Infective complications in laparoscopic surgery

Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (N.O.T.E.S)

Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (N.O.T.E.S) is a technique that allows access to the peritoneal cavity through natural orifices (oral, rectal, vaginal, vesical) without passing through the anterior abdominal wall. Rapid strides have been made in developing this technique, especially in animal models. Majority of research work in this field is originating from USA, while human clinical trials are being reported from India and Southern America. Morbidly obese patients and ITU patients are two target groups where N.O.T.E.S if implemented, will have the highest potential and bearing. With increasing evidence of safe practice in human models, questions on indications and feasibility of practice need to be addressed by rigorous research, strong evidence and collaboration between surgical centers worldwide.

Deep and organ/space infections in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery: incidence and impact on hospital length of stay and costs

BACKGROUND

The reported incidence of infection complicating elective colorectal surgery (ECS) is 11% to 26%. We evaluated length of stay (LOS) and expense associated with such infections, which heretofore remain unexplored.

METHODS

We reviewed 1127 ECS procedures from October 2005 to may 2007 to identify infected case subjects (n = 46). Data were obtained by way of chart abstraction and administrative database review. A case-control study evaluated LOS and actual accounting costs for case subjects versus uninfected control subjects (n = 46). Logistic regression determined risk factors for infection.

RESULTS

Infection incidence was 4.1%. Mean +/- SD LOS and costs were greater for case than control subjects: 21 +/- 15 days compared with 6 +/- 4 days (P < .001) and $42,516 +/- 39,972 compared with $10,999 +/- $7,122 (P < .001). Procedure type, infection, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, increased age, and nonsmoking status predicted greater LOS and costs. Infection risk factors included duration of procedure > or =3 hours, male sex, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, low baseline hematocrit, and indication for surgery of regional enteritis/ulcerative colitis.

COMMENTS

Infection development after ECS is infrequent in our population, but it results in significantly poorer outcomes. Vigilant adherence to preventive guidelines, including those for antibiotic prophylaxis, is warranted.

Hybrid vaginal MA-NOS sleeve gastrectomy: technical note on the procedure in a patient

BACKGROUND

Standard sleeve gastrectomy for the morbidly obese is feasible and safe using the hybrid transvaginal minilaparoscopic-assisted natural orifice surgery (MA-NOS) with available laparoscopic/endoscopic instruments and technology as illustrated by this technical report on a female patient.

METHODS

The intervention was a transvaginal sleeve gastrectomy in a 67-year-old woman who was hypertensive, noninsulin-dependent with diabetes with morbid obesity (BMI, 37). Operative field view was maintained at all times with a gastroscope introduced through a transvaginal trocar. The surgeon positioned himself at the right side of the patient using a 2-mm needle port/mini-grasper placed in the left upper quadrant for traction of the greater curvature of the stomach. A 12-mm umbilical trocar was used as the port for insertion of the LigaSure device used for division of the short gastric vessels and the Endo-GIA stapler for creation of the gastric tube. The first assistant used a second mini-grasper for liver retraction and stomach positioning. The resected stomach was retrieved through the vagina. There were no intraoperative complications. The operative time was 150 minutes.

RESULTS

The advantages of minimally invasive surgery seemed to be enhanced with this hybrid laparoscopic approach. Postoperative course was uneventful. All component steps of a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) were reproduced. The patient was discharged on the third postoperative day.

CONCLUSIONS

Transvaginal hybrid MA-NOS sleeve gastrectomy is both feasible and safe. The hybrid technique ensured safety during the performance of the procedure. MA-NOS is a potential option to avoid abdominal incisions and related complications for the laparoscopic resection of large intra-abdominal organs. Combined hybrid laparoscopic NOS for humans is currently a safe and reliable approach for major surgery through the NOS approach in female patients. Hybrid surgery allows controlled implementation of NOS techniques in clinical practice, providing a stepwise progression to the pure NOS approach once the appropriate technology has been developed. Additionally, it is the best way to stimulate the active development and evaluation of the underpinning technologies and instruments for these novel endoscopic surgical approaches. Appropriate clinical indications for these new procedures are yet to be defined. LSG is associated with short-term excess weight loss and resolution of comorbidities comparable to those obtained with other restrictive procedures. The performance of sleeve gastrectomy is an option in selected patients undergoing bariatric surgical treatment, particularly in the super obese and those who are considered high risk because of comorbid disease.

Surgical site infections: epidemiology, microbiology and prevention

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are defined as infections occurring up to 30 days after surgery (or up to one year after surgery in patients receiving implants) and affecting either the incision or deep tissue at the operation site. Despite improvements in prevention, SSIs remain a significant clinical problem as they are associated with substantial mortality and morbidity and impose severe demands on healthcare resources. The incidence of SSIs may be as high as 20%, depending on the surgical procedure, the surveillance criteria used, and the quality of data collection. In many SSIs, the responsible pathogens originate from the patient's endogenous flora. The causative pathogens depend on the type of surgery; the most commonly isolated organisms are Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, Enterococcus spp. and Escherichia coli. Numerous patient-related and procedure-related factors influence the risk of SSI, and hence prevention requires a 'bundle' approach, with systematic attention to multiple risk factors, in order to reduce the risk of bacterial contamination and improve the patient's defences. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for the prevention of SSIs emphasise the importance of good patient preparation, aseptic practice, and attention to surgical technique; antimicrobial prophylaxis is also indicated in specific circumstances. Emerging technologies, such as microbial sealants, offer the ability to seal and immobilise skin flora for the duration of a surgical procedure; a strong case therefore exists for evaluating such technologies and implementing them into routine clinical practice as appropriate.

The effects of laparoscopic surgery and nosocomial infections on the cost of care: evidence from three common surgical procedures

OBJECTIVE

To examine the cost of care for laparoscopic versus open surgery and the added cost of nosocomial infections for three common surgical procedures: cholecystectomy, hysterectomy, and appendectomy.

METHODS

The Cardinal Health database repository was utilized to extract reimbursement data for laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy, hysterectomy, and appendectomy surgical procedures. Utilizing a 22-hospital sample and a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliant clinical data extraction technique, the Cardinal Health database repository produced a Nosocomial Infection Marker to identify and track nosocomial infection rates for these procedures. ICD-9 codes were utilized to identify 10,731 patients who had undergone these procedures between September 2004 and December 2006. Multivariable linear regression models were estimated to isolate the effects of laparoscopic versus open surgery and nosocomial infections on the cost of care.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic surgery significantly reduces the overall cost of care for cholecystectomies, hysterectomies, and appendectomies. Controlling for the cost of nosocomial infection, incremental cost savings from laparoscopic versus open surgery for all three procedures average $1608. Cholecystectomy has the largest savings ($3299), followed by hysterectomy ($1385) and appendectomy ($1032). These cost savings in part reflect that patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures have shorter lengths of stay. In contrast, nosocomial infection increases costs substantially for each surgery type, raising costs for cholecystectomy by $4794, hysterectomy by $4528, and appendectomy by $6108.

CONCLUSION

The cost of care for laparoscopic surgery is lower than open surgery for cholecystectomy, hysterectomy, and appendectomy. This conclusion is based on actual hospital reimbursement data.

Laparoscope use and surgical site infections in digestive surgery

OBJECTIVE

To compare surgical site infection (SSI) rates in open or laparoscopic appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and colon surgery. To investigate the effect of laparoscopy on SSI in these interventions.

BACKGROUND

Lower rates of SSI have been reported among various advantages associated with laparoscopy when compared with open surgery, particularly in cholecystectomy. However, biases such as the lack of postdischarge follow-up and confounding factors might have contributed to the observed differences between the 2 techniques.

METHODS

This observational study was based on prospectively collected data from an SSI surveillance program in 8 Swiss hospitals between March 1998 and December 2004, including a standardized postdischarge follow-up. SSI rates were compared between laparoscopic and open interventions. Factors associated with SSI were identified by using logistic regression models to adjust for potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

SSI rates in laparoscopic and open interventions were respectively 59/1051 (5.6%) versus 117/1417 (8.3%) in appendectomy (P = 0.01), 46/2606 (1.7%) versus 35/444 (7.9%) in cholecystectomy (P < 0.0001), and 35/311 (11.3%) versus 400/1781 (22.5%) in colon surgery (P < 0.0001). After adjustment, laparoscopic interventions were associated with a decreased risk for SSI: OR = 0.61 (95% CI 0.43-0.87) in appendectomy, 0.27 (0.16-0.43) in cholecystectomy, and 0.43 (0.29-0.63) in colon surgery. The observed effect of laparoscopic techniques was due to a reduction in the rates of incisional infections, rather than in those of organ/space infections.

CONCLUSION

When feasible, a laparoscopic approach should be preferred over open surgery to lower the risks of SSI.

MA-NOS radical sigmoidectomy: report of a transvaginal resection in the human

BACKGROUND

With available laparoscopic and endoscopic instruments/technology a standard radical sigmoid resection is feasible and safe using transvaginal minilaparoscopic-assisted natural orifice surgery (MA-NOS).

METHODS

The intervention was a transvaginal MA-NOS sigmoidectomy in a 78-year-old woman with a sigmoid adenocarcinoma. Maintaining triangulation the surgeon positioned himself at the right side of the patient and used the transvaginal trocar for dissection and stapling of both the inferior mesenteric vessels and the upper rectum. The colonic resection was performed extracorporeally in the conventional fashion and was followed by an intra-abdominal endoscopically assisted stapled anastomosis.

RESULTS

Advantages of minimally invasive surgery seemed to be enhanced with this hybrid laparoscopic approach. Postoperative course was uneventful. All oncological principles governing resection and management were accomplished and the pathology examination confirmed a T3N1 lesion. The patient was discharged on the fourth postoperative day.

CONCLUSION

Transvaginal MA-NOS radical sigmoidectomy is a feasible and oncologically safe procedure. MA-NOS is a realistic option for avoiding the need of assisting incisions and related morbidity in the laparoscopic resection of large intra-abdominal lesions. Combined hybrid laparoscopic NOS in humans (MA-NOS) currently provides a safe and reliable way of defining future clinical applications and advantages of NOS and NOTES. Additionally, it stimulates the active development and evaluation of the underpinning technologies and instrumentation.

A review of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) for intra-abdominal surgery: experimental models, techniques, and applicability to the clinical setting

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of models, techniques, outcomes, pitfalls, and applicability to the clinical setting of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) for performing intra-abdominal surgery through a systematic review of the literature.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

NOTES has attracted much recent attention for its potential to allow traditional surgical procedures to be performed entirely through a natural orifice. Amid the excitement for potentially scar-free surgery and abolishment of dermal incision-related complications, the safety and efficacy of this new surgical technology must be evaluated.

METHODS

Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Current Contents, Cochrane Library, Entrez PubMed, Clinical Trials Database, National Health Services Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (NHS CRD) databases, and National Research Register from 2000 to June 2007. Studies identified in September 2007 were included if they were performed in live human subjects.

RESULTS

Of the 34 studies included for review, 30 were experimental studies conducted in animals, thus the evidence base was very limited. Although intra-abdominal access could be achieved reliably via oral, anal, or urethral orifices, the optimal access route and method could not be established. Viscerotomy closure could not be achieved reliably in all cases and risk of peritoneal infection has not been adequately minimized. Although the majority of interventions could be performed in animals using NOTES, a number of technical problems were encountered that need to be resolved.

CONCLUSIONS

NOTES is still in early stages of development and more robust technologies will be needed to achieve reliable closure and overcome technical challenges. Well-managed human studies need to be conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of NOTES in a clinical setting.

[Surgical site infection rates using a laparoscopic approach: results of the German national nosocomial infections surveillance system]

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to assess the impact of laparoscopy on surgical site infections.

METHODS

An analysis was performed using the data of the German national nosocomial infections surveillance system (Krankenhaus-Infektions-Surveillance-Systems, KISS) collected during the period from January 2001 to June 2006. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to investigate the influence of age, gender, ASA score, duration of surgery, wound contamination class and surgical technique.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

A total of 18,249 appendectomies, 32,912 herniorrhaphies, 42,949 cholecystectomies and 19,523 colon operations were analysed. The overall surgical site infection rate was significantly higher (2.6-fold) for the open approach compared to laparoscopically performed appendectomies. For herniorrhaphies, cholecystectomies and colon operations the corresponding odds ratios were 3.40, 3.22 and 1.20 respectively. Whenever possible a laparoscopic approach should be used.