Single-port versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy reduced postoperative pain than three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with large gallstone, a retrospective study

Aim

To compare the short-term outcomes between SILC and TILC depending on gallstone size.

Material and methods

Data from 114 patients with gallstones who underwent cholecystectomy hospitalized in Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital between June 2022 and October 2023 were collected. The gallstone diameter, the operation time, estimated blood loss, post-operative pain, complications post-operation, and length of hospital stay were all collected and examined.

Results

Of the 114 patients included in this study, 61 underwent SILC, and 53 underwent TILC. The pain score 6 h, 24 h post-operation was higher in the TILC group compared with the SILC group. Patients were divided into large (diameter > 2 cm) and small groups (diameter < 2 cm), larger gallstones significantly increased operation duration in the SILC group. For the TILC group, large gallstones significantly increased blood loss during the operation. The blood loss and pain scores were higher in the TILC group compared with the SILC group for patients with large gallstones.

Conclusion

In this study, SILC and TILC both had comparable postoperative outcomes, while SILC significantly reduced postoperative pain than TILC. Moreover, SILC might be a suitable option for patients with larger gallstones (diameter > 2 cm) and helps reduce blood loss and postoperative pain.

Distal pancreatectomy with En-bloc celiac axis resection for locally advanced pancreatic body/tail cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Distal pancreatectomy with En-bloc celiac axis resection (DP-CAR) is a challenging procedure that has yielded certain clinical efficacy in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic body/tail cancer, especially in patients with invasion of abdominal vessels. However, the clinical efficacy and safety of DP-CAR remain controversial. The study aimed to systematically review efficacy and safety of DP-CAR in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic body/tail cancer. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception to 1 October 2020. Two studiers independently accomplished the study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment. Initially, of 1032 studies were searched, among which 11 high quality studies including 1072 patients were finally identified. The pooled results showed that DP-CAR versus Distal pancreatectomy (DP), the rate of R0 resection (RR = 0.76; 95%CI: 0.66 to 0.88; p = 0.0002) and 3-year survival (RR = 0.65; 95%CI: 0.43 to 0.98; p = 0.04) was lower, postoperative mortality (RR = 2.48; 95%CI: 1.02 to 6.03; p = 0.04) was higher, the operation time (MD = 104.67; 95%CI: 84.70 to 124.64; p < 0.001) and hospital stay (MD = 3.94, 95% CI 1.35 to 6.53; p = 0.003) were longer. There was no statistical difference between the DP-CAR and DP group in 1-year, 2-year survival rate (RR = 0.84; 95%CI: 0.57 to 1.23; p = 0.37) (RR = 0.70; 95%CI: 0.45 to 1.10; p = 0.12). In conclusion, compared with DP, DP-CAR has worse efficacy and prognosis survival and is more dangerous, but it can obtain better survival benefit and quality of life than palliative treatment. We suggest that DP-CAR can be carefully attempted for effective margin-negative resection. However, surgeons and patients need to know its potential perioperative risk.

Safe Cholecystectomy Multi-society Practice Guideline and State of the Art Consensus Conference on Prevention of Bile Duct Injury During Cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

BDI is the most common serious complication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. To address this problem, a multi-society consensus conference was held to develop evidenced-based recommendations for safe cholecystectomy and prevention of BDI.

METHODS

Literature reviews were conducted for 18 key questions across 6 broad topics around cholecystectomy directed by a steering group and subject experts from 5 surgical societies (Society of Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, and European Association for Endoscopic Surgery). Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation methodology. When evidence-based recommendations could not be made, expert opinion was documented. A number of recommendations for future research were also documented. Recommendations were presented at a consensus meeting in October 2018 and were voted on by an international panel of 25 experts with greater than 80% agreement considered consensus.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 17 of 18 questions by the guideline development group and expert panel with high concordance from audience participation. Most recommendations were conditional due to low certainty of evidence. Strong recommendations were made for (1) use of intraoperative biliary imaging for uncertainty of anatomy or suspicion of biliary injury; and (2) referral of patients with confirmed or suspected BDI to an experienced surgeon/multispecialty hepatobiliary team.

CONCLUSIONS

These consensus recommendations should provide guidance to surgeons, training programs, hospitals, and professional societies for strategies that have the potential to reduce BDIs and positively impact patient outcomes. Development of clinical and educational research initiatives based on these recommendations may drive further improvement in the quality of surgical care for patients undergoing cholecystectomy.

Safe cholecystectomy multi-society practice guideline and state-of-the-art consensus conference on prevention of bile duct injury during cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Bile duct injury (BDI) is the most common serious complication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. To address this problem, a multi-society consensus conference was held to develop evidenced-based recommendations for safe cholecystectomy and prevention of BDI.

METHODS

Literature reviews were conducted for 18 key questions across six broad topics around cholecystectomy directed by a steering group and subject experts from five surgical societies (SAGES, AHPBA IHPBA, SSAT, and EAES). Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology. When evidence-based recommendations could not be made, expert opinion was documented. A number of recommendations for future research were also documented. Recommendations were presented at a consensus meeting in October 2018 and were voted on by an international panel of 25 experts with greater than 80% agreement considered consensus.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 17 of 18 questions by the Guideline Development Group (GDG) and expert panel with high concordance from audience participation. Most recommendations were conditional due to low certainty of evidence. Strong recommendations were made for (1) use of intraoperative biliary imaging for uncertainty of anatomy or suspicion of biliary injury; and (2) referral of patients with confirmed or suspected BDI to an experienced surgeon/multispecialty hepatobiliary team.

CONCLUSION

These consensus recommendations should provide guidance to surgeons, training programs, hospitals, and professional societies for strategies that have the potential to reduce BDIs and positively impact patient outcomes. Development of clinical and educational research initiatives based on these recommendations may drive further improvement in the quality of surgical care for patients undergoing cholecystectomy.

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery, an emerging technology, has some potential advantages in many complicated endoscopic procedures compared with laparoscopic surgery. But robot-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) is still a controversial issue on its comparative merit compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of RAC compared with LC for benign gallbladder disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases (from their inception to December 2017) to obtain comparative studies assessing the safety and efficacy between RAC and LC. The quality of the literature was assessed, and the data analyzed using R software, random effects models were applied.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies, including 5 RCTs and 21 NRCSs (3 prospective plus 18 retrospective), were included. A total of 4004 patients were included, of which 1833 patients (46%) underwent RAC and 2171 patients (54%) underwent LC. No significant differences were found in intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, readmission rate, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and conversion rate between RAC and LC groups. However, RAC was related to longer operative time compared with LC (MD = 12.04 min, 95% CI 7.26-16.82) in RCT group, which was consistent with NRCS group; RAC also had a higher rate of incisional hernia in NRCS group (RR = 3.06, 95% CI 1.42-6.57), and one RCT reported that RAC was similar to LC (RR = 7.00, 95% CI 0.38-129.84).

CONCLUSIONS

The RAC was not found to be more effective or safer than LC for benign gallbladder diseases, which indicated that RAC is a developing procedure instead of replacing LC at once. Given the higher costs, the current evidence is in favor of LC in cholecystectomy.

Perioperative Outcomes of 3-Arm Versus 4-Arm Robotic Radical Hysterectomy in Patients with Cervical Cancer

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To investigate and compare surgical outcomes of the 3 versus 4 robotic arm approaches for robotic surgery in patients with cervical cancer.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

An academic tertiary hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 142 patients with stage 1A1 to IIB cervical carcinoma who underwent robotic surgery were included for analysis. The subjects were divided according to the surgical approach (i.e., the number of robotic arms), and the 2 groups were compared in terms of intraoperative data and postoperative outcomes.

INTERVENTIONS

Robotic radical hysterectomy (RRH) with lymphadenectomy using 3 robotic arms (n = 101) versus 4 robotic arms (n = 41).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Perioperative surgical outcomes. The 3-arm robotic approach consisted of a camera arm, 2 robotic arms, and 1 conventional assistant port. An additional robotic arm was placed on the right side of the patient's abdomen for the 4-arm robotic approach. The mean age, body mass index, cell type, Fédération Internationale de Gynécologie et d'Obstétrique stage, and type of surgery were not significantly different between the 2 cohorts. The 3-arm approach showed favorable outcomes over the 4-arm approach in terms of postoperative pain at 6 and 24 hours (3.8 ± 1.8 vs 4.5 ± 1.7 and 2.8 ± 1.7 vs 3.4 ± 1.6, respectively; p = .033 and .049) and postoperative hemoglobin difference (1.8 ± 0.9 vs 2.6 ± 1.3 and 1.9 ± 1.1 vs 2.4 ± 0.9 on days 1 and 3, respectively; p = .002 and .004). The median length of postoperative hospital stay, total operative time, docking time, lymph node yield, and intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were comparable between the 2 cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Surgical outcomes and complications rates of RRH for cervical cancer using the 4-arm approach were comparable with that of the 3-arm approach with decreased early postoperative pain in the 3-arm group. Cost-benefit analysis and the impact on surgical training are needed in the future.

Muscular workload of veterinary students during simulated open and laparoscopic surgery: A pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To compare upper extremity muscle activity and workload between simulated open surgery, multiple port laparoscopic surgery (MLS), and single incision laparoscopic surgery (SLS) techniques in veterinary students.

STUDY DESIGN

Pilot study.

POPULATION

Veterinary students (n = 10) from years 1 to 4.

METHODS

Bipolar skin surface electrodes were fixed bilaterally to the forearm flexor, forearm extensor, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, and upper trapezius muscles. Electromyography data were recorded during one repetition of 2 simulated surgical exercises via open surgery, MLS, and SLS. Participants completed a validated workload survey after each simulated surgical technique. Muscle activity and perceived workload were compared between surgical techniques with 1-way ANOVAs and Fisher's LSD post hoc tests.

RESULTS

Muscle activity during peg transfer was higher with MLS and SLS compared to simulated open surgery in the right and left forearm extensors (both P < .0001), right (P < .0001) and left biceps (P = .0005), right triceps (P = .0004), and right upper trapezius muscles (P = .0211). Similar results were found for the right and left forearm extensors (both P < .0001), right (P = .0381) and left (P = .0147) forearm flexors, right biceps (P < .0001), and right triceps (P = .0004) during a simulated suture task. Participants found laparoscopic techniques more mentally demanding, physically demanding, complex, and stressful compared to a simulated open surgical technique.

CONCLUSION

In veterinary students, average muscle activity and perceived workload were highest using MLS and SLS compared to an open surgical technique when performing simulated surgical exercises in a laparoscopic box trainer.

Robotic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic cholecystectomy is a novel approach that offers the surgeon improved high-definition, 3-dimensional views and enhanced instrument ergonomics, which represent a technical development from previous operative platforms that include conventional and single-incision laparoscopy. This review compares its short-term outcomes with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy by a meta-analysis.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed databases (January 1990-October 2015). Studies identified were appraised with standard selection criteria. Data were extracted and a meta-analysis performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, 12 retrospective trials and one randomized controlled trial comprising 1,589 patients (laparoscopic cholecystectomy, n = 921; robotic cholecystectomy, n = 668) were examined. There was a trend of a greater median total operative time (115.3 min vs 128.0 min; pooled MD = 31.22, 95% confidence interval = -2.48 to 59.96; Z = 2.13; P = .03) and preoperative time (32.4 min vs 53.4 min; pooled MD = 20.98, 95% confidence interval = 15.74 to 26.23; Z = 7.84; P < .001) in the robotic cholecystectomy group. Intraoperative complications (P = .52), conversion rate (P = .06), estimated blood loss (P = .55), postoperative complications (P = .28), duration of hospital stay (P = .36), and readmission rate (P = .85) were similar between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Robotic cholecystectomy is associated with greater operative times related primarily to the preparatory phase of the operation but with similar safety and perioperative outcome as conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. For it to gain acceptance, future studies are required to define specific measures to quantify equipment benefits to the surgeon and to evaluate the potential advantage of its use in the acute setting.

Advances in Laparoscopic Surgery

Recently, a new platform of abdominal access, called single-port surgery, has emerged in human and veterinary laparoscopy. The single-port platform enables all laparoscopic instruments, including the telescope, to pass individually through the same abdominal incision. Recently, there have been several published reports documenting the efficacy and safety of single-port procedures in veterinary patients. This article discusses the common single-port devices and instrumentation, as well as procedures now routinely offered in veterinary minimally invasive surgery.

Single-incision laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh repair for the treatment of multiple recurrent inguinal hernias

Introduction:

Despite an exponential rise in laparoscopic surgery for inguinal herniorrhaphy, overall recurrence rates have remained unchanged. Therefore, an increasing number of patients present with recurrent hernias after having failed anterior and laparoscopic repairs. This study reports our experience with single-incision laparoscopic (SIL) intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair for these hernias.

Materials and methods:

All patients referred with multiply recurrent inguinal hernias underwent SIL-IPOM from November 1 2009 to October 30 2013. A 2.5-cm infraumbilical incision was made and a SIL surgical port was placed intraperitoneally. Modified dissection techniques, namely, “chopsticks” and “inline” dissection, 5.5 mm/52 cm/30° angled laparoscope and conventional straight dissecting instruments were used. The peritoneum was incised above the symphysis pubis and dissection continued laterally and proximally raising an inferior flap, below a previous extraperitoneal mesh, while reducing any direct/indirect/femoral/cord lipoma before placement of antiadhesive mesh that was fixed into the pubic ramus as well as superiorly with nonabsorbable tacks before fixing its inferior border with fibrin sealant. The inferior peritoneal flap was then tacked back onto the mesh.

Results:

There were 9 male patients who underwent SIL-IPOM. Mean age was 55 years old and mean body mass index was 26.8 kg/m². Mean mesh size was 275 cm². Mean operation time was 125 minutes with hospital stay of 1 day and umbilical scar length of 21 mm at 4 weeks' follow-up. There were no intraoperative/postoperative complications, port-site hernias, chronic groin pain, or recurrence with mean follow-up of 20 months.

Conclusions:

Multiply recurrent inguinal hernias after failed conventional anterior and laparoscopic repairs can be treated safely and efficiently with SIL-IPOM.

Outcomes in laparoscopic cholecystectomy by single incision with SPIDER surgical system are comparable to conventional multiport technique: one surgeon's experience

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy has emerged as an alternative to conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Technical difficulty, prolonged surgical times and increased complication rates have been reported in single-incision laparoscopic surgery. One of the concerns is lack of triangulation of instruments. The SPIDER^® surgical system is a single-incision laparoscopic device that utilizes flexible instruments with the purpose of achieving adequate triangulation. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of SPIDER versus LC.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent LC and SPIDER cholecystectomy by a single surgeon during a concurrent 44-month period at Baptist Health South Florida hospitals was performed focusing on demographics, indication for surgery, complications and incisional hernia rates. Exclusion criteria were concomitant surgery and hernia repair at the time of surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 612 patients underwent minimally invasive cholecystectomy: 279 cases for SPIDER cholecystectomy and 333 for multiport LC. Baseline differences in patient characteristics between the SPIDER and LC groups were statistically significant. The SPIDER group had younger and healthier patients (lower ASA classification scores) with predominant diagnosis of cholelithiasis (69 %) compared to the LC group which had more complex cases. Total complications rate for both SPIDER and LC were 0.4 % (n = 1) and 3 % (n = 10), respectively. Conversion to open cholecystectomy occurred in one patient from the LC group (0.3 %). Conversion rate from SPIDER to additional ports or LC was performed in 5 cases (1.8 %) with no conversions to open surgery. Hemoperitoneum was reported in 2 cases, one for each approach, requiring reoperation.

CONCLUSION

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with SPIDER is a safe and feasible technique with similar outcomes to multiport LC. However, statistical significant difference was reported in baseline characteristics of both groups. No incisional hernias were reported in this case series for either technique.

Diagnosis and treatment of cholelithiasis: A review based on meta-analyses

Cholelithiasis is common disease whose diagnosis and treatment are important for doctors. Nowadays, main diagnostic methods include X-ray, ultrasonography, CT and MRI. Major treatments are surgical and endoscopic approaches. With evidence based medicine developing, more and more meta-analyses, which provide much best evidence, are reported. By means of summarizing these meta-analyses, we provide the best evidence for clinicians to update their knowledge on the diagnosis and treatment of cholelithiasis.

Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review

AIM: To review current applications of the laparoscopic surgery while highlighting the standard procedures across different fields.

METHODS: A comprehensive search was undertaken using the PubMed Advanced Search Builder. A total of 321 articles were found in this search. The following criteria had to be met for the publication to be selected: Review article, randomized controlled trials, or meta-analyses discussing the subject of laparoscopic surgery. In addition, publications were hand-searched in the Cochrane database and the high-impact journals. A total of 82 of the findings were included according to matching the inclusion criteria. Overall, 403 full-text articles were reviewed. Of these, 218 were excluded due to not matching the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS: A total of 185 relevant articles were identified matching the search criteria for an overview of the current literature on the laparoscopic surgery. Articles covered the period from the first laparoscopic application through its tremendous advancement over the last several years. Overall, the biggest advantage of the procedure has been minimizing trauma to the abdominal wall compared with open surgery. In the case of cholecystectomy, fundoplication, and adrenalectomy, the procedure has become the gold standard without being proven as a superior technique over the open surgery in randomized controlled trials. Faster recovery, reduced hospital stay, and a quicker return to normal activities are the most evident advantages of the laparoscopic surgery. Positive outcomes, efficiency, a lower rate of wound infections, and reduction in the perioperative morbidity of minimally invasive procedures have been shown in most indications.

CONCLUSION: Improvements in surgical training and developments in instruments, imaging, and surgical techniques have greatly increased safety and feasibility of the laparoscopic surgical procedures.

A multicenter study of initial experience with single-incision robotic cholecystectomies (SIRC) demonstrating a high success rate in 465 cases

BACKGROUND

Recently, the robotic single-site platform has been used to ameliorate the difficulties seen in single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILC) while preserving the benefits of standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The purpose of this study is to describe the clinical outcomes of a large series of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC).

METHODS

Medical records of consecutive patients who underwent SIRC were retrospectively reviewed. All procedures were performed by six surgeons at five different North American centers involved in the study. All patients included in the study underwent a cholecystectomy attempted through single site at the umbilicus, using the da Vinci(®) Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Inc. Sunnyvale, CA).

RESULTS

A total of 465 patients met study criteria. Median age was 48 years (range 18-89); 351 (75.5 %) were female and 304 (66.4 %) were overweight or obese. Except for gender, case characteristics differed significantly by surgeon/site. Previous abdominal surgery was reported for 226 (48.6 %) cases. SIRC was successfully completed in 455 (97.8 %) cases, and there were no conversions to open surgery. Median surgical time was 52 min with a decreasing trend after 55-85 cases. Male gender, obesity and diagnoses other than biliary dyskinesia were independent predictors of longer surgical times. The complication rate was 2.6 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Our large, multicenter study demonstrates that robotic single-site cholecystectomy is safe and feasible in a wide range of patients.

New minimally invasive approaches for cholecystectomy: Review of literature

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the most commonly performed abdominal intervention in Western countries. In an attempt to reduce the invasiveness of the procedure, surgeons have developed single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC), minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). The aim of this review was to determine the role of these new minimally invasive approaches for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of gallstone related disease. Current literature remains insufficient for the correct assessment of emerging techniques for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. None of these procedures has demonstrated clear benefits over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. SILC cannot be currently recommended as it can be associated with an increased risk of bile duct injury and incisional hernia incidence. NOTES cholecystectomy is still experimental, although hybrid transvaginal cholecystectomy is gaining popularity in clinical practice. As it is standardized and almost identical to the standard laparoscopic technique, MLC could lead to limited benefits without exposing patients to increased postoperative complications, being therefore adoptable for routine elective cholecystectomy. Technical challenges of SILC and NOTES cholecystectomy could be addressed with the evolution of new surgical tools that need to catch up with the innovative minds of surgeons. Regardless the place of these approaches in the future, robotization may be necessary to impose them as standard treatment.

Single incision cholecystectomy using a clipless technique with LigaSure in a resource limited environment: The Bahamas experience

•

SILC in the third world.

•

The addition of LigaSure to enhance procedure.

•

Look at feasibility.

•

Look at cost different.

Background

Scarless/single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is a new procedure. It affords a superior cosmetic outcome when compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We examine the application of this technique using LigaSure via a clipless method. The present study looks at the experience of a single surgeon using this method with initial evaluation of the safety, feasibility, affordability, and benefits of this procedure.

Methods

Twenty-eight patients underwent transumbilical SILC at Doctors Hospital from January to December, 2014. The cohort included both emergency and elective patients. There was no difference in the preoperative work-up as indicated. To perform the operation, a 2–2.5-cm linear incision was made through the umbilicus and the single port platform utilized. A 10 mm 30-degree laparoscope, a 5 mm LigaSure and straight instruments were used to perform the laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure.

Results

All patients except two were operated on successfully. Conversion was considered the placement of an additional epigastric/Right upper quadrant (RUQ) port. The conversion rate to standard LC was 7%. No patient was converted to open cholecystectomy. In the 28 successfully completed patients, the median duration of the operation was 38.5 min and estimated operative blood loss was 24 ml. Patients were commenced on liquid diet immediately on being fully conscious and after return to the ward with an estimated time of 6 h. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.4 days. Follow-up visits were conducted for all patients at 2-weeks intervals and continued for 6 weeks after surgery where possible. Two patients developed wound infections. All patients were satisfied with the good cosmetic effect of the surgery. The total satisfaction rate was 100%.

Conclusions

SILC is a safe and feasible technique for operating with scarless outcomes and reducing perioperative discomfort at the same time. The GelPOINTTM is a safe and feasible platform to be used. The procedure can be accomplished using regular instruments and laparoscope. Curved instruments and a bariatric length laparoscope may make the procedure easier and result in greater time saving. The addition of LigaSure™ decreases the complexity of the operation, decreases operative time and blood loss. The technique is economical in a resource-limited environment.

Single-port onlay mesh repair of recurrent inguinal hernias after failed anterior and laparoscopic repairs

Background and Objectives:

Despite the exponential increase in the use of laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy, overall recurrence rates have remained unchanged. Therefore, a growing number of patients are presenting with recurrent hernias after conventional anterior and laparoscopic repairs have failed. This study reports our experience with single-incision laparoscopic (SIL) intraperitoneal onlay mesh (IPOM) repair of these hernias.

Methods:

Patients referred with two or more recurrences of inguinal hernia underwent SIL-IPOM from November 1, 2009, to June 24, 2014. A 2.5-cm infraumbilical incision was made, and an SIL port was placed intraperitoneally. Modified dissection techniques were used: chopstick and inline dissection, 5.5-mm/52-cm/30° angled laparoscope, and conventional straight dissecting instruments. The peritoneum was incised above the pubic symphysis, and dissection was continued laterally and proximally, raising the inferior flap below the previous extraperitoneal mesh while reducing any direct, indirect, femoral, or cord lipoma before placement of antiadhesive mesh, which was fixed to the pubic ramus, as well as superiorly, with nonabsorbable tacks before the inferior border was fixed with fibrin sealant. The inferior peritoneal flap was then tacked back onto the mesh.

Results:

Nine male patients underwent SIL-IPOM. Their mean age was 53 years and mean body mass index was 26.8 kg/m². Mean mesh size was 275 cm². Mean operation time was 125 minutes, with a hospital stay of 1 day. The umbilical scar length was 23 mm at the 6-week follow-up. There were no intra-/postoperative complications, port-site hernias, chronic groin pain, or recurrence of the hernia during a mean follow-up of 24 months.

Conclusion:

Inguinal hernias recurring after two or more failed conventional anterior and laparoscopic repairs can be safely and efficiently treated with SIL-IPOM.

No difference in incidence of port-site hernia and chronic pain after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a nationwide prospective, matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) is regarded as the gold standard for cholecystectomy. However, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) has been suggested to replace CLC. This study aimed at comparing long-term incidences of port-site hernia and chronic pain after SLC versus CLC.

METHODS

We conducted a matched cohort study based on prospective data (Jan 1, 2009-June 1, 2011) from the Danish Cholecystectomy Database with perioperative information and clinical follow-up. Consecutive patients undergoing elective SLC during the study period were included and matched 1:2 with patients subjected to CLC using pre-defined criteria. Follow-up data were obtained from the Danish National Patient Registry, mailed patient questionnaires, and clinical examination. A port-site hernia was defined as a repair for a port-site hernia or clinical hernia located at one or more port sites.

RESULTS

In total, 699 patients were eligible and 147 patients were excluded from the analysis due to pre-defined criteria. The rate of returned questionnaires was 83%. Thus, 552 (SLC, n = 185; CLC, n = 367) patients were analyzed. The median observation time was 48 months (range 1-65) after SLC and 48 months (1-64) after CLC (P = 0.940). The total cumulated port-site hernia rate was 4 % and 6 % for SLC and CLC, respectively (P = 0.560). Incidences of moderate/severe chronic pain were 4 % and 5 % after SLC and CLC, respectively (P = 0.661).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no difference in long-term incidence of port-site hernia or chronic pain after SLC versus CLC.

Short-term surgical outcomes of reduced port surgery for esophageal achalasia

PURPOSE

To clarify the feasibility and utility of reduced port surgery (RPS) for achalasia.

METHODS

Between September 2005 and June 2013, 359 patients with esophageal achalasia, excluding cases of reoperation, underwent laparoscopic Heller myotomy and Dor fundoplication (LHD) according to our clinical pathway. Three-hundred and twenty-seven patients underwent LHD with five incisions (conventional approach), while the other 32 patients underwent RPS, including eight via SILS. The clinical data were collected in a prospective fashion and retrospectively reviewed. We selected 24 patients matched for gender, age and morphologic type with patients in the RPS group from among the 327 patients (C group). The surgical outcomes were compared between the C and RPS groups.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in the duration of symptoms, dysphagia score, chest pain score, shape of the distal esophagus and esophageal clearance. The operative time was significantly longer in the RPS group than in the C group (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the length of postoperative hospital stay or rates of bleeding, mucosal injury of the esophagus and/or stomach and postoperative complications. The symptom scores significantly improved after surgery in both groups (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the C group and RPS group in terms of the postoperative symptom scores or satisfaction scores after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The surgical outcomes of RPS for achalasia are comparable to those obtained with the conventional method.

[Mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy as an innovative method in minimally invasive abdominal surgery]

INTRODUCTION

In our study, we applied a mini-laparosopic approach during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) (using the minimum size of trocars with the simultaneous intention to reduce their number). The advantages and disadvantages of the mini-LC approach were compared with those of traditional LC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

During mini-LC procedures, we used 3 ports (11 mm, 5 mm, 3.5 mm). Mini-LC was performed in 10 patients, and the results were compared with those of 10 cases of traditional LCs. The two groups were homogenous in terms of gender, age, BMI and ASA classification. Comparison criteria included operative time, the need to use an extra port, conversion rate, oral analgesic requirement, early/late complications and cosmetic results.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in terms of operative time, blood loss, hospital stay and complications. Cumulative size of incisions was 19.5 mm with mini-LC- and 41 mm in the LC group, respectively, and the tissue injury was 124.2 mm(2) and 448.2 mm(2). Cosmetic results of mini-LC were highly improved by these values. Increased oral analgetic requirements were detected in LC group.

CONCLUSION

Mini-LC is a safe procedure with outstanding cosmetic results accompanied by less oral analgetic requirements. In selected patients, it can be recommended as an alternative method of traditional LC.

Minimal access laparoscopic surgery for treatment of ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis coli in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic restorative proctocolectomy is standard surgical treatment for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and familial adenomatous polyposis coli (FAP). Scar burden can be minimized by reducing the number of laparoscopic ports. The aim of this study is to review the authors' experience with reduced-port laparoscopy in this setting and to compare it with conventional laparoscopy using multiple ports.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Charts of pediatric patients undergoing colectomy for UC or FAP between 2009 and 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who had the operation performed through one or two multichannel ports were assigned to the minimal access (MA) study group. Patients who had four or five single-channel ports with or without an additional small laparotomy were assigned to the LAP group.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients were identified. Ages at first operation were 2-18 years (median, 13.5 years). There were no conversions to laparotomy and no mortality. Mean operative times for the MA and LAP groups, respectively, were 250 and 284 minutes for abdominal colectomy with end ileostomy (P=.15), 198 and 301 minutes for completion proctectomy with diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) (P=.26), and 455 and 414 minutes for proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and DLI (P=.72). A major complication requiring laparotomy occurred in 1 patient (9%) in the MA group and in 2 patients (18%) in the LAP group.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimal access laparoscopic surgery for UC and FAP is safe and feasible. A slightly larger incision at the ostomy site facilitates extraction of the specimen and extracorporeal construction of a J-pouch. Operative times and hospital stay are comparable to those with multiport laparoscopy.

Single-access laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery using the glove technique

INTRODUCTION

Single-access laparoscopic surgery has been widely adopted in many kinds of surgery including laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic colectomy. Performing single-access rectal surgery, however, has technical drawbacks such as instrument collision and endostaple application issues. The glove technique is likely to mitigate these problems.

METHODS

Fourteen patients with anal canal to mid-rectum cancers were recruited and underwent single-access laparoscopic surgery via the glove technique. An incision was made at the paraumbilicus to insert a wound protector with surgical gloves. The operation was medial to lateral and inferior mesenteric artery and inferior mesenteric vein were identified and controlled. Total mesorectal excision was performed while keeping traction and countertraction down to the pelvic floor.

RESULTS

Average operative time was 251.66 min (range, 180-300 min). Hospital stay ranged from 5 to 8 days (median, 7 days). No serious early postoperative surgical problems related to complications were observed. The pathologic results showed good mesorectal capsule grading. The mean lymph node harvest was 14 nodes (range, 7-26 nodes), and the mean wound length was 5 cm (range, 4-6 cm).

CONCLUSIONS

In rectal surgery, the glove technique for single-access laparoscopic surgery is feasible and is comparable to commercial single-port techniques in terms of oncologic results.

Peritoneal adhesions after laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery

Although laparoscopy has the potential to reduce peritoneal trauma and post-operative peritoneal adhesion formation, only one randomized controlled trial and a few comparative retrospective clinical studies have addressed this issue. Laparoscopy reduces de novo adhesion formation but has no efficacy in reducing adhesion reformation after adhesiolysis. Moreover, several studies have suggested that the reduction of de novo post-operative adhesions does not seem to have a significant clinical impact. Experimental data in animal models have suggested that CO₂ pneumoperitoneum can cause acute peritoneal inflammation during laparoscopy depending on the insufflation pressure and the surgery duration. Broad peritoneal cavity protection by the insufflation of a low-temperature humidified gas mixture of CO₂, N₂O and O₂ seems to represent the best approach for reducing peritoneal inflammation due to pneumoperitoneum. However, these experimental data have not had a significant impact on the modification of laparoscopic instrumentation. In contrast, surgeons should train themselves to perform laparoscopy quickly, and they should complete their learning curves before testing chemical anti-adhesive agents and anti-adhesion barriers. Chemical anti-adhesive agents have the potential to exert broad peritoneal cavity protection against adhesion formation, but when these agents are used alone, the concentrations needed to prevent adhesions are too high and could cause major post-operative side effects. Anti-adhesion barriers have been used mainly in open surgery, but some clinical data from laparoscopic surgeries are already available. Sprays, gels, and fluid barriers are easier to apply in laparoscopic surgery than solid barriers. Results have been encouraging with solid barriers, spray barriers, and gel barriers, but they have been ambiguous with fluid barriers. Moreover, when barriers have been used alone, the maximum protection against adhesion formation has been no greater than 60%. A recent small, randomized clinical trial suggested that the combination of broad peritoneal cavity protection with local application of a barrier could be almost 100% effective in preventing post-operative adhesion formation. Future studies should confirm the efficacy of this global strategy in preventing adhesion formation after laparoscopy by focusing on clinical end points, such as reduced incidences of bowel obstruction and abdominal pain and increased fertility.

Tips for single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) is an emerging technique and gaining increased attention by its superiority in cosmesis. A 1.5-cm vertical transumbilical incision is used for the single port, followed by the glove method. Indications for SPLC are the same as those for standard 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, including patients with morbid obesity, previous upper abdominal surgery, severe acute cholecystitis, or suspected presence of common bile duct stones. Some randomized controlled trials have shown negative results of SPLC regarding operative time, wound-related complications, and postoperative pain. However, our retrospective analysis shows equivalent clinical outcomes among the two approaches in terms of postoperative pain and complications. In this context, SPLC can be a good option for gallbladder pathologies.

The efficacy and safety of different kinds of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a network meta analysis of 43 randomized controlled trials

Background and Objective

We conducted a network meta analysis (NMA) to compare different kinds of laparoscopic cholecystectomy [LC] (single port [SPLC], two ports [2PLC], three ports [3PLC], and four ports laparoscopic cholecystectomy [4PLC], and four ports mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy [mini-4PLC]).

Methods

PubMed, the Cochrane library, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched to find randomized controlled trials [RCTs]. Direct pair-wise meta analysis (DMA), indirect treatment comparison meta analysis (ITC) and NMA were conducted to compare different kinds of LC.

Results

We included 43 RCTs. The risk of bias of included studies was high. DMA showed that SPLC was associated with more postoperative complications, longer operative time, and higher cosmetic score than 4PLC, longer operative time and higher cosmetic score than 3PLC, more postoperative complications than mini-4PLC. Mini-4PLC was associated with longer operative time than 4PLC. ITC showed that 3PLC was associated with shorter operative time than mini-4PLC, and lower postoperative pain level than 2PLC. 2PLC was associated with fewer postoperative complications and longer hospital stay than SPLC. NMA showed that SPLC was associated with more postoperative complications than mini-4PLC, and longer operative time than 4PLC.

Conclusion

The rank probability plot suggested 4PLC might be the worst due to the highest level of postoperative pain, longest hospital stay, and lowest level of cosmetic score. The best one might be mini-4PLC because of highest level of cosmetic score, and fewest postoperative complications, or SPLC because of lowest level of postoperative pain and shortest hospital stay. But more studies are needed to determine which will be better between mini-4PLC and SPLC.

Single incision versus standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: up-dated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We aimed to compare single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) to the standard multiport technique (MLC) for clinically relevant outcomes in adults.

METHODS

Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of randomized trials.

RESULTS

We identified 30 trials (SILC N = 1209, MLC N = 1202) mostly of moderate to low quality. Operating time (30 trials): longer with SILC (WMD = 12.4 min, 95% CI 9.3, 15.5; p < 0.001), but difference reduced with experience - in 10 large trials (1321 patients) WMD = 5.9 (-1.3, 13.1; p = 0.105). Intra-operative blood loss (12 trials, 1201 patients): greater with SILC, but difference practically irrelevant (WMD = 1.29 mL, 0.24-2.35; p = 0.017). Procedure failure (27 trials, 2277 patients): more common with SILC (OR = 13.9, 4.34-44.7; p < 0.001), but overall infrequent (SILC pooled incidence 4.39%) and almost exclusively addition of a trocar. Post-operative pain (29 trials) and hospital stay (22 trials): no difference. Complications (30 trials): infrequent (SILC pooled incidence 5.35%) with no overall SILC vs. MLC difference. Incisional hernia (19 trials, 1676 patients): very rare (15 vs. 4 cases), but odds significantly higher with SILC (OR = 4.94, 1.26-19.4; p = 0.025). Cosmetic satisfaction (16 trials, 11 with data at 1-3 months): in 5 trials with non-blinded patients (N = 513) in favour of SILC (SMD = 1.83, 0.13, 3.52; p = 0.037), but in 6 trials with blinded patients (N = 719) difference small and insignificant (SMD = 0.42, -1.12, 1.96; p = 0.548).

DISCUSSION

SILC outcomes largely depend on surgeon's skill, but regardless of it, when compared to MLC, SILC requires somewhat longer operating time, risk of incisional hernia is higher (but overall very low) and early cosmetic benefit is modest.

CONCLUSION

From the (in)convenience and safety standpoint, SILC is an acceptable alternative to MLC with a modest cosmetic benefit.