Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / @xirurgi_2025 / @xirurgi_2025 - 756 - файл

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
29.08.2026
Размер:
14 Мб
Скачать
21 Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
https://t.me/med1917
35. Sohn N, Marcoux J, Mycyk T, Krahn J, Meng Q.The impact of different biocompatible coated cardiopulmonary bypass circuits on inammatory response and oxidative stress. Perfusion. 2009;24:231–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267659109351218.
36. Hirsh J, O'Donnell M, Weitz JI. New anticoagulants. Blood. 2005;105:453–63. https://doi.
org/10.1182/blood- 2003- 12- 4195.
37. DeLoughery EP, Olson SR, Puy C, McCarty OJT, Shatzel JJ.The safety and efcacy of novel agents targeting factors XI and XII in early phase human trials. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2019;45:502–8.
38. Wallisch M, Lorentz CU, Lakshmanan HHS, Johnson J, Carris MR, Puy C, Gailani D, Hinds MT, McCarty OJT, Gruber A, etal. Antibody inhibition of contact factor XII reduces platelet deposition in a model of extracorporeal membrane oxygenator perfusion in nonhuman pri­mates. Res Pract Thromb Haemost. 2020;4:205–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/rth2.12309.
39. Bembea MM, Annich G, Rycus P, Oldenburg G, Berkowitz I, Pronovost P. Variability in anticoagulation management of patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: an international survey. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013;14:e77–84. https://doi.org/10.1097/
PCC.0b013e31827127e4.
40. Rajsic S, Breitkopf R, Bachler M, Treml B.Diagnostic modalities in critical care: point-of­care approach. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11:2202.
41. Goldberg RJ, Spencer FA, Gore JM, Lessard D, Yarzebski J.Thirty-year trends (1975 to 2005) in the magnitude of, management of, and hospital death rates associated with cardiogenic shock in patients with acute myocardial infarction: a population-based perspective. Circulation. 2009;119:1211–9. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.108.814947.
42. Napp LC, Kühn C, Bauersachs J. ECMO in cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock. Herz. 2017;42:27–44.
43. Sayer GT, Baker JN, Parks KA.Heart rescue: the role of mechanical circulatory support in the management of severe refractory cardiogenic shock. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2012;18:409–16.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0b013e328357f1e6.
44. Wilson-Smith AR, Bogdanova Y, Roydhouse S, Phan K, Tian DH, Yan TD, Loforte A.Outcomes of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory cardiogenic shock: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;8:1–8. https://doi.
org/10.21037/acs.2018.11.09.
45. Cheng R, Hachamovitch R, Kittleson M, Patel J, Arabia F, Moriguchi J, Esmailian F, Azarbal B.Complications of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for treatment of cardiogenic shock and cardiac arrest: a meta-analysis of 1,866 adult patients. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;97:610–6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.09.008.
46. Chen Y-C, Tsai F-C, Fang J-T, Yang C-W. Acute kidney injury in adults receiving extra­corporeal membrane oxygenation. J Formos Med Assoc. 2014;113:778–85. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jfma.2014.04.006.
47. Villa G, Katz N, Ronco C.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and the kidney. Cardiorenal Med. 2015;6:50–60. https://doi.org/10.1159/000439444.
48. Fisser C, Reichenbächer C, Müller T, Schneckenpointner R, Malfertheiner MV, Philipp A, Foltan M, Lunz D, Zeman F, Lubnow M.Incidence and risk factors for cannula-related venous thrombosis after venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in adult patients with acute respiratory failure. Crit Care Med. 2019;47:e332–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/
ccm.0000000000003650.
49. Sohail S, Fan E, Foroutan F, Ross HJ, Billia F, Alba AC.Predictors of mortality in patients treated with veno-arterial ECMO for cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarc­tion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Cardiovasc Transl Res. 2022;15:227–38. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12265- 021- 10140- w.
50. Connors JM, Levy JHJB.COVID-19 and its implications for thrombosis and anticoagulation. Blood. 2020;135:2033–40.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s- 0039- 1692439.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00059- 016- 4523- 4.
351
352
https://t.me/med1917
51. Lim MS, Mcrae S. COVID-19 and immunothrombosis: pathophysiology and therapeutic implications. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2021;168:103529.
52. Ranucci M, Ballotta A, Di Dedda U, Baryshnikova E, Dei Poli M, Resta M, Falco M, Albano G, Menicanti L.The procoagulant pattern of patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory dis­tress syndrome. J Thromb Haemost. 2020;18:1747–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/jth.14854.
53. Weir-McCall JR, Galea G, Mun Mak S, Joshi K, Agrawal B, Screaton N, Toshner M, Ruggiero A, Benedetti G, Brozik J, etal. Vascular thrombosis in severe COVID-19 requiring extracor­poreal membrane oxygenation: a multicenter study. Crit Care Med. 2022;50:624–32. https://
doi.org/10.1097/ccm.0000000000005322.
54. Yusuff H, Zochios V, Brodie D.Thrombosis and coagulopathy in COVID-19 patients requir­ing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. ASAIO J. 2020;66:844–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/
mat.0000000000001208.
55. Peek GJ, Mugford M, Tiruvoipati R, Wilson A, Allen E, Thalanany MM, Hibbert CL, Truesdale A, Clemens F, Cooper N, etal. Efcacy and economic assessment of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respira­tory failure (CESAR): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2009;374:1351–63.
56. Pappalardo F, Pieri M, Arnaez Corada B, Ajello S, Melisurgo G, De Bonis M, Zangrillo A. Timing and strategy for weaning from Venoarterial ECMO are complex issues. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2015;29:906–11. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2014.12.011.
57. Aissaoui N, Luyt CE, Leprince P, Trouillet JL, Léger P, Pavie A, Diebold B, Chastre J, Combes A. Predictors of successful extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) weaning after assistance for refractory cardiogenic shock. Intensive Care Med. 2011;37:1738–45. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s00134- 011- 2358- 2.
58. Cavarocchi NC, Pitcher HT, Yang Q, Karbowski P, Miessau J, Hastings HM, Hirose H.Weaning of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation using continuous hemodynamic transesophageal echocardiography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;146:1474–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jtcvs.2013.06.055.
59. Aissaoui N, El-Banayosy A, Combes A.How to wean a patient from veno-arterial extracor­poreal membrane oxygenation. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41:902–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00134- 015- 3663- y.
60. Santise G, Panarello G, Ruperto C, Turrisi M, Pilato G, Giunta A, Sciacca S, Pilato M.Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for graft failure after heart transplantation: a multi­disciplinary approach to maximize weaning rate. Int J Artif Organs. 2014;37:706–14. https://
doi.org/10.5301/ijao.5000353.
61. Ortuno S, Delmas C, Diehl JL, Bailleul C, Lancelot A, Naili M, Cholley B, Pirracchio R, Aissaoui N.Weaning from veno-arterial extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation: which strat­egy to use? Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;8:E1–e8. https://doi.org/10.21037/acs.2018.08.05.
62. Rajsic S, Breitkopf R, Treml B, Jadzic D, Oberleitner C, Oezpeker UC, Innerhofer N, Bukumiric Z.Association of aPTT-guided anticoagulation monitoring with thromboembolic events in patients receiving V-A ECMO support: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2023;12:3224.
63. Rajsic S, Treml B, Jadzic D, Breitkopf R, Oberleitner C, Bachler M, Bösch J, Bukumiric Z. aPTT-guided anticoagulation monitoring during ECMO support: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Crit Care. 2023;77:154332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2023.154332.
64. Guervil DJ, Rosenberg AF, Winterstein AG, Harris NS, Johns TE, Zumberg MS.Activated partial thromboplastin time versus antifactor Xa heparin assay in monitoring unfractionated heparin by continuous intravenous infusion. Ann Pharmacother. 2011;45:861–8. https://doi.
org/10.1345/aph.1Q161.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140- 6736(09)61069- 2.
S. Rajsic et al.
21 Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
https://t.me/med1917
65. Swayngim R, Preslaski C, Burlew CC, Beyer J.Comparison of clinical outcomes using acti­vated partial thromboplastin time versus antifactor-Xa for monitoring therapeutic unfraction­ated heparin: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Res. 2021;208:18–25. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2021.10.010.
66. Willems A, Roeleveld PP, Labarinas S, Cyrus JW, Muszynski JA, Nellis ME, Karam O. Anti-Xa versus time-guided anticoagulation strategies in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Perfusion. 2021;36:501–12. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0267659120952982.
67. Zhang M, Pauls JP, Bartnikowski N, Haymet AB, Chan CHH, Suen JY, Schneider B, Ki KK, Whittaker AK, Dargusch MS, et al. Anti-thrombogenic surface coatings for extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a narrative review. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2021;7:4402–19. https://
doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.1c00758.
353
Part VI
https://t.me/med1917
Perioperative Surgical Challenges
Chapter 22
https://t.me/med1917
Damage Control Laparotomy
DavidRayVelez andAnthonyJosephDuncan
Abbreviations
ATLS Advanced Trauma Life Support BAT Blunt abdominal trauma CT Computerized tomography DCL Damage control laparotomy DPL Diagnostic peritoneal lavage FAST Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma NPWT Negative pressure wound therapy PAT Penetrating abdominal trauma REBOA Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta
Introduction
History of the traumatic abdomen extends through antiquity. Although management has evolved over time, the traumatic abdomen in a crashing patient can still, as described by Hippocrates, “mortify imperatively.”
Damage control is not a novel modality for therapeutic interventions. The term
itself comes from the US Navy and refers to the ability of a ship to undergo damage
D. R. Velez (*) Department of Surgery, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, USA e-mail: david.velez@unlv.edu
A. J. Duncan University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, ND, USA e-mail: Anthony.Duncan@ndus.edu
Switzerland AG 2024 J. Faintuch, S. Faintuch (eds.), Recent Strategies in High Risk Surgery,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56270-9_22
357© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature
358
https://t.me/med1917
but still maintain mission integrity. The term was brought into the mainstream surgi­cal community in 1993, when Rotondo etal. proposed it as an approach for manag­ing penetrating abdominal injuries [1]. Before the adoption of damage control as a therapeutic intervention, several methodologies were implemented to reduce surgi­cal time at the index procedure and improve outcomes of critically ill patients. These included peri-hepatic packing and Feliciano etal.’s rapid conservative opera­tive techniques, which were published in 1993 [2, 3].
Damage control surgery is a surgical technique that involves a brief initial opera­tion aimed at quickly controlling severe bleeding and/or contamination in critically ill patients [4]. Following the initial surgery, patients are admitted to the intensive care unit where their condition is stabilized with the objective of returning them to their pre-injury state before denitive repair can be carried out [4]. While advance­ments in technology have led to signicant improvements in this technique over the years, the fundamental principles of damage control surgery have remained unchanged.
D. R. Velez and A. J. Duncan
Epidemiology andEtiology
There are 5.8million traumatic deaths every year across the globe [5]. Trauma is the third leading cause of death in the United States with 150,000 deaths per year [6]. Trauma is largely a disease of young males with over 50% between the ages of 10 and 24years and over 66% male [7]. Trauma is the most common cause of death between ages 1 and 44years [8].
The most common causes of traumatic death in the United States are motor vehi­cle collision (37,991 deaths/year), falls (37,455 deaths/year), and gunshot wounds with suicide (24,432 deaths/year) accounting for almost twice that of homicide (13,958 deaths/year) [9]. Blunt abdominal trauma (BAT) accounts for 90% of patients presenting but only 67% of those requiring laparotomy [10]. Penetrating abdominal trauma (PAT) accounts for only 10% of patients presenting but 33% of those requiring laparotomy [9, 10]. Of penetrating mechanisms, stab wounds are the most common, although gunshot wounds are approximately eight times more lethal [11].
Among patients with injury due to BAT, the most commonly injured organs are the spleen (40–55%), liver (35–45%), and small bowel (5–10%) [9]. The most com­mon injuries after PAT are small bowel (50%), colon (40%), liver (30%), and vas­cular injury (25%) [9]. After the decision is made to proceed with trauma laparotomy, the most common procedures performed are enterectomy (23%), hepatorrhaphy (20%), enterorrhaphy (16%), splenectomy (16%), and colectomy (15%) [10]. Damage control procedures are used in 38% of cases [10]. Overall mortality is 21% which doubles to 46% in hypotensive patients [10]. Surprisingly, despite major advancements in the eld of trauma, these high mortality rates have seen minimal change over the last two decades [10].
22 Damage Control Laparotomy
https://t.me/med1917
359
General Management ofAbdominal Trauma
As with any trauma, abdominal trauma begins with a thorough primary and second­ary survey [12]. Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) algorithms start with the management of airway, breathing, circulation, disability, exposure, and then a head­to- toe injury inventory and exam [12]. Diagnosis then diverges depending on the patient’s condition and mechanism of injury.
All patients with overt peritonitis or evisceration mandate trauma laparotomy [6,
13]. Regarding patients without peritonitis or evisceration, management will then
differ by the mechanism of injury. In an unstable patient after PAT, a trauma lapa­rotomy is mandated. In an unstable patient after BAT, the abdomen must rst be conrmed as the source of instability by a Focused Assessment with Sonography for Trauma (FAST) prior to laparotomy. Some surgeons do elect for diagnostic peri­toneal lavage (DPL), although it has almost entirely been replaced since the advent of FAST and is now primarily used when FAST results are equivocal. A positive FAST requires trauma laparotomy but a negative FAST should instead prompt fur­ther evaluation for other sources of instability with chest X-ray or computerized tomography (CT) scan as indicated. A stable patient allows more time for diagnosis in a comprehensive manner. As such, a stable patient after BAT should be evaluated by CT scan. A stable patient after PAT should undergo local wound exploration.
The primary goal of local wound exploration is to evaluate for violation of pos­terior fascia, not peritoneum. If no fascial violation is found in a PAT that is stable with no other indication for admission, the patient may be discharged home [13]. Fascial violation requires further evaluation to determine peritoneal violation or damage to intrabdominal structures. This can be accomplished by CT scan, FAST, DPL, or diagnostic laparoscopy dependent on surgeon preference. A patient without any evidence of peritoneal violation should be monitored for 24h with serial clini­cal exams. Peritoneal violation mandates surgical evaluation with either laparotomy or diagnostic laparoscopy. Of note, when evaluating anterior abdominal stab wounds, only 50–75% will penetrate the peritoneum and of those, only 50–75% will require repair of intraabdominal injury [13].
Trauma Laparotomy: ASystematic Approach
Upon arrival in the operating room, skin should be prepped from chin to knees with arms extended allowing adequate access for the worst-case scenarios. Understand that sterility is a luxury in hemorrhagic shock. Rather than disappearing for a pro­longed relaxing scrub, if necessary the surgeon should throw on gloves and dive-in if needed to save the patient’s life.
360
https://t.me/med1917
The trauma laparotomy “Operative Sequence” was outlined by Hirshberg and Mattox in the book “Top Knife” published two decades ago in 2004 [14]. It follows four basic steps: access and exposure, temporary bleeding control, exploration, and then decision of denitive repair versus damage control [14]. There have been many descriptions of how to approach a trauma laparotomy, and although they do not always use the same terminology, they all at their core follow the same format [1315].
D. R. Velez and A. J. Duncan
Access andExposure
The rst steps of an efcient trauma laparotomy are access and exposure to facili­tate the ensuing procedure. The typical access is through a long midline incision from xiphoid to pubis. However, every effort should be made to enter through virgin territory to avoid scars and internal adhesions. This may be accomplished by extend­ing the incision superiorly or inferiorly if able. If unable, an alternative incision can be chosen such as the chevron incision which resembles the military chevron insig­nia just under the rib cage bilaterally. This is also known as a bilateral subcostal, double Kocher, or rooftop incision. For additional access, a Mercedes Incision can be made by adding a small midline extension toward the xiphoid from the chevron incision, therefore, resembling a Mercedes-Benz automobile emblem. Immediately upon entry into the abdomen, the bowel should be eviscerated early. Incision should be done rapidly but in a controlled manner as a major pitfall during this step would be iatrogenic injury to the liver, bowel, or bladder.
Temporary Bleeding Control
Once inside the abdomen, the rst step should be temporary bleeding control. BAT begins with empiric packing. Packing should be placed over and under the liver, over and medial to the spleen, along the right gutter, along the left gutter, and in the pelvis. Although it will not arrest major hemorrhage, it will give time to organize efforts and systematically explore the abdomen. PAT begins by directly approaching the bleed. Although some have recommended empiric packing in all trauma lapa­rotomies, the consensus appears to be in favor of directly approaching the bleed.
The exsanguinating patient should be approached by obtaining supraceliac con­trol of the Aorta. This is done through division of the Gastrohepatic ligament. Although normally avascular, care should be taken to watch for a replaced left hepatic artery. The stomach and esophagus are then reected to the left to allow access to the aorta. Division of the diaphragmatic crura may be required. The aorta can then be bluntly dissected and occluded. Aortic occlusion is typically with a vascular clamp although it can also be compressed against the spine either manually or with an aortic root compressor.
22 Damage Control Laparotomy
https://t.me/med1917
Other described methods for aortic control include suprahepatic control through the triangular ligaments, inframesocolic control through the inferior mesentery, or a left-sided medial visceral rotation (Mattox maneuver). These other methods, how­ever, have fallen out-of-favor as suprahepatic control is technically more difcult, inframesocolic control does not halt bleeding supplied by the proximal aortic branches, and the Mattox maneuver, although providing more extensive exposure, takes more time and should be reserved for exploration after temporary bleeding control. A left anterolateral thoracotomy can also provide excellent control of the distal thoracic aorta. However, it may produce unnecessary morbidity if the aorta can instead be accessed directly from the abdomen. Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) is another technique being utilized at some centers although its use is evolving and is not available in all centers.
361
Exploration
After bleeding has been temporarily controlled, time is allowed to systematically explore the abdomen for signs of injury. Newly identied sites of bleeding should be controlled with clamps or packing. Gastrointestinal perforations should be tem­porarily controlled with bowel, vascular, Babcock, or Allis clamps. The order of exploration is not as important as making sure that the surgeon performs the same steps the same way every time so that injuries are not missed. The most commonly described order starts with inframesocolic exploration followed by supramesocolic, lesser sac, and then nally retroperitoneum.
For inframesocolic exposure, the transverse colon is lifted cranially and the bowel is run from the ligament of Treitz down to the rectum. Each loop of bowel is systematically ipped between hands inspecting both sides as well as the associated mesentery. Notorious sites of missed injury include the proximal jejunum near the ligament of Treitz, posterior transverse colon, hepatic exure, and splenic exure. Once nished, the bladder and pelvis are inspected. The transverse colon is then pulled caudally for supramesocolic exposure. Typically, structures are inspected from the patient’s right-to-left as if reading a book. First the liver and gallbladder are palpated, the right kidney is palpated, the stomach is evaluated from the gastro­esophageal junction down through the duodenal loop, and then the spleen and left kidney are palpated. The gastroesophageal junction and retroperitoneal duodenum are also at higher risk for missed injury and should allocate special attention. Next the lesser sac is accessed by blunt dissection through the greater omentum, allowing inspection of the posterior stomach and pancreas.
Finally, the retroperitoneum is evaluated. Exploration should be kept targeted and limited based on missile trajectory and presence of hematoma. Hematoma exploration is based on the retroperitoneal zones. Zone I is midline between the kidneys from the aortic hiatus to the sacral promontory. Zone II exists lateral to the kidneys. Zone III encompasses the pelvis with everything inferior to the sacral promontory. All Zone I hematomas should be explored with risk for major vascular
362
https://t.me/med1917
D. R. Velez and A. J. Duncan
injury. Penetrating Zone II hematomas should be selectively explored. Blunt Zone II hematomas are further directed by associated structures. Peri-Colonic and Peri­Duodenal hematomas should all be explored [16]. Peri-Renal hematomas should be explored only if expanding, pulsatile or with active hemorrhage [16]. Exploration of Zone II should be kept limited to exclude injury with the rst step being palpation of the contralateral kidney to determine the need for heroic measures. Needless exploration of Zone II may result in unnecessary loss of the kidney. All Zone III hematomas due to penetrating trauma should be explored. Zone III hematomas due to blunt trauma should be explored only if expanding, pulsatile, or with active hem­orrhage. Unnecessary exploration of blunt Zone III hematomas can result in uncon­trolled bleeding.
Retroperitoneal exposure is generally accomplished through any of four primary maneuvers: the Mattox Maneuver, inframesocolic division, Kocher Maneuver, or Cattell-Braasch Maneuver. In general, left-sided supramesocolic injuries should be approached by a Mattox Maneuver, while isolated left-sided inframesocolic injuries can be approached through an inframesocolic division. A right-sided suprarenal injury can be approached through a simple Kocher Maneuver, although a right­sided infrarenal injury would require a Cattell-Braasch Maneuver. These maneu­vers, however, have signicant overlap, and the exploration should be based on the patient’s presentation, keeping it limited to avoid unnecessary morbidity yet exten­sive enough to allow adequate exposure.
A Mattox Maneuver, also known as a left-sided medial visceral rotation, allows for visualization of the entire abdominal aorta as well as the primary arterial branches. The descending colon is mobilized by incising along the Line of Toldt from the sigmoid colon up to the splenic exure and then extending laterally around the spleen. A hand is then used to sweep from inferior to superior with the dissection plane directly against the posterior abdominal wall. All structures are then rotated medially. To visualize the left renal artery, the kidney may be left behind during the rotation. Major pitfalls to avoid would be injury to the spleen or risk for avulsion of the left descending lumbar vein as it connects to the renal vein.
Inframesocolic division allows visualization of the inframesocolic aorta. It is commonly used outside of trauma as the preferred operative approach for a trans­peritoneal open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Although a Mattox Maneuver allows visualization of the same structures, the inframesocolic division allows for a more targeted and limited dissection if access to the supramesocolic aorta is unnec­essary. In practice the transverse mesocolon is reected cephalad and the small bowel is eviscerated to the right. A retroperitoneal incision is then made starting at the Ligament of Treitz to the left of the aorta. Avoid injury to the inferior mesenteric vein with this initial cut. The incision is then carried inferiorly and should course to the right of the aortic midline preventing the major pitfall of injury to the inferior mesenteric artery or sigmoid mesentery.
The Kocher Maneuver provides visualization of the suprarenal inferior vena cava, right renal hilum, duodenum, and pancreas. It is performed by incising the posterior peritoneum lateral to the duodenum. A hand is then placed behind to