| Title |
Technische Aspekte der laparoskopischen Leberchirurgie
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Die Chirurgie, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00104-018-0684-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
S. Heinrich, J. Mittler, V. Tripke, H. Lang |
| Abstract |
Laparoscopic surgery has become the standard for most visceral surgery procedures in many hospitals. Now, liver resections are also being increasingly carried out laparoscopically. The advantages of the laparoscopic technique have been demonstrated in numerous case series and in a recent randomized controlled trial. The aim of this review article is to present the available techniques for laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS). The technical variations reported in the literature as well as the own experience with LLS are reported. Optimal patient and trocar positions are crucial for successful LLS and they are chosen according to the planned type of liver surgery: the literature offers several options in particular for surgery of the cranial and dorsal liver segments. As for open liver surgery, a restrictive volume management and the application of the Pringle maneuver are helpful to reduce intraoperative blood loss in LLS. In addition, several dissection techniques have been adopted from open liver surgery. The Cavitron Ultrasound Surgical Aspirator (CUSA™) is particularly suitable for parenchymal dissection close to major vascular structures, since it guarantees a meticulous parenchymal dissection with minimal vascular injuries. The developments of minimally invasive surgery nowadays allow complex liver resections, which can mostly be performed comparable to open liver surgery. Hopefully, minimally invasive liver surgery will further develop in Germany in the near future, since it offers several advantages over open liver surgery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 25% |
| Researcher | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 July 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Die Chirurgie
#246
of 434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#250,591
of 341,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Die Chirurgie
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 434 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 341,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.