The Learning Curve of Totally Laparoscopic Aortobifemoral Bypass for Occlusive Disease. How Many Cases and How Safe?

Totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery in the treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease or abdominal aortic aneurysms - a systematic review and critical appraisal of literature

PURPOSE

This systematic review aims to evaluate the published literature regarding totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABF) surgery in the treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) or abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), compared with open aortobifemoral bypass surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the medical literature between 1990 and 2016 was performed, searching the medical databases Cochrane Library, OVID Medline, Embase and PubMed. Studies concerning totally LABF with or without control group and containing more than 10 patients were included in the analysis. Operative and aortic cross-clamping times, blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, mortality and morbidity within the first 30 postoperative days, hospital stay and primary and secondary patency of the graft were extracted and compared with open surgery when possible.

RESULTS

Sixty-six studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in this review, 16 of them matched the inclusion criteria for quantitative synthesis. The patient material consisted of 588 patients undergoing totally LABF, 22 due to AAA, and the remaining 566 for AIOD. Five comparative studies regarding AIOD compared 211 totally LABF procedures with 246 open procedures. Only one study concerning AAA was eligible for inclusion, and this study did not provide a comparison against an open group. The operating and aortic cross-clamping times were shorter in the open group. Conversion rates ranged from 0% to 27%. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the two groups (p=0.64). Hospital stays ranged from 4.0 to 12.1 and 5.0 to 12.8 days in the laparoscopic group and open group, respectively. Most of the studies provided low levels of evidence, mainly due to lack of blinding, randomization and correction of bias.

CONCLUSION

Totally laparoscopic aortoiliac surgery seems to be a feasible technique with unaffected mortality and trend toward benefits in hospital stay and possibly also in complication rates. The literature published this far is sparse and with inconsistent results. More randomized controlled trials are required before this method can be widely implemented.

Comparison of the acute-phase response after laparoscopic versus open aortobifemoral bypass surgery: a substudy of a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive surgical techniques have been shown to reduce the inflammatory response related to a surgical procedure. The main objective of our study was to measure the inflammatory response in patients undergoing a totally laparoscopic versus open aortobifemoral bypass surgery. This is the first randomized trial on subjects in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a substudy of a larger randomized controlled multicenter trial (Norwegian Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery Trial). Thirty consecutive patients with severe aortoiliac occlusive disease eligible for aortobifemoral bypass surgery were randomized to either a totally laparoscopic (n=14) or an open surgical procedure (n=16). The inflammatory response was measured by perioperative monitoring of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8, and C-reactive protein (CRP) at six different time points.

RESULTS

The inflammatory reaction caused by the laparoscopic procedure was reduced compared with open surgery. IL-6 was significantly lower after the laparoscopic procedure, measured by comparing area under the curve (AUC), and after adjusting for the confounding effect of coronary heart disease (P=0.010). The differences in serum levels of IL-8 and CRP did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

In this substudy of a randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass surgeries, we found a decreased perioperative inflammatory response after the laparoscopic procedure measured by comparing AUC for serum IL-6.

Long-term Results of Totally Laparoscopic Aortobifemoral Bypass

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to estimate the long-term results and patency rates of totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass in aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD).

METHODS

All 87 patients who received a laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass for AIOD on an intention to treat basis between October 2003 and October 2013 were identified. All operations were performed by the same surgical team using a totally laparoscopic technique. Demographic, pre-operative, peri-operative, and follow up variables were collected and analyzed. Patients were followed up at 1 month post-operatively and annually thereafter. Patency rates were calculated in accordance with published patency reporting standards.

RESULTS

The median age was 57 years (range 40-78 years). The conversion rate was 20.6% overall. The thirty-day post-operative mortality was 1.1%. Six patients required early re-intervention. There were no graft infections. The median length hospital stay was 6 days (range 4-39 days). The mean follow up was 58.0 months (range 1-133 months). Graft limb based primary, primary assisted, and secondary patency rates were respectively 96.1%, 98.1% and 99.4% at 1 year, and 83.0%, 92.0% and 97.0% at 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass is a safe alternative to open surgery in selected patients, with excellent long-term patency rates, albeit at the cost of a steep learning curve.

Laparo- and thoracoscopic aortic aneurysm neck optimization and treatment of potential endoleaks type IA and II in a porcine model

Background

Endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms has a higher incidence of late complications, and open conversion (OC) associated with high mortality may be required. As alternatives to OCs, we propose minimal invasive laparo-/thoracoscopic approaches, either to control endoleaks after endovascular repair, or to convert non-endovascular treatable cases due to a hostile neck anatomy by inserting a peri-aortic PTFE collar before endovascular repair. Such interventions may reduce complications and the necessity for OCs in the future.

Methods

In twelve pigs, were 10 had infra-/juxtrarenal AAAs, externally placed collars/aneuwraps around the proximal AAA neck and just below the left subclavian artery and division of the aortic side branches were carried out laparo-and thoracoscopically.

Results

For the laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures respectively, mean operative time was 143 ± 41 min and 86 ± 51 min and a mean of 2.6 and 2.25 aortic side branches were ligated/divided. For both procedures, the last half in the series were carried out significantly faster (p < 0.05) indicating a learning curve. Blood loss was minimal and no procedure related complications were seen.

Conclusion

Using these minimal invasive endoscopic approaches, it seems feasible to externally band aneurysm necks and ligate aortic side branches in a pig model. These procedures could potentially be considered as alternatives to OCs in controlling endoleaks and in improving the safety of endovascular interventions. As endoscopic aortic surgery is challenging a learning curve is expected. Practicing the described procedures using this model, can be used as a learning tool prior to similar interventions on humans.

•

Laparo-/thoracoscopic approaches for treating endoleaks can be simulated in a pig model.

•

Laparo-/thoracoscopic approaches to optimize a challenging aortic aneurysm neck can be simulated in a pig model.

•

Endoscopic aortic surgery is challenging and a learning curve must be expected.

•

A pig model with aortic aneurysm can be used as a realistic surgical learning tool before human application.

A comparative cohort study of totally laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass for the treatment of advanced atherosclerosis

Background

Totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABF) procedure has been shown to be feasible for the treatment of advanced aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). This study compares the LABF with the open aortobifemoral bypass (OABF) operation.

Methods

In this prospective comparative cohort study, 50 consecutive patients with type D atherosclerotic lesions in the aortoiliac segment were treated with an LABF operation. The group was compared with 30 patients who were operated on with the OABF procedure for the same disease and time period. We had an explanatory strategy, and our research hypothesis was to compare the two surgical procedures based on a composite event (all-cause mortality, graft occlusion, and systemic morbidity). Stratification analysis was performed by using the Mantel–Haenszel method with the patient–time model. Cox multivariate regression method was used to adjust for confounding effect after considering the proportional hazard assumption. Cox proportional cause-specific hazard regression model was used for competing risk endpoint.

Results

There was a higher frequency of comorbidity in the OABF group. A significant reduction of composite event, 82% (hazard ratio 0.18; 95% CI 0.08–0.42, P=0.0001) was found in the LABF group when compared with OABF group, during a median follow-up time period of 4.12 years (range from 1 day to 9.32 years). In addition, less operative bleeding and shorter length of hospital stay were observed in the LABF group when compared with the OABF group. All components of the composite event showed the same positive effect in favor of LABF procedure.

Conclusion

LABF for the treatment of AIOD, Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II type D lesions, seems to result in a less composite event when compared with the OABF procedure. To conclude, our results need to be replicated by a randomized clinical trial.

Learning curves for cardiothoracic and vascular surgical procedures--a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the learning curve (LC) literature and identify the LC of cardiothoracic and vascular surgical procedures.

SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND

The LC describes an observation that a learner's performance improves over time during acquisition of new motor skills. Measuring the LC of surgical procedures has important implications for surgical innovation, education, and patient safety. Numerous studies have investigated LCs of isolated operations in cardiothoracic and vascular surgeries, but a lack of uniformity in the methods and variables used to measure LCs has led to a lack of systematic reviews.

METHODS

The MEDLINE®, EMBASE™, and PsycINFO® databases were systematically searched until July 2013. Articles describing LCs for cardiothoracic and vascular procedures were included. The type of procedure, statistical analysis, number of participants, procedure setting, level of participants, outcomes, and LCs were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 48 studies investigated LCs in cardiothoracic and vascular surgeries. Based on operating time, the LC for coronary artery bypass surgery ranged between 15 and 100 cases; for endoscopic vessel harvesting and other cardiac vessel surgery between 7 and 35 cases; for valvular surgery, which included repair and replacement, between 20 and 135 cases; for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, between 15 and 35 cases; for vascular neurosurgical procedures between 100 and 500 cases, based on complications; for endovascular vessel repairs between 5 and 40 cases; and for ablation procedures between 25 and 60 cases. However there was a distinct lack of standardization in the variables/outcome measures used, case selection, prior experience, and supervision of participating surgeons and a range of statistical analyses to compute LCs was noted.

CONCLUSION

LCs in cardiothoracic and vascular procedures are hugely variable depending on the procedure type, outcome measures, level of prior experience, and methods/statistics used. Uniformity in methods, variables, and statistical analysis is needed to derive meaningful comparisons of LCs. Acknowledgment and application of learning processes other than those reliant on volume-outcomes relationship will benefit LC research and training of surgeons.

Laparoscopic versus open approach for aortobifemoral bypass for severe aorto-iliac occlusive disease--a multicentre randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate differences between open and laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease on postoperative morbidity and mortality.

DESIGN

A multicentre randomised controlled trial.

METHODS

Between January 2007 and November 2009, 28 patients with severe aorto-iliac occlusive disease (TASC II C or D) were randomised between laparoscopic and open approach at one community hospital and one university hospital (TASC = Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus on the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease).

RESULTS

The operation time was longer for the laparoscopic approach (mean 4 h 19 min (2 h 00 min to 6 h 20 min) vs. 3 h 30 min (1 h 42 min to 5 h 11 min); p = 0.101)). Nevertheless, postoperative recovery and in-hospital stay were significantly shorter after laparoscopic surgery. Also oral intake could be restarted earlier (mean 20 h 34 min (6 h 00 min to 26 h 55 min) vs. 43 h 43 min (19 h 40 min to 77 h 30 min); p = 0.00014)) as well as postoperative mobilisation (walking) (mean 46 h 15 min (16 h 07 min to 112 h 40 min) vs. mean 94 h 14 min (66 h 10 min to 127 h 23 min); p = 0.00016)). Length of hospitalisation was shorter (mean 5.5 days (2.5-15) vs. mean 13.0 days (7-45); p = 0.0095)). Visual pain scores and visual discomfort scores were both lower after laparoscopic surgery. Also return to normal daily activities was achieved earlier. There were no major complications in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery for aorto-iliac occlusive disease is a safe procedure with a significant decrease in postoperative morbidity and in-hospital stay and earlier recovery.

Laparoscopic kidney transplantation: an initial experience

Laparoscopic donor nephrectomy has the advantages of less pain, early ambulation and shorter hospitalization compared to open donor nephrectomy. Kidney recipient surgery is, however, traditionally performed by open surgery. Our aim was to study feasibility and safety of laparoscopic kidney transplantation (LKT). After permission from Internal Review Board, LKT was performed in four patients. All kidneys were procured from deceased donors. Left kidney was used for LKT and transplanted in left iliac fossa while right kidney was used for standard open kidney transplantation (OKT). All transplantation procedures were performed successfully. Cold ischemia time varied between 4 h and 14 h. For LKT, mean time for anastomosis was 65 (range 62-72) min, mean operative time was 3.97 (range 3.5-5) h, mean blood loss was 131.25 mL (range 45-350) mL. Mean wound length was 7 cm in LKT group and 18.4 cm in OKT group. Delayed graft function was observed in one patient in each group. One patient was lost in OKT group due to posttransplant bacterial meningitis. At 6 months, both groups have comparable value of serum creatinine. In conclusion, LKT is technically feasible and safe. Long term outcome needs to be evaluated in a larger study.

Mid-term results of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery for aortoiliac occlusive disease

The aim of this study was to evaluate middle-term clinical results of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) to treat aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). Between 2002 and 2007, 28 consecutive patients received robot-assisted laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass grafting ( n = 24) or aortoiliac endarterectomy ( n = 4). Patients were followed prospectively. RALS could be completed successfully in 24 patients; conversion to open surgery was necessary in four patients (14%). Median operative time was 350 min. Median aortic clamping time was 70 min. Median hospital stay was five days. One patient died within 30 days. Non-lethal complications occurred in four patients (14%). Clinical symptoms improved in all patients. Primary and secondary limb-based patencies at 36 months were 89% and 91%, respectively. In conclusion, RALS is a feasible and durable technique for patients with AIOD. Although operative times are long, RALS allows rapid postoperative recovery.

Early Experiences of Laparoscopic Aortofemoral Bypass in Korea-report from a Single Center

Although endovascular approach can be widely applied to occlusive aortoiliac segment, aortofemoral bypass (AFB) continues to offer superior long term patency. In an effort to reduce the morbidity of AFB, LAFB (laparoscopic AFB) has been developed. We report our initial experiences to determine the feasibility and safety. From September 2005 to May 2008, LAFB was performed in 12 patients. A transabdominal retrocolic approach with pneumoperitoneum or direct approach was preferred. LAFB consisted of aortic dissection, vascular control with or without intracorporeal anastomosis. Last two cases were performed using da Vinci system for secure proximal anastomosis as an end to side fashion. Laparoscopic procedures were successfully performed in 11 patients. One patient underwent open conversion due to small bowel injury and bleeding. Mean operating time and aortic clamping time was 446 minutes and 87.5 minutes. The time to return of bowel function was about 2.1 days (2.1 ± 1.2). Compartment syndrome was developed in one patient at immediate postoperatively. During this study period, operating time was shown in decreasing tendency. Although LAFB is challenging procedure with steep learning curve, it is feasible technique and appears to ease patient's postoperative course.