Case Reports in Surgery and Invasive Procedures

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (202) 780-3397

Short Communication - Case Reports in Surgery and Invasive Procedures (2022) Volume 6, Issue 6

Influence of combining medication therapy and laparoscopic surgery for clinical efficacy

Zhongheng Zhang*

Department of Pediatric Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China

*Corresponding Author:
Zhongheng Zhang
Department of Pediatric Surgery,
West China Hospital, Sichuan University,

Received: 19-Oct-2022, Manuscript No. AACRSIP-22-81745; Editor assigned: 21-Oct-2022, PreQC No. AACRSIP-22-81745(PQ); Reviewed: 04-Nov-2022, QC No. AACRSIP-22-81745; Revised: 08-Nov-2022, Manuscript No. AACRSIP-22-81745(R); Published: 15-Nov-2022, DOI:10.35841/2591-7366-6.6.126

Citation: Zhang Z. Influence of combining medication therapy and laparoscopic surgery for clinical efficacy. Case Rep Surg Invasive Proced. 2022;6(6):126

Visit for more related articles at Case Reports in Surgery and Invasive Procedures


The most recent method for treating mild to moderate endometriosis is laparoscopy. The condition can be identified and treated with laparoscopic surgery. Through the use of a surgical procedure and a lit viewing device called a laparoscope, extensive abdominal incisions are not necessary. Laparoscopic surgery, also known as Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS), keyhole surgery or microsurgery, is a contemporary surgical technique that allows procedures to be carried out through very small incisions (about 0.5-1.5 cm) in the body. Compared to other types of procedures, this can lessen discomfort and pain. One type of laparoscope is a telescopic rod lens system, which is typically attached to a video camera and the other type is a digital laparoscope, which has a charge-coupled device at the end.


Laparoscopic surgery, Reflux surgery, Gastric surgery.


The evolution of surgical endoscopy up until 1988 was actually slow and evolutionary. There are numerous conditions that must be met for any significant improvement or change to occur. Laparoscopy needed significant technological advancements. Furthermore, every transformation has its time and requires a suitable and encouraging philosophical context. In comparison to the comfortable status quo, authoritative institutions must be persuaded of the safety and effectiveness of the reforms. Momentum is always in inertia's favour. Fears must be overcome, including the fears of making mistakes, failing, outmoded systems and established authorities losing control [1]. A force stronger than the status quo is needed for successful change, as well as the right moment. The most powerful catalyst for long-lasting change is a noble objective [2].

The advent of diagnostic laparoscopy in the 1960s led to the creation of laparoscopic surgery. Beginning in the 1980s, the invention of laparoscopic surgery transformed it from a diagnostic to a surgical operation and since then, it has been a widely used method for a variety of purposes. With the reproductive and digestive systems being some of the most prevalent, the method has emerged as the industry standard for many organ systems. Laparoscopic surgery has become safe and practical across a variety of medical specialties thanks to significant advancements in surgical training, tools, imaging and surgical procedures [3].

Reflux surgery

The laparoscopic method has emerged as the preferred surgical strategy for treating gastroesophageal reflux disease. In comparison to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of GERD resulted in a shorter hospital stay, a quicker recovery, a quicker return to normal activity and a considerable decrease in perioperative morbidity. Patients who underwent laparoscopy reported a higher quality of life than those who underwent other medical procedures such using a proton-pump inhibitor medicine alone. Laparoscopy has been demonstrated to more effectively address symptoms, such as reducing heartburn and regurgitation [4].

Gastric surgery

A difficult operation is laparoscopic stomach surgery. The stage of the gastric tumour (early vs advanced), whether a partial or total gastrectomy was performed and the presence of gastrointestinal stromal tumours all affect how the operation turns out. With reduced blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, quicker bowel healing (shorter time to first flatus) and fewer significant perioperative complications, laparoscopic resections have a superior overall short-term result. The average length of the surgery, though, was lengthier. Infections at the surgery site and complications from wounds were less severe in the laparoscopic group. There was no difference between open surgery and laparoscopic surgery for severe postoperative problems such anastomotic leakage, stenosis, haemorrhage and postoperative ileus [5].


When compared to open surgery, numerous laparoscopic treatments have consistently reduced stress to the abdominal wall. The most obvious benefits of laparoscopic surgery include quicker recovery, shorter hospital stays and quicker return to normal activity. A variety of applications, including cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and adrenalectomy, have demonstrated the effectiveness, lower incidence of wound infections, and decreased perioperative morbidity of minimally invasive operations. Laparoscopic applications do not have any randomised controlled trials to back them, but they are nevertheless regarded as the gold standard for surgical intervention. Laparoscopic procedures take longer than open procedures. Due to experience and the learning curve, the duration has shortened over time. There is no proof that open surgery yields better oncological short- and long-term results than laparoscopic surgery.


  1. Ris HB, Altermatt HJ, Inderbitzi R, et al. Photodynamic therapy with chlorins for diffuse malignant mesothelioma: initial clinical results. Br J Cancer. 1991;64(6):1116-20.
  2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1-34.
  4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Ohtani H, Tamamori Y, Arimoto Y, et al. Meta-analysis of the results of randomized controlled trials that compared laparoscopic and open surgery for acute appendicitis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16(10):1929-39.
  6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Thomson JE, Kruger D, Jann-Kruger C, et al.  Laparoscopic versus open surgery for complicated appendicitis: a randomized controlled trial to prove safety. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(7):2027-32.
  8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Markides G, Subar D, Riyad K.  Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in adults with complicated appendicitis: systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg. 2010;34(9):2026-40.
  10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App