. Abdominal surgery of infancy and childhood. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1941: 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ramstedt C. For the operation of congenital pyloric stenosis. Med Klinik 1912;8:1702–1705. [in German]

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gans SL, Berci G. Peritoneoscopy in infants and children. J Pediatr Surg 1973;8:399–405.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Alain JL, Grousseau D, Terrier G. Extramucosal pyloromyotomy by laparoscopy. Surg Endosc 1991;5:174–175.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bufo AJ, Merry C, Shah R, Cyr N, Schropp KP, Lobe TE. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: a safer technique. Pediatr Surg Int 1998;13:240–242.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hall NJ, Pacilli M, Eaton S, Reblock K, Gaines BA, Pastor A, et al. Recovery after open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pyloric stenosis: a double-blind multicentre randomized controlled trial. Lancet 2009;373:390–398.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Leclair MD, Plattner V, Mirallie E, Lejus C, Nguyen JM, Podevin G, et al. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Pediatr Surg 2007;42:692–698.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. St Peter SD, Holcomb GW 3rd, Calkins CM, Murphy JP, Andrews WS, Sharp RJ, et al. Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pyloric stenosis: a prospective, randomized trial. Ann Surg 2006;244:363–370.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fujimoto T, Lane GJ, Segawa O, Esaki S, Miyano T. Laparoscopic extramucosal pyloromyotomy versus open pyloromyotomy for infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: which is better? J Pediatr Surg 1999;34:370–372.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Greason KI, Allshouse MJ, Thompson WR, Rappold JF, Downey EC. A prospective, randomized evaluation of laparoscopic versus open pyloromyotomy in the treatment of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Pediatr Endosurg Innovative Tech 1997;1:175–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Scorpio RJ, Tan HL, Hutson JM. Pyloromyotomy: comparison between laparoscopic and open surgical techniques. J Laparoendosc Surg 1995;5:81–84.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sola JE, Neville HL. Laparoscopic vs open pyloromyotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pediatr Surg 2009;44:1631–1637.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Shah AA, Shah AV. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy using an indigenous endoknife. J Indian Assoc Pediatr Surg 2004;9:46–47.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Abu-Kishk I, Stolero S, Klin B, Lotan G. Myringotomy knife for pyloromyotomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2010;20:e47–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Muensterer OJ, Adibe OO, Harmon CM, Chong A, Hansen EN, Bartle D, et al. Single-incision laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: initial experience. Surg Endosc 2010;24:1589–1593.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vishesh Jain.

Additional information

This work was presented at the 22nd Congress of the Asian Association of Pediatric Surgeons held on February 22–24, 2010, Kaula Lampur, Malaysia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jain, V., Roy Choudhury, S., Chadha, R. et al. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: is a knife really necessary?. World J Pediatr 8, 57–60 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12519-011-0278-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12519-011-0278-4

Key words