Single incision laparoscopic right colectomy

Comparison of robotic reduced-port and laparoscopic approaches for left-sided colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The reduced-port approach can overcome the limitations of single-incision laparoscopic surgery while maintaining its advantages. Here, we compared the effects of robotic reduced-port surgery and conventional laparoscopic approaches for left-sided colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Between January 2015 and December 2016, the clinicopathological characteristics and treatment outcomes of 17 patients undergoing robotic reduced-port surgery and 49 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colorectal cancer were compared.

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable in almost all outcome measures except for the distal resection margin, which was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (P < 0.001). The between-group differences in reoperation, incisional hernia development, and overall and progression-free survival were nonsignificant; however, the total hospital cost was significantly higher in the robotic group than in the laparoscopic group (US$13779.6 ± US$3114.8 vs. US$8556.3 ± US$2056.7, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Robotic reduced-port surgery for left-sided colorectal cancer is safe and effective but more expensive with no additional benefit compared with the conventional laparoscopic approach. This observation warrants further evaluation.

Current and emerging robotic assisted intervention for Notes

INTRODUCTION

Natural orifices transluminal endoscopic surgery (notes) procedures are limited by a number of factors including closure of the internal entry point, loss of triangulation, and unstable operative platform. Areas covered: In this paper, new technical developments in different aspects of robotic assisted NOTES interventions are reviewed. We further address new research opportunities for more widespread clinical acceptance of robotic assisted NOTES procedures. Expert commentary: The application of robotics in NOTES intervention is still in its infancy. The development of more compact, smart and intuitive robotic NOTES systems holds much promise for the future of NOTES application.

ECSPECT prospective multicentre registry for single-port laparoscopic colorectal procedures

BACKGROUND

The international multicentre registry ECSPECT (European Consensus of Single Port Expertise in Colorectal Treatment) was established to evaluate the general feasibility and safety of single-port colorectal surgery with regard to preoperative risk assessment.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing single-port colorectal surgery were enrolled from 11 European centres between March 2010 and March 2014. Data were analysed to assess patient-, technique- and procedure-dependent parameters. A validated sex-adjusted risk chart was developed for prediction of single-port colorectal surgery-related conversion and complications.

RESULTS

Some 1769 patients were enrolled, 937 with benign and 832 with malignant conditions. Procedures were completed without additional trocars in 1628 patients (92·0 per cent). Conversion to open surgery was required in 75 patients (4·2 per cent) and was related to male sex and ASA fitness grade exceeding I. Conversions were more frequent in pelvic procedures involving the rectum compared with abdominal procedures (8·1 versus 3·2 per cent; odds ratio 2·69, P < 0·001). Postoperative complications were observed in a total of 224 patients (12·7 per cent). Independent predictors of complications included male sex (P < 0·001), higher ASA grade (P = 0·006) and rectal procedures (P = 0·002). The overall 30-day mortality rate was 0·5 per cent (8 of 1769 patients); three deaths (0·2 per cent; 1 blood loss, 2 leaks) were attributable to surgical causes.

CONCLUSION

The feasibility and safety, conversion and complication profile demonstrated here provides guidance for patient selection.

Laparoscopic single site (LESS) and classic video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the elderly: A single centre experience

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold-standard surgical method used to treat gallbladder diseases. Recently Laparoendoscopic single site surgery (LESS) has gained greater interest and diffusion for the surgical treatment of several pathologies. In elderly patients, just few randomized controlled trials are present in the literature that confirm the clinical advantages of LESS compared with the classic laparoscopic procedures. We present in this paper the preliminary results of this randomized prospective study regarding the feasibility and safety of LESS cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic technique. We demonstrated that LESS technique compared with traditional technique show some advantages like: acceptable operative times, lower post-operative discomfort and sometimes reduction added complications. In addition we also demonstrate that fewer incisions and less scarring which mean less pain, and fewer parietal complications are related to this surgical procedure. In conclusion in the elderly LESS cholecystectomy technique is to be considered a suitable alternative to traditional three-port cholecystectomy.

SILS sigmoidectomy versus multiport laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for diverticulitis

Background and Objectives:

In this single-institution study, we aimed to compare the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (SILSS) with multiport laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (MLS) for recurrent diverticulitis.

Methods:

Between October 2011 and February 2013, 60 sigmoidectomies were performed by the same surgeon. Forty patients had a MLS and 20 patients had a SILSS. Outcomes were compared.

Results:

Patient characteristics were similar. There was no difference in morbidity, mortality or readmission rates. The mean operative time was longer in the SILSS group (P = .0012). In a larger proportion of patients from the SILSS group, 2 linear staplers were needed for transection at the rectum (P = .006). The total cost of disposable items was higher in the SILSS group (P < .0001). No additional ports were placed in the SILSS group. Return to bowel function or return to oral intake was faster in the SILSS group (P = .0446 and P = .0137, respectively). Maximum pain scores on postoperative days 1 and 2 were significantly less for the SILSS group (P = .0014 and P = .047, respectively). Hospital stay was borderline statistically shorter in the SILSS group (P = .0053). SILSS was also associated with better cosmesis (P < .0011).

Conclusion:

SILSS is feasible and safe and is associated with earlier recovery of bowel function, a significant reduction in postoperative pain, and better cosmesis.

Review of 500 single incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery cases - Lessons learned

Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a minimally invasive platform with specific benefits over traditional multiport laparoscopic surgery. The safety and feasibility of SILS has been proven, and the applications continue to grow with experience. After 500 cases at a high-volume, single-institution, we were able to standardize instrumentation and operative steps, as well as develop adaptations in technique to help overcome technical and ergonomic challenges. These technical adaptations have allowed the successful application of SILS to technically difficult patient populations, such as pelvic cases, inflammatory bowel disease cases, and high body mass index patients. This review is a frame of reference for the application and wider integration of the single incision laparoscopic platform in colorectal surgery.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Right Hemi-Colectomy: a Systematic Review

As surgeons became more adept with laparoscopic colon surgery, other less invasive procedures, such as single-incision laparoscopic right hemi-colectomy (SIL-RH), have been applied. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety of SIL-RH as well as its intraoperative and postoperative outcomes for right-sided colon diseases. A detailed search in PubMed for citations that included SIL-RH from 2000 to 2014 revealed 21 studies fulfilling the criteria of the present review. A total of 684 patients were analyzed. Of the patients, 50.2 % were men. Mean patient age was 64.8 years. Of the patients, 36.1 % had already undergone an abdominal operation before the performance of SIL-RH, while 69 % of the patients underwent SIL-RH for colon cancer. Relatively low rates of overall morbidity (15 %) and mortality (0.75 %) were reported in the included studies. Mean length of postoperative hospital stay (LOS) was 5.5 days. Bowel motility return had a mean value of 2.8 days. Mean number of harvested lymph nodes (LN) was 19.2 LN. All resection margins were tumor-free. SIL-RH was a safe alternative to multiport laparoscopic right hemi-colectomy (ML-RH) in terms of morbidity and mortality, postoperative gastrointestinal function recovery, LOS, as well as oncological radicalness.

Review of single incision laparoscopic surgery in colorectal surgery

As surgical techniques continue to move towards less invasive techniques, single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), a hybrid between traditional multiport laparoscopy and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, was introduced to further the enhanced outcomes of multiport laparoscopy. The safety and feasibility of SILS for both benign and malignant colorectal disease has been proven. SILS provides the potential for improved cosmesis, postoperative pain, recovery time, and quality of life at the drawback of higher technical skill required. In this article, we review the history, describe the available technology and techniques, and evaluate the benefits and limitations of SILS for colorectal surgery in the published literature.

Emerging Techniques in Minimally Invasive Surgery. Pros and Cons

New trends have emerged regarding the best minimally invasive access approaches to perform gastrointestinal surgery. However, these newer approaches are seen critically by those who demand a more strict assessment of outcomes and safety. An international panel of expert gathered at the 2014 American College of Surgeons Meeting with the goal of providing an evidence-based understanding of the real value of these approaches in gastrointestinal surgery. The panel has compared the efficacy and safety of most established approaches to gastrointestinal diseases to those of new treatment modalities: peroral esophageal myotomy vs. laparoscopic myotomy for achalasia, transgastric vs. transvaginal approach, and single-incision vs. multi-port access minimally invasive surgery. The panel found that (1) the outcome of these new approaches was not superior to that of established surgical procedures; (2) the new approaches are generally performed in few highly specialized centers; and (3) transgastric and transvaginal approaches might be safe and feasible in very experienced hands, but cost, training, operative time, and tools seem to limit their application for the treatment of common procedures such as cholecystectomy and appendectomy. Because the expected advantages of new approaches have yet to be proven in controlled trials, new approaches should be considered for adoption into practice only after thorough analyses of their efficacy and effectiveness and appropriate training.

Single incision laparoscopic resection for diverticulitis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sigmoidectomy is the standard procedure in elective surgery for recurrent diverticular disease. Recently, Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) have been developed as the next generation technique of minimally invasive surgery. SILS advantages include reduced surgical trauma due to reduction in the number of surgical incisions, faster recovery times, and reduced hospitalization. However, the use of SILS in colorectal surgery is technically demanding and requires expert surgeons, which has hampered the reproducibility and the diffusion of this technique.

METHODS

Between October 2009 and August 2013, 488 consecutive patients were referred to Evangelisches Hochstift Hospital (Worms, Germany) and/or Stadt Klinikum Frankental Hospital (Frankenthal, Germany) for sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease. SILS sigmoidectomy via the umbilicus was performed in 484/488 cases. Clinical outcomes such as the rate of conversion to standard laparoscopy and/or to open surgery, operation time, post-operative complications and hospitalization time were recorded.

RESULTS

SILS sigmoidectomy was successfully completed for 484 out of 488 patients. SILS was converted to standard laparoscopy in 3 patients (0.6%) and to an open procedure in 1 patient (0.2%). Median time for the procedures was 103.26 min (range, 52-156 min). No mortalities or major complications were noted. The average hospitalization period was of 5 days.

CONCLUSION

Our work demonstrates that SILS sigmoidectomy via the umbilicus is effective in the treatment of patients affected by diverticular disease on a routine basis and, moreover, is technically feasible also in patients who have been subjected to previous abdominal surgery, with high Body Mass Index and/or patients with perforation at presentation. Thus this procedure represents a valid alternative to standard laparoscopy.

Learning curves for single incision and conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a multidimensional analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the learning curves and early postoperative outcomes for conventional laparoscopic (CL) and single incision laparoscopic (SIL) right hemicolectomy (RHC).

METHODS

This retrospective study included the initial 35 cases in each group. Learning curves were evaluated by the moving average of operative time, mean operative time of every five consecutive cases, and cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis. The learning phase was considered overcome when the moving average of operative times reached a plateau, and when the mean operative time of every five consecutive cases reached a low point and subsequently did not vary by more than 30 minutes.

RESULTS

Six patients with missing data in the CL RHC group were excluded from the analyses. According to the mean operative time of every five consecutive cases, learning phase of SIL and CL RHC was completed between 26 and 30 cases, and 16 and 20 cases, respectively. Moving average analysis revealed that approximately 31 (SIL) and 25 (CL) cases were needed to complete the learning phase, respectively. CUSUM analysis demonstrated that 10 (SIL) and two (CL) cases were required to reach a steady state of complication-free performance, respectively. Postoperative complications rate was higher in SIL than in CL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (17.1% vs. 3.4%).

CONCLUSION

The learning phase of SIL RHC is longer than that of CL RHC. Early oncological outcomes of both techniques were comparable. However, SIL RHC had a statistically insignificant higher complication rate than CL RHC during the learning phase.

A case-matched comparison of single-incision versus multiport laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer

PURPOSE

To minimize the parietal trauma associated with multiple surgical access sites, single-incision laparoscopic surgery for colectomy has been emerging with the improvements in instrumentation and surgical techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinicopathological outcomes between single-incision laparoscopic right colectomy (SILC) and multiport laparoscopic right colectomy (MLC) for right colon cancer.

METHODS

Thirty-five consecutive patients undergoing SILC from a prospective single-institution database were case matched according to demographic data to an equivalent number of patients who underwent MLC.

RESULTS

The SILC patients had decreased scores for maximal pain assessed by a visual analog scale on postoperative days 1 and 3, and used fewer postoperative systemic narcotics. The median length of the hospital stay for the SILC patients was significantly shorter compared with the MLC patients. The postoperative morbidity rates were similar between the groups. The oncological findings were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

SILC is a feasible and safe alternative to conventional MLC for patients with right colon cancer.

New trends in colorectal surgery: Single port and natural orifice techniques

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) have rapidly gained pace worldwide, potentially replacing conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) as the preferred colorectal surgery technique. Currently available data mainly consist of retrospective series analyzed in four meta-analyses. Despite conflicting results and lack of an objective comparison, SILS appears to offer cosmetic advantages over CLS. However, due to conflicting results and marked heterogeneity, present data fail to show significant differences in terms of operative time, postoperative morbidity profiles, port-site complications rates, oncological appropriateness, duration of hospitalization or cost when comparing SILS with conventional laparoscopy for colorectal procedures. The application of “pure” NOTES in humans remains limited to case reports because of unresolved issues concerning the ideal access site, distant organ reach, spatial orientation and viscera closure. Alternatively, minilaparoscopy-assisted natural orifice surgery techniques are being developed. The transanal “down-to-up” total mesorectum excision has been derived for transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and represents the most encouraging NOTES-derived technique. Preliminary experiences demonstrate good oncological and functional short-term outcomes. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are now mandatory to confirm the long-term SILS results and validate transanal TEM for the application of NOTES in humans.

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery-systematic review and pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this pooled analysis is to determine the effect of single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery (SILC) on short-term clinical and oncological outcomes compared with conventional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery (CLC).

METHODS

An electronic search of Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was performed. Weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated for the effect size of SILC on continuous variables and pooled odds ratios (POR) were calculated for discrete variables.

RESULTS

No significant differences between the groups were noted for mortality or morbidity including anastomotic leak, reoperation, pneumonia, wound infection, port-site hernia, and operative time. The benefits of a SILC approach included reduction in time to return of bowel function (WMD = -1.11 days; 95 % C.I. -2.11 to -0.13; P = 0.03), and length of hospital stay (WMD = -1.9 days; 95 % C.I. -2.73 to -1.07; P < 0.0001). Oncological surgical quality was also shown for SILC for the treatment of colorectal cancer with a similar average lymph node harvest, proximal and distal resection margin length compared to CLC.

CONCLUSIONS

SILC can be performed safely by experienced laparoscopic surgeons with similar short-term clinical and oncological outcomes to CLC. SILC may further enhance some of the benefits of minimally invasive surgery with a reduction in blood loss and length of hospital stay.

A Comparative Study of Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Surgery for Rectal Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Conventional laparoscopic surgery is the treatment of choice for many abdominal procedures. To further reduce surgical trauma, new minimal invasive procedures such as single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) have emerged. The aim of this study was to compare the early results of SPLS versus RALS in the treatment of rectal cancer.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients who had undergone SPLS (n = 36) or RALS (n = 56) in the period between 2010 and 2012. Operative and short-term oncological outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The RALS group had fewer patients with low rectal cancer and more patients with mid-rectal tumors (P = .017) and also a higher rate of intraoperative complications (14.3% vs 0%, P = .021). The rate of postoperative complications did not differ (P = .62). There were no differences in circumferential resection margins, distal resection margins, or completeness of the mesorectal fascia. The RALS group had a larger number of median harvested lymph nodes (27 vs 13, P = .001). The SPLS group had fewer late complications (P = .025). There were no locoregional recurrences in either of the groups. There was no difference in median follow-up time between groups (P = .58).

CONCLUSION

Both SPLS and RALS may have a role in rectal surgery. The short-term oncological outcomes were similar, although RALS harvested more lymph nodes than the SPLS procedure. However, SPLS seems to be safer with regard to intraoperative and late postoperative complications.

The application of McBurney's single-incision laparoscopic colectomy alleviates the response of patients to postoperative wound pain

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) is one of several promising operation choices. Our previous study demonstrated that SILC with a self-made glove-port system both improves the feasibility of SILC and decreases the cost expense of surgery. Because the incision site for SILC could be made at either the umbilicus or McBurney's point, we are interested in whether the incision site affects the outcomes of patients, which is a less explored topic. The purpose of this study is not only to show the results of SILC with a self-made glove-port system for supporting its feasibility, but also to compare the short-term surgical outcomes between SILC with the incision made at the umbilicus and at McBurney's point.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

We collected and reviewed the medical records of patients who received SILC with a self-made glove-port system for tumors in the left side of the colon from August 2009 to March 2011. All operations were performed by a single surgeon. Comparisons of the demographic characteristics, perioperative data, and clinical outcomes between umbilical and McBurney's SILCs were performed. Postoperative pain was assessed by a visual analog scale and opiate demand.

RESULTS

In total, 61 patients were enrolled in this retrospective study. Five of 48 (10.4%) tumors in the umbilical SILC group and 5 of 13 (38.5%) tumors in the McBurney's SILC group were located below the peritoneal reflection. The tumor location was significantly different between these two groups (P=.015). Patients in the umbilical SILC group had significantly higher frequency of opiate demand than those in the McBurney's SILC group (0.4±0.7 versus 1.4±1.8, respectively; P=.002).

CONCLUSIONS

This study further provides evidence for supporting the safety and feasibility of SILC in treating colorectal diseases. More important is that McBurney's SILC not only alleviates the patient response to wound pain, but also provides the same site for a diverting enterostomy to avoid creating an additional wound.

NOTES total mesorectal excision (TME) for patients with rectal neoplasia: a preliminary experience

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision laparoscopy are emerging, minimally invasive techniques. Total mesorectal excision (TME), the gold standard treatment for patients with resectable distal rectal tumors, is usually performed in an "up-to-down" approach, either laparoscopically or via open techniques. A transanal, "down-to-up" TME has already been reported. Our NOTES variant of TME (NOTESTME) is based on a transperineal approach without any form of abdominal assistance. The aim was to reduce further the invasiveness of the procedure while optimizing the anatomical definition of the distal mesorectum. This approach may lead to reduced postoperative pain, decreased hernia formation and improved cosmesis when compared to standard laparoscopy.

METHODS

NOTESTME was attempted in 16 patients with distal rectal neoplasia (i.e., distal edge of the tumor lower than the pouch of Douglas, between 0 and 12 cm from the dentate line). Additional inclusion criteria consisted of an ASA status ≤III and the absence of previous abdominal surgery.

RESULTS

NOTESTME was completed in all patients. Additional abdominal, single-incision laparoscopic assistance was required in 6 (38 %) patients. Mean operative time was 265 min (range 155-440 min). The morbidity rate was 18.8 % (two small bowel obstructions and one pelvic abscess), requiring re-operation in each case. No leaks occurred, and the mortality rate at 30 and 90 days was 0 %. Resection margins were negative in all patients. A median of 17 nodes (range 12-81) was retrieved per specimen. Mean length of hospital stay was 10 days (range 4-29 days). Patients were followed for an average of 7 months (range 3-23 months).

CONCLUSION

NOTESTME was feasible and safe in this series of patients with mid- or low rectal tumors. The short-term mortality and morbidity rates are acceptable, with no apparent compromise in the oncological quality of the resection. Larger, randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up are warranted.

Single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer: State of art

A number of clinical trials have demonstrated that the laparoscopic approach for colorectal cancer resection provides the same oncologic results as open surgery along with all clinical benefits of minimally invasive surgery. During the last years, a great effort has been made to research for minimizing parietal trauma, yet for cosmetic reasons and in order to further reduce surgery-related pain and morbidity. New techniques, such as natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) have been developed in order to reach the goal of “scarless” surgery. Although NOTES may seem not fully suitable or safe for advanced procedures, such as colectomies, SIL is currently regarded as the next major advance in the progress of minimally invasive surgical approaches to colorectal disease that is more feasible in generalized use. The small incision through the umbilicus allows surgeons to use familiar standard laparoscopic instruments and thus, perform even complex procedures which require extraction of large surgical specimens or intestinal anastomosis. The cosmetic result from SIL is also better because the only incision is made through the umbilicus which can hide the wound effectively after operation. However, SIL raises a number of specific new challenges compared with the laparoscopic conventional approach. A reduced capacity for triangulation, the repeated conflicts between the shafts of the instruments and the difficulties to achieve a correct exposure of the operative field are the most claimed issues. The use therefore of this new approach for complex colorectal procedures might understandingly be viewed as difficult to implement, especially for oncologic cases.

Single incision laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

A meta-analysis was performed to compare the outcome of single incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with standard multiport laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

METHOD

A systematic search of databases was carried out to extract comparative studies (randomized and non-randomized, prospective and retrospective). Data were analysed according to Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. A meta-analysis was performed when the data permitted this form of analysis.

RESULTS

Nine comparative studies were retrieved comprising 241 patients with single incision and standard laparoscopy. None of these was randomized. There was no significant difference between the two methods for the primary end-points of mortality, morbidity and cancer-specific parameters and for the secondary end-points of operation time, blood loss, ileus, hospital stay and conversion. It was not possible to analyse pain and cosmetics data owing to insufficient information.

CONCLUSION

Single incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is comparable with standard multiport laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in primary and secondary outcomes. Given current information it is justified to use single incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy, but there is a need for a prospective randomized study.

Advances in laparoscopic techniques and instrumentation in standing equine surgery

Equine standing surgery and laparoscopy are becoming increasingly important aspects of equine surgery. Laparoscopic advancements lag behind the human medical field, mainly due to decreased access to appropriate training and instrumentation. It is nearly impossible to cover the topic of equine standing surgery without discussing advances in laparoscopy, because without such advances, equine standing surgery lacks potential for forward progress. Although novel standing techniques continue to be published, the addition of minimally invasive laparoscopic techniques adds an entirely new dimension and provides a plethora of procedures to surgeons practicing equine standing surgery.

Oncological 3-port laparoscopic colectomy by 1 surgeon and 1 camera operator: a preliminary report

This retrospective study analyzed the short-term outcomes of oncological reduced-port laparoscopic colectomy (RPLC) using 3 ports performed by 1 surgeon and 1 camera operator. Patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal carcinoma in 2010 and 2011 were divided into 2 groups: the CLC group, which included 62 patients who underwent a conventional laparoscopic colectomy and the RPLC group, which included 28 patients who underwent reduced-port laparoscopic colectomy, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to TNM stage, estimated blood loss, complications, conversion rate, pain score, the length of postoperative stay, or the number of harvested lymph nodes. However, the prevalence of right-side colectomy was higher and the operative time was significantly shorter in the RPLC group. RPLC was technically feasible, providing that the appropriate patients were selected. Therefore, even though its surgical benefit might be subtle, we believe that RPLC definitively contributes to the reduction of equipment and manpower costs and will be considered as a standard procedure in the near future.

Timing is everything-colectomy performed on Monday decreases length of stay

BACKGROUND

Perioperative care of patients undergoing colon resection requires a multidisciplinary approach by the operating surgeon, residents, and nurses. Operations performed on Monday take full advantage of hospital resources throughout the week to meet expected discharge by Friday. In a current health care environment of diminishing means, improving the timing of surgery in relation to expected length of stay may play an important role in preserving health care resources.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected colorectal surgical database identified all patients who underwent segmental colon resection at a single tertiary care referral center from 2004 to 2010. Length of stay for patients undergoing elective open and minimally invasive segmental colectomy was compared for Monday versus Tuesday through the weekend. Patient and surgeon demographics were recorded as well as postoperative outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 868 segmental colectomies were performed during the study period. Length of stay was significantly decreased by .73 days (P < .01) for all segmental colectomies performed on Monday compared with those performed Tuesday through Sunday. There was also a significant decrease in length of stay looking independently at right (.96 days, P < .01) and left or sigmoid colectomies (.56 days, P < .01). There was no significant difference in patient or surgeon demographics to account for this difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Segmental colectomies have a significantly decreased length in stay when performed on Monday compared with the rest of the week. The decrease is independent of surgeon, comorbidities, and complications. This difference may be the result of patients' taking full advantage of hospital resources and ancillary support. Cost-effective measures may be evaluated and directed at adjustment of resources available throughout the week to reduce length of stay.

Single-incision laparoscopic versus traditional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery--a cumulative meta-analysis and systematic review

PURPOSE

The published data on the evaluation of feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery (SILC) compared with traditional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery (MLC) remained controversial. The present cumulative meta-analysis and systematic review were performed to provide a more objective and precise estimate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and also, manual searches were employed to identify potentially eligible studies which were published before June 7, 2012. The association was assessed by odds ratio (OR) and means with 95 % confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 20 comparative studies were included, with 670 patients underwent SILC and 838 patients underwent MLC. For overall pooled estimates, no evidence of between trial differences was found in overall conversion rate (OR, 1.7; 95 % CI, 0.97 to 3.01), overall complication rate (OR, 0.82; 95 % CI, 0.63 to 1.08), and operative time (mean, -3.59; 95 % CI, -10.95 to 3.77); significantly between trial differences were found in estimated blood loss (mean, -18.61; 95 % CI, -31.33 to -5.90) and post-operative hospital stay (mean, -0.54; 95 % CI, -0.95 to -0.12). The cumulative meta-analysis identified a potentially increased conversion rate of SILC compared with MLC with the increased percentage of malignancies, but no significant differences could be identified in overall complication rate.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested the feasibility and safety of SILC performed by experienced hands, though potentially higher overall conversion rate occurred in malignancies. SILC will benefit the patients much more with its superiority over MLC.

Comparison of single-incision laparoscopic high anterior resection with standard laparoscopic high anterior resection

AIM

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is gaining momentum. The aim of the present study was to compare the outcome of SILS for high anterior resection with that of standard laparoscopic resection (StdLS).

METHOD

Patients undergoing laparoscopic high anterior resection were prospectively entered into an institutional approved database. Patients treated with SILS were compared with those undergoing StdLS.

RESULTS

Between April 2000 and April 2009, 327 (143 cancer) consecutive unselected patients underwent StdLS; there were three (1%) conversions and 12 (3.6%) covering ileostomies. After April 2009, 55 (29 cancer) consecutive, unselected patients underwent SILS; there were two conversions to a three-port technique (3.6%), no conversions to open resection and two (3.6%) covering ileostomies. There were no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, hospital of operation or American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade between the two groups. The operating time for SILS was significantly shorter (113 ± 44 min for StdLS vs 79 ± 37 min for SILS; P < 0.0001). SILS patients tolerated a normal diet earlier [10 (2-24) h for SILS vs 18 (2-96) h for StdLS] and were discharged faster [1 (1-8) days for SILS vs 3 (1-24) days for StdLS]. There were no significant differences in return to theatre, readmissions or 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

SILS for high anterior resection is feasible, safe and quicker to perform than standard three-port laparoscopic colectomy. It seems to be associated with a faster recovery and earlier discharge.

Transanal employment of single access ports is feasible for rectal surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility of transanal single port surgery in 15 consecutive patients.

BACKGROUND

The current method of choice for local resection of rectal tumors is transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), a complex and expensive technique. Single access surgery is easy, relatively cheap, and more broadly applied in laparoscopy. Evidence regarding transanal use of single access ports is scarce.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with a rectal lesion otherwise eligible for TEM were operated using the Single Site Laparoscopic Access System (SSL) and standard laparoscopic instrumentation. Patient, lesion and procedure characteristics, hospitalization length, and peroperative and postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were planned for single port transanal surgery. In 2 patients (13.3%), intrarectal retractor expansion failed, and conversion to conventional TEM was necessary. The remaining 13 patients were successfully operated. Rectal lesions (mean diameter 36 mm, standard deviation ±25 mm, mean distance from the dentate line 6 cm [±4.5]) included adenoma in 7 patients, T1 adenocarcinoma in 1, T2 adenocarcinoma in 3, carcinoid in 1, and fibrosis only in 1 (after prior polypectomy). All patients were operated in lithotomy position. Resections were en bloc, full thickness, and had complete margins. Resection specimens measured 65 (±35) × 52 (±24) mm. Twelve rectal defects were sutured. One peroperative pneumoscrotum occurred. Mean operating time was 57 (±39) minutes. One patient presented with postoperative hemorrhage, treated conservatively (postoperative morbidity rate 7.7%). Mean hospitalization lasted 2.5 days (±2.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Transanal single port surgery via the SSL is feasible and safe and may become a promising alternative to TEM.

Single-incision laparoscopic right colectomy compared with conventional laparoscopy for malignancy: assessment of perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colectomy for malignancy currently is the standard operative technique together with open colectomy. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SIL) is a recent advance in minimally invasive surgical techniques. This study aimed to compare SIL right colectomy with conventional laparoscopy (CL) used to treat patients with colon cancer.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of data from the authors' prospectively collected colorectal surgery database. Between August 2009 and November 2010, 159 patients who underwent primary laparoscopic right colectomy at the Samsung Medical Center were recruited to participate in this study. Of these, 66 patients underwent SIL colectomy.

RESULTS

The SIL and CL right colectomy groups did not differ significantly in terms of general characteristics including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), American society of anesthesiology (ASA) score, previous abdominal operation, and diagnosis. The two groups also did not differ significantly in terms of perioperative complications (9.1 vs. 15.1 %, p = 0.335). Oncologic resection was similar in the two groups. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 24 for SIL and 27 for CL right colectomy (p = 0.068). Tumor size, disease stage, adjuvant chemotherapy, and proximal and distal resection margins did not differ significantly between the two groups. The mean follow-up period was 24.5 for the SIL group and 26.4 months for the CL group (p = 0.098), with six recurrences in the SIL group (9.1 %) and three recurrences in the CL group (3.2 %) (p = 0.120). One death occurred in the CL group. Disease-free survival at 24 months did not differ significantly between the two groups (89.7 vs. 96.3 %, p = 0.120).

CONCLUSION

The findings show that SIL right colectomy for colon cancer is safe and can provide resection and oncologic outcomes equal to those of conventional laparoscopic right colectomy.

Suprapubic single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) has gained significance recently. The umbilicus has been the preferred access site for SIL. Suprapubic access site (SAS) can be an alternative, especially for a right hemicolectomy (RH).

METHODS

Between November 2011 and July 2012, 7 consecutive patients underwent suprapubic SIL RH (SSILRH). The median age was 53 years, and the median body mass index was 23.9 kg/m2. Indications for surgery included appendicular tumor (1) and adenocarcinoma of the right colon (6). Three reusable trocars were used, and the resection was performed through the SAS. An intracorporeal linear stapled anastomosis was performed, the mesenteric defect was closed, and the access site was used for specimen extraction.

RESULTS

No patient required additional trocars or conversion to an open surgery. The median laparoscopic time was 222 minutes, and the median final incision length was 50 mm. The median Visual Analogue Scale score (0-10) at 6, 18, 30, 42, 54, 66, and 78 postoperative hours was 6, 6, 2, 2, 2, 2, and 2, respectively. The median hospital stay was 4 days.

CONCLUSIONS

SSILRH is useful because the SAS can be enlarged for extraction of the specimen without compromising the cosmetic outcome. The mesocolic and mesenteric dissections are on the same axis as the access site. The intracorporeal anastomosis can be performed without traction. Finally, positioning of the operative table improves exposure of the operative field and allows the surgeon to maneuver the colon and small bowel intracorporeally.

Minimally invasive approaches for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Despite significant improvements in medical management of inflammatory bowel disease, many of these patients still require surgery at some point in the course of their disease. Their young age and poor general conditions, worsened by the aggressive medical treatments, make minimally invasive approaches particularly enticing to this patient population. However, the typical inflammatory changes that characterize these diseases have hindered wide diffusion of laparoscopy in this setting, currently mostly pursued in high-volume referral centers, despite accumulating evidences in the literature supporting the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. The largest body of evidence currently available for terminal ileal Crohn’s disease shows improved short term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery, with prolonged operative times. For Crohn’s colitis, high quality evidence supporting laparoscopic surgery is lacking. Encouraging preliminary results have been obtained with the adoption of laparoscopic restorative total proctocolectomy for the treatment of ulcerative colitis. A consensus about patients’ selection and the need for staging has not been reached yet. Despite the lack of conclusive evidence, a wave of enthusiasm is pushing towards less invasive strategies, to further minimize surgical trauma, with single incision laparoscopic surgery being the most realistic future development.

Systematic review of single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have shown multiport laparoscopic surgery to be safe compared with open surgery in elective colonic disease. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) represents the latest advance in laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this systematic review was to establish the safety and complication profile of colonic SILS.

METHODS

The search was performed in October 2011 using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Search terms were 'colorectal', 'colon', 'colectomy', 'rectal' and single incision/port/trocar/site/scar. Only pure single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery for benign and malignant colonic disease was included. Primary outcomes were the early postoperative complication profiles of colonic SILS. Secondary outcomes were duration of operation, lymph node yields, conversion rate and duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Colonic SILS data were compared with data from a Cochrane review on the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic colonic surgery and four main RCTs on laparoscopic colonic surgery. Median operating times and time to first bowel motion for colonic SILS were comparable with those for laparoscopic colonic surgery. The median lymph node retrieval for malignant disease achieved with SILS was acceptable. Evidence for a reduction in postoperative pain with SILS was conflicting. There was no significant reduction in length of hospital stay with SILS. Most patients selected for colonic SILS had a low body mass index, non-bulky tumours and were operated on by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. There was significant heterogeneity in study group characteristics, indications for surgery, research methodology, operative techniques and follow-up time.

CONCLUSION

Colonic SILS should be restricted to highly selected patients; operations should be performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, with critical appraisal of clinical outcomes.

Single-incision right hemicolectomy for malignancy: a feasible technique with standard laparoscopic instrumentation

AIM

Single-incision laparoscopy is a rapidly evolving technique in the spectrum 'standard laparoscopy-natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)'. From a commercial perspective, purchase of articulating instruments is advised. However, here we present our early experience with single-incision laparoscopy for right hemicolectomy with standard laparoscopic instrumentation.

METHOD

Between June 2010 and December 2011, 25 patients presenting with malignant disease underwent single-incision laparoscopy for right hemicolectomy. Four different ports (SILS™ port, Covidien; SSL(®) Access system, Ethicon; X-Cone/S-Portal(®) , Storz; and OCTO™ port, AFS Medical) were used. Patients were recruited prospectively and all data were processed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were included in our study (and their characteristics, described later in this paragraph, are expressed as median (range)). Four conversions to standard laparoscopy were performed. The age of patients was 69 (36-89) years, and they had a body mass index (BMI) of 24.5 (19.1-34.2). The duration of surgery was 110 (70-148) min with a healed skin incision length of 35 (20-60) mm. Hospital stay was 5 (2-15) days. In four patients discharge was delayed because of comorbidity. One patient suffered an overwhelming pneumonia.

CONCLUSION

Single-incision laparoscopy using standard laparoscopic instruments appears to be a safe and feasible technique for malignant disease requiring right hemicolectomy. Randomized, prospective trials are ongoing to prove the benefits of this technique and to compare its oncological outcome measures with those of conventional laparoscopy. In our experience, a low-profile port with a wide intra-abdominal range of motion is most preferable.

Hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for ileocecal resection

Although laparoscopic colectomy is commonly performed around the world, an operative wound formed during the surgery is large but not sufficient enough to convert for the majority of open surgery. Thus, a certain sized skin incision is required to remove the resected colon. Here we report the case of a pure laparoscopic ileocecal resection which involves transanal specimen extraction. We present a case characterized by a laterally spreading type of tumor of the cecum. We performed a pure laparoscopic ileocecal resection and the resected specimen was removed transanally using colonoscopy. Intracorporeal functional anastomosis was then performed using a flexible linear stapling device under supporting barbed suture traction. The patient was discharged without complications on postoperative day 4. Laparoscopic colectomy performed with minimal incision could essentially increase the usage of this surgical technique. Although our method is restricted to flat or small lesions, we think it is a feasible and realistic solution for minimization of operative invasion because it involves specimen extraction through a natural orifice.

Single-incision laparoscopy for colorectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of more than a thousand procedures

AIM

Single-incision laparoscopy for colorectal surgery is of growing importance. The experience of colorectal resection through single-incision laparoscopic surgery was assessed, including the patient outcomes.

METHOD

A meta-analysis was performed of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic with multiport laparoscopy. Endpoints included conversion to laparotomy, operation time, postoperative morbidity, length of skin incision and length of hospital stay. The MEDLINE database was searched and only comparative studies were included in the meta-analysis. Data were retrieved from full-text manuscripts. Meta-analysis was performed according to the Mantel-Haenszel method for random effects.

RESULTS

From October 2008 to December 2011, 1026 colorectal resections including 921 colonic and 105 rectal procedures using single-incision laparoscopic surgery were reported in 64 studies. Meta-analysis of the 15 comparative studies, including a total of 1075 procedures (494 single-incision and 581 multiport laparoscopies), showed no difference in conversion to open laparotomy [odds ratio (OR) 0.58 (0.24, 1.38); P=0.22], morbidity [OR 0.84 (0.61, 1.15); P=0.27] or operation time [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.27 (-6.50, 5.95); P=0.93], but a significantly shorter total skin incision [WMD -0.52 (-0.79, -0.25); P<0.001] and a significantly shorter postoperative length of stay [WMD -0.75 (-1.30, -0.20); P=0.008] after single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared with a multiport laparoscopic approach.

CONCLUSION

Although only 15 nonrandomized comparative studies of varying methodology have been reported, this systematic review and meta-analysis of more than 1000 colorectal procedures suggest that single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery is feasible and safe.

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy: technical aspects and short-term results

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is currently regarded as the next major advance in the progress of minimally invasive techniques in colorectal surgery. We describe our initial experience using SILS for the management of colorectal disease and present preliminary short-term results. Between February 2010 and April 2011, 7 patients (4 females and 3 males, mean age 55 years, range 32–74) underwent SILS for either benign or malignant colorectal disease. Preoperative diagnosis was diverticular disease of the sigmoid colon in two patients, malignant polyps of the sigmoid colon in two other patients and large villous tumor of the right colon in three patients. Surgical procedures, 4 anterior resections of the rectum and 3 right hemicolectomies, were performed through a 3 cm single umbilical incision using a SILS multi port device with conventional or articulated laparoscopic instruments. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions in the standard laparoscopic procedure. The mean operative time for anterior resections was 160.0 ± 10.6 min, whereas it was 160.6 ± 20 for right hemicolectomies. Blood loss was minimal. No postoperative complications were reported in any of the patients. The overall mean hospital stay was 4.8 ± 0.2 days (range 4–5). For the subset of patients with malignant or pre-malignant disease, the mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 15.6 ± 4.4 (range 6–31). Cosmetic results were considered excellent by all the patients after 15 days. In conclusion, our preliminary experience shows that SILS for colorectal disease is feasible and safe with potential reproducible oncologic results.

Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection with a SILS port for very low rectal cancer: a case report

Since intersphincteric resection (ISR) for rectal cancer was established in the 1990 s, this technique has been applied to very low rectal cancer. This procedure requires advanced techniques for anorectal surgery. However, it is indicated only for early lesions and should be as minimally invasive as possible. We describe a minimally invasive ISR with a single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) port. Our case involves a 59-year-old man with hemorrhage from the rectum. Pathologic examination of the transanally resected specimen revealed that the tumor had invaded into the deeper submucosa. To minimize surgical incisions, a SILS port was utilized in place of a 10- and a 5-mm trocar. The SILS port was inserted through a 2.5 cm transverse incision in the right lower abdomen, where a diverting stoma would be created. Two flexible or straight forceps introduced through this port afforded an easier dissection of the rectum to the levator ani muscle, and transanal dissection of the internal sphincter was performed in the standard manner to connect with the abdominal dissection. The only postoperative incision other than a stoma and surgical drain was one 10-mm incision above the umbilicus. Our technique of ISR with the SILS port is a useful clinical application of minimally invasive surgery.

Pearls and pitfalls in SILS colectomy

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy has developed into a viable option for the treatment of benign and malignant colorectal diseases with the innovation of new access devices, instrumentation, and surgical techniques. Although cosmesis has been highly touted as the most apparent advantage of the approach, the single-incision platform also affords the potential for enhanced recovery, early hospital discharge, and reduction in postoperative wound complications. Despite increasing evidence demonstrating the safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy, wide-ranging adaptation has been tempered in part as a result of the technical demands of the approach. We aim to describe our surgical pearls for overcoming various pitfalls and technical challenges experienced during single-incision laparoscopic colectomy to facilitate successful application of this technique.

Surgery for Crohn's disease: new developments

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Crohn's disease is a chronic relapsing inflammatory bowel disease requiring surgery in a large number of patients. This review describes new developments in surgical techniques for treating Crohn's disease.

RESULTS

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery decreases abdominal wall trauma by reducing the number of abdominal incisions, possibly improving postoperative results in terms of pain and cosmetics. The resected specimen can be extracted through the single-incision site or the future stoma site. Another option is to use natural orifices for extraction (i.e. transcolonic/transanal), but actual benefits of these procedures have not yet been determined. In patients with extensive perianal disease or rectal involvement, transperineal completion proctectomy is often feasible, thereby avoiding relaparotomy. By using a close rectal intersphincteric resection, damage to the pelvic autonomic nerves is avoided. In addition, the risk of presacral abscess formation is reduced by leaving the mesorectal tissue behind.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgery and associated techniques have become standard clinical practice in surgical treatment of patients with Crohn's disease. New developments aim at further reducing the hospital stay and morbidity, and improving the cosmetic outcomes.

Combination therapy with single incision laparoscopic surgery and double-balloon endoscopy for small intestinal bleeding: report of three cases

The clinical introduction of double-balloon endoscopy (DBE) has brought about a revolution in the diagnosis and the treatment of diseases of the small intestine. DBE allows not only direct observation of the entire small intestine, but also interventional therapies, tissue sampling and India ink marking (tattooing). Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) was developed from conventional laparoscopic surgery to further reduce the degree of invasiveness. SILS requires only one umbilical incision, thus resulting in almost scarless surgery. This report presents three cases of small intestinal bleeding successfully treated by SILS following tattooing under DBE. The average operative time was 67 min and average blood loss was 5 ml. All patients immediately recovered without any complications. SILS, in conjunction with presurgical tattooing by DBE for small intestinal bleeding is considered to be an ideal approach in terms of minimal surgical trauma and aesthetics.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgeries for colorectal diseases: early experiences of a novel surgical method

Objectives. This paper aims to analyze the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) and its potential benefits. Methods. Systematic review was performed for the years 1983-August 2011 to retrieve all relevant literature. A total of 21 studies with 477 patients undergoing SILC were selected. Results. Range of operative times and estimated blood losses were 75-229 min and 0-100 mL, respectively. Overall conversion rate was 5.9% (28/477) and an additional laparoscopic port was used in 4.9% (16/329) cases. Range of lymph node number for malignant cases was 12-24.6 and surgical margins were all negative. Overall mortality and morbidity rate was 0.4% (2/477) and 11.7% (43/368), respectively. The length of hospital stay (LOS) varied across reports (2.7-9.2 days). Among 6 case-matched studies, one showed less blood loss in SILC as compared to LAC and 2 showed shorter LOS after SILC versus HALC or LAC/HALC groups. In addition, one study reported maximum pain score on postoperative days 1 and 2 was lower in SILS compared to LAC and HALC. Conclusions. SILC procedure is feasible and safe when performed by surgeons highly skilled in laparoscopy. In spite of technical difficulties, there may be potential benefits associated with SILC over LAC/HALC.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery: outcomes from 224 colonic resections performed at a single center using SILS

BACKGROUND

Compared with single-incision laparoscopy, multiport laparoscopy is associated with greater risk of postoperative wound pain, infection, incisional hernias, and suboptimal cosmetic outcomes. The feasibility of minimally invasive single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colorectal procedures is well-established, but outcome data remain limited.

METHODS

Patients with benign diverticular disease, Crohn's disease, or ulcerative colitis admitted to Klinikum Leverkusen, Germany, for colonic resection between July 2009 and March 2011 (n = 224) underwent single-incision laparoscopic surgery using the SILS port system. Surgeons had ≥7 years' experience in laparoscopic colon surgery but no SILS experience. Patient demographic and clinical data were collected prospectively. Pain was evaluated by using a visual analog scale (0-10). Data were analyzed by using the SPSS PASW Statistics 18 database.

RESULTS

The majority of patients underwent sigmoid colectomy with high anterior resection (AR) or left hemicolectomy (n = 150) for diverticulitis. Our conversion rate to open surgery was 6.3 %, half in patients undergoing sigmoid colectomy with high AR or left hemicolectomy, 95 % of whom had diverticulitis. Mean operating time was 166 ± 74 (range, 40-441) min in the overall population, with shorter times for single-port transanal tumor resection (SPTTR; 89 ± 51 min; range, 40-153 min) and longer times for proctocolectomy (325 min; range, 110-441 min). Mean hospital stay was approximately 10 days, longer after abdominoperineal rectal resection or proctocolectomy (12-16 days). Most complications occurred following sigmoid colectomy with high AR or left hemicolectomy [19/25 (76 %) of early and 4/5 (80 %) of late complications, respectively]. Pain was <4 on a scale of 0-10 in all cases on postoperative day 1, and typically decreased during the next 2 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the feasibility and tolerability of colorectal surgery, conducted by experienced laparoscopic surgeons without specific training in use of the SILS port.

Conventional laparoscopic versus single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a case cohort comparison of short-term outcomes in 144 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a recent development of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal disease. The literature comparing it against conventional laparoscopic colectomy remains limited.

METHODS

A retrospective case-cohort study compared the benefits and outcomes of SILS right hemicolectomy (SRH) with those of conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRH). The medical records of consecutive patients from a prospectively collected database were reviewed. Demographic data, operative details, recovery parameters, and details of resected specimens were obtained and analyzed in an intention-to-treat manner.

RESULTS

From January 2006 to March 2011, 104 elective LRHs (72 %) and 40 elective SRHs (28 %) were performed. The demographics for these two groups were comparable in terms of gender, age, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities and American Society of Anesthesiology score. As the records showed, 62 % of the LRHs and 57 % of the SRHs were performed for malignancies (p = 0.536). Seven of the LRH cases (7 %) were converted to open procedure, whereas two of the SILS cases (5 %) were converted. Three SILS cases (7 %) were completed with additional laparoscopic ports. The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of wound length, mean operative time, lymph node clearance, or margins of resected specimen. The recovery parameters (pain score, hospital length of stay, and complications rate) also were equivalent between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

As a feasible and safe procedure with early postoperative outcomes equivalent to those for LRH, SRH is a suitable alternative. The possible advantages of SILS over conventional laparoscopic surgery may be validated only with randomized controlled trials in the future.

Feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and potential benefits of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC).

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive review for the years 1983 to March 2011 to retrieve all relevant articles.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies with 378 patients undergoing SILC were reviewed. All studies except 2 used a commercially available single-port device. Range of body mass index was 20.9 to 30.0 kg/m². Ranges of operative times and estimated blood losses were 83 to 225 minutes and 0 to 115 mL, respectively. Of 378 cases, a total of 6 cases (1.6%) were converted to open, 6 (1.6%) to hand-assisted laparoscopic (HALC), and 14 (4.0%) to conventional (multiport) laparoscopic colectomy (MLC) (overall conversion rate, 6.9%). An additional laparoscopic port was used in 4.9% (12/247) cases. Range of harvested lymph nodes number for malignant cases was 13.5 to 27 and surgical margins were negative in all cases. Overall mortality and morbidity rates were 0.5% (2/378) and 12.9% (45/349), respectively. The length of hospital stay (LOS) varied across reports (1.9-9.8 days). Among 4 case-matched studies, 2 showed shorter LOS after SILC than after HALC (2.7 vs 3.3 days) or after MLC/HALC (3.4 vs 4.6/4.9 days). Furthermore, one of these studies reported that maximum pain score on postoperative days 1 and 2 was significantly lower in SILS than in MLC and HALC.

CONCLUSIONS

In early series of highly selected patients, SILC appears to be feasible and safe when performed by surgeons who are highly skilled in laparoscopy. Despite technical difficulties, there may be potential benefits associated with SILC over MLC/HALC but it is yet to be proven objectively.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery used to perform transanal endoscopic microsurgery (SILSTEM) for T1 rectal cancer under spinal anesthesia: report of a case

Transanal endoscopic surgery has slowly gained widespread acceptance among colorectal surgeons, despite the need for specific training and the high costs of specialized instrumentation. At the other extreme, some laparoscopic surgeons recommend single port access surgery using a single-incision laparoscopic surgery port. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery was applied to perform transanal endoscopic microsurgery in a patient with T1 rectal cancer under spinal anesthesia. The patient was a 74-year-old man who presented with a 2-cm elevated lesion in the right anterior portion of the rectum. Ordinary laparoscopic instruments were used to perform submucosal resection. The tumor was completely excised from the rectal wall with the use of an ultrasonic surgical scissors. The patient recovered uneventfully and was discharged 4 days after the operation. There was no fecal incontinence or soiling during the postoperative follow-up. Colonoscopy at 4 months after the operation showed no recurrence of either adenocarcinoma or adenoma.