Systematic review of single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer

Long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy for right-sided colon cancer utilising a craniocaudal approach

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) for right-sided colon cancer (CC) using a craniocaudal approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The data of patients who underwent SILC for right-sided CC at our hospital between January 2013 and December 2022 were retrospectively collected. Surgery was performed using a craniocaudal approach. Short- and long-term operative outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 269 patients (127 men, 142 women; median age 74 years) underwent SILC for right-sided CC. The cases included ileocaecal resection ( n = 138) and right hemicolectomy ( n = 131). The median operative time was 154 min, and the median operative blood loss was 0 ml. Twenty-seven cases (10.0%) required an additional laparoscopic trocar, and 9 (3.3%) were converted to open surgery. The Clavien-Dindo classification Grade III post-operative complications were detected in 7 (2.6%) cases. SILC was performed by 25 surgeons, including inexperienced surgeons, with a median age of 34 years. The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 96.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.3%-98.2%), and CSS per pathological disease stage was 100% for Stages 0-I and II and 86.2% (95% CI 71.3%-93.7%) for Stage III. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 90.6% (95% CI 85.7%-93.9%), and RFS per pathological disease stage was 100% for Stage 0-I, 91.7% (95% CI 80.5%-96.6%) for Stage II and 76.1% (95% CI 63.0%-85.1%) for Stage III.

CONCLUSIONS

SILC for right-sided CC can be safely performed with a craniocaudal approach, with reasonable short- and long-term outcomes.

Single incision laparoscopy versus conventional multiport laparoscopy for colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There has been an increase in colorectal cancer resections worldwide and in the UK. Initially conducted as an open procedure, this was replaced with the conventional multiport technique. Laparoscopic colectomy became the standard surgical technique in 1991. With innovation in surgical technology, single incision laparoscopy (SIL) has attracted more attention as the possible next step in colorectal resection. The aim of this review was to compare outcomes between SIL and conventional laparoscopy (CL).

METHODS

A literature search was carried out in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The PubMed®, MEDLINE®, Embase®, Google Scholar™ and Cochrane Library databases were used to extract randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 2000 and May 2021. Statistical analysis was performed with RevMan software.

RESULTS

A total of 11 RCTs were extracted with 1,370 patients (686 SIL, 684 CL). There was no significant difference between SIL and CL for operative time (standardised mean difference [SMD]: 0.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.19 to 0.22, z=0.11, p=0.91), length of hospital stay (SMD: -0.10, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.02, z=1.61, p=0.11) or overall complications (odds ratio [OR]: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.75 to 1.30, z=0.09, p=0.93). SIL had a shorter mean incision (SMD: -0.99, 95% CI: -1.35 to -0.62, z=5.25, p<0.00001). Patients undergoing SIL had a higher conversion rate to CL or an open approach (OR: 3.10, 95% CI: 0.95 to 10.14, z=1.87, p=0.06) but this just missed statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

SIL can be considered a safe alternative to CL if performed by experienced surgeons.

Long-term oncological outcome of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (single-incision plus one port) as a technical option for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to clarify the oncological safety of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (single-incision plus one port) (RPS) for patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

The clinicopathological data of 63 selected patients with clinical Stage I-III (T1-3 and N0-2) rectal cancer who underwent RPS of radical anterior resection between 2012 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The median distance of tumor from anal verge was 11 cm. Ordinarily, a multiport platform with three channels was placed in the 3-cm umbilical incision, and another 5- or 12-mm port was placed in the right lower abdomen.

RESULTS

The median operative time, amount of intraoperative bleeding, number of harvested lymph nodes, and length of distal margin were 272 min, 10 mL, 22 nodes, and 4.0 cm, respectively, and there was one (2%) patient with involvement of the radial margin. There were eight patients (13%) who required additional ports, and one patient (2%) who converted to open surgery. Intra- and postoperative complications occurred in one (2%) and 12 patients (19%), respectively. The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 8 days. The median follow-up period was 79 months, and incisional hernia was observed in 3 (5%) patients at the platform site not the port site, and cancer recurrence occurred in four patients (6%). The 5-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were 100% and 100% in the patients with pathological Stage I disease, 94% and 100% in the patients with pathological Stage II disease, and 83% and 89% in the patients with pathological Stage III disease, respectively.

CONCLUSION

RPS in the selected patients with rectal cancer, performed by an expert laparoscopic surgeon, may be technically safe and oncologically acceptable as well as multiport laparoscopic surgery.

International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons survey of surgeons' preference on rectal cancer treatment

PURPOSE

Rectal cancer treatment has a wide range of possible approaches from radical extirpative surgery to nonoperative watchful waiting following chemoradiotherapy, with or without, additional chemotherapy. Our goal was to assess the personal opinion of active practicing surgeons on rectal cancer treatment if he/she was the patient.

METHODS

A panel of the International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ISUCRS) selected 10 questions that were included in a questionnaire that included other items including demographics. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to ISUCRS fellows and other surgeons included in our database and remained open from April 16 to 28, 2020.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-three specialists completed the survey. The majority of surgeons (n=65, 39.9%) chose the minimally invasive (laparoscopic) surgery for their personal treatment of rectal cancer. For low-lying rectal cancer T1 and T2, the treatment choice was standard chemoradiation+local excision (n=60, 36.8%) followed by local excision±chemoradiotherapy if needed (n=55, 33.7%). In regards to locally advanced low rectal cancer T3 or greater, the preference of the responders was for laparoscopic surgery (n=65, 39.9%). We found a statistically significant relationship between surgeons' age and their preference for minimally invasive techniques demonstrating an age-based bias on senior surgeons' inclination toward open approach.

CONCLUSION

Our survey reveals an age-based preference by surgeons for minimally invasive surgical techniques as well as organ-preserving techniques for personal treatment of treating rectal cancer. Only 1/4 of specialists do adhere to the international guidelines for treating early rectal cancer.

Single incision laparoscopic appendectomy with surgical-glove port is cost-effective and reliable in complicated acute appendicitis: A casecontrol multicenter study in Colombia

Background

The single-port (SPL) and multi-port (MPL) laparoscopic approach are the gold standard of management of acute appendicitis, due to its multiple advantages over open surgery, mainly because of its direct effects on recovery, esthetics and costs of the procedure. However, in third-world countries, the laparoscopic approach is not yet fully reproducible due to the costs of the technique. The surgical-glove port single incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SGP-SILA) has been proposed as a viable option. However, it has never been studied in Colombia.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and reliability of SGP-SILA in the management of complicated acute appendicitis, compared to traditional MPL approach.

Materials and methods

A retrospective case control study was carried out comparing patients undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy by SGP-SILA vs. MPL, evaluating operating costs associated with intraoperative and postoperative variables in two tertiary centers in Bogota, Colombia. The data were analyzed and expressed according to their nature and distribution.

Results

116 patients were included (SGP-SILA: 62 and MPL: 54). The median surgical time for SGP-SILA was 60 min vs. 39 min for MPL. SGP-SILA was shown to cause lower frequency of surgical site infection (4 vs. 8 patients; p = 0.047). It was found a significant correlation between Grade III surgical site infection and surgery time (p = 0.047) in the MPL group; also, with hospital stay (p < 0.001). Also, a lower risk of surgical site infection was found with the SGP-SILA technique (22% vs. 31%). SGP-SILA generated a reduction in both direct and indirect operating costs of approximately 10% (616 USD vs. 683 USD).

Conclusion

SGP-SILA and MPL are feasible and comparable procedures in the resolution of complicated acute appendicitis. SGP-SILA turns out to be more cost-effective compared to MPL, due to the use of more easily accessible instruments. This may be a reproducible technique in low- and middle-income countries.

Early return to work: Single-port vs. multiport laparoscopic surgery for benign ovarian tumor

Objective

To compare the return to work (RTW) time between single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for benign ovarian tumors.

Methods

A cross-sectional cohort study was conducted, which consisted of 335 women of reproductive age with benign ovarian tumors and who were keen on returning to work as early as possible. Surgical outcomes, postoperative pain score, postoperative satisfaction with the cosmesis score (CS), and the RTW time of the SPLS group were compared with those of the MPLS group. Besides, the RTW time and CS were calculated from the questionnaire survey by a single specialized gynecologist.

Results

Women who met the inclusion criteria were included in the SPLS (n = 106) and MPLS groups (n = 229). The RTW time in the SPLS group (22.13 ± 27. 06 days) was significantly shorter than that in the MPLS group (46.08 ± 57.86 days) (P &lt; 0.001). The multivariate Cox analysis results showed that age (HR = 0.984, 95% CI, 0.971−0.997, P = 0.020), SPLS (HR = 3.491, 95% CI, 2.422−5. 032, P &lt; 0.001), and return to normal activity time (HR = 0.980, 95% CI, 0.961−0.998, P = 0.029) were independent factors of the RTW time.

Conclusions

SPLS may be advantageous in terms of shortening the RTW time for women with benign ovarian tumors.

Comparison of clinical safety and feasibility between reduced-port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy and conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy: A retrospective study

Background

Traditional open gastric cancer surgery has evolved from porous to reduced-hole, single-hole, or even natural cavity surgery to laparoscopic surgery, due to the continuous development of minimally invasive concepts and medical technologies, as well as awareness for the concept of rapid recovery. Conventional laparoscopic radical gastrectomy is quite mature in age at the moment, but how to progress to minimally invasive surgery without increasing the difficulty of surgery while ensuring clinical safety and feasibility is worth further investigation. Therefore, the clinical safety and feasibility of reduced port laparoscopic radical gastrectomy were assessed in this study.

Methods

Information on the clinical data of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical gastric cancer surgery in a single centre between May 2020 and May 2022 was collected, and a total of 232 patients were included in this study according to the study protocol design. The clinical data of 232 patients with gastric cancer treated by two different surgical methods, namely, reduced port laparoscopic surgery (RPLS) or conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS), were retrospectively analysed. The intraoperative indices, postoperative pathological indices, and short-term postoperative complications (within 30 days) of the two different surgical methods were evaluated, as well as the surgical methods’ feasibility and short-term postoperative recovery effect.

Results

There was no significant difference between the general data of patients with RPLS and CLS (P &gt; 0.05). Compared with CLSG, the operation time, digestive tract reconstruction time and lymph node dissection time of RPLSG are shorter. The intraoperative blood loss was less, and the incision was minimally invasive (P &lt; 0.05). In the short-term postoperative effect, the level of white blood cell count on the first day, the time of getting out of bed, the time of removing drainage tube, the time of hospitalization and the VAS of pain on the first, third and fifth days after operation, RPLSG was obviously superior to CLSG (P &lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference between RPLSG and CLSG in terms of pathological indices (P &gt; 0.05).

Conclusions

The treatment of gastric cancer with RPLS has good safety, feasibility and short-term postoperative effects, which is in line with the implementation of the modern concept of rapid rehabilitation surgery.

The efficacy of ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis

Background

Protective ileostomy is always applied to avoid clinically significant anastomotic leakage and other postoperative complications for patients receiving laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. However, whether it is necessary to perform the ileostomy is still controversial. This meta-analysis aims to analyze the efficacy of ileostomy on laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

Methods

Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, and PubMed were applied for systematic search of all relevant literature, updated to May 07, 2021. Studies compared patients with and without ileostomy for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. We applied Review Manager software to perform this meta-analysis. The quality of the non-randomized controlled trials was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS), and the randomized studies were assessed using the Jadad scale.

Results

We collected a total of 1203 references, and seven studies were included using the research methods. The clinically significant anastomotic leakage rate was significantly lower in ileostomy group (27/567, 4.76%) than that in non-ileostomy group (54/525, 10.29%) (RR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.30–0.73, P for overall effect = 0.0009, P for heterogeneity = 0.18, I² = 32%). However, the postoperative hospital stay, reoperation, wound infection, and operation time showed no significant difference between the ileostomy and non-ileostomy groups.

Conclusion

The results demonstrated that protective ileostomy could decrease the clinically significant anastomotic leakage rate for patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. However, ileostomy has no effect on postoperative hospital stay, reoperation, wound infection, and operation time. The efficacy of ileostomy after laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery: a meta-analysis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-021-02432-x.

Oncologic long-term outcome of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been introduced as a less invasive alternative to multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MLS). MLS is widely accepted for the treatment of colorectal cancer, but there remains minimal evidence for the use of SILS. Thus, we compared both short- and long-term outcomes of SILS and open surgery (OS) in matched cohorts of colorectal cancer patients.

METHODS

Some 910 patients had colorectal resections for cancer between 2006 and 2013, and 134 of them were operated on using SILS. Eighty of these SILS patients were compared to a cohort of patients who had open surgery that were matching in tumour stage and location, type of resection, sex, age and ASA Score. Disease-free survival at 5 years (5y-DFS) was the primary endpoint; morbidity and hospitalization were secondary parameters. The role of surgical training in SILS was also investigated.

RESULTS

Clavien Dindo ≥ IIIb complications occurred in 13.8% in both groups. 5y-DSF were 82% after SILS and 70% after OS (p = 0.11). Local recurrence after rectal cancer tended to be lower after SILS (0/43 (SILS) vs. 4/35 (OS), p = 0.117). Length of stay was significantly shorter after SILS (10 vs. 14 days, p = 0.0004). The rate of operations performed by surgical residents was equivalent in both groups (44/80 (SILS) vs. 46/80 (OS), p = 0.75).

CONCLUSION

The data demonstrates that SILS results in similar long-term oncological outcomes when compared to open surgery as well as morbidity rates. The hospital stay in the SILS group was shorter. SILS can also be incorporated in surgical training programmes.

Short-term clinical and oncological outcomes after single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid cancer: a retrospective clinical analysis of 30 cases

Objective

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic surgery+1 (SILS+1) radical resection of sigmoid and upper rectal cancer.

Methods

The clinical data of 30 consecutive patients with sigmoid and upper rectal cancer who underwent SILS+1 radical resection between October 2018 and January 2020 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed. An initial 5-cm periumbilical transverse incision was made. Then, a multiport device was placed in the umbilical incision. Two 10-mm ports were used for laparoscope insertion, and the other two ports were used for laparoscope device insertion. A 12-mm trocar was placed in the right lower abdominal quadrant under laparoscopic view and served as the surgeon’s dominant operating channel.

Results

All operations were performed successfully without conversion to conventional laparoscopic surgery or open operation. Three patients developed postoperative complications: one patient developed ileus, one developed postoperative bleeding, and one developed wound infection. There were no perioperative deaths.

Conclusions

The safety and feasibility of SILS+1 radical resection of sigmoid and upper rectal cancer was established by experienced surgeons in our study. However, further studies are needed to demonstrate the advantages of this procedure compared with the benefits of conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies

PURPOSE

To compare single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and multiport laparoscopic surgery (MLS) for colorectal cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies comparing SILS and MLS for colorectal cancer were enrolled. Outcomes of interests included intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and survival outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies (6 RCTs and 10 PSM studies) published between 2012 and 2020 with a total of 2425 patients were enrolled. Compared with MLS, SILS was associated with less postoperative pain at postoperative day (POD) 1 (P = 0.02, MWD = -0.73, 95%CI: -1.37, -0.09) and POD2 (P < 0.001, MWD= -1.10, 95%CI: -1.45, -0.74) and shorter length of total incision length (P < 0.001, MWD = -3.31, 95%CI: -3.95, -2.67). No differences were observed in terms of operative time, blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative complications, incision hernia, and pathological or survival outcomes between SILS and MLS. Subgroup analysis for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid colon cancer showed that the SILS group was only associated with less postoperative pain and shorter total incision length. The surgical and pathological outcomes were comparable between SILS and MLS.

CONCLUSIONS

SILS is a beneficial alternative to MLS in select colorectal cancer patients, especially for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid cancer, with better cosmetic effects and less postoperative pain. Simultaneously, SILS does not compromise intraoperative and postoperative complications, surgical quality, or long-term outcomes.

Efficiency in image-guided robotic and conventional camera steering: a prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Robotic camera steering systems have been developed to facilitate endoscopic surgery. In this study, a randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare conventional human camera control with the AutoLap™ robotic camera holder in terms of efficiency and user experience when performing routine laparoscopic procedures. Novelty of this system relates to the steering method, which is image based.

METHODS

Patients undergoing an elective laparoscopic hemicolectomy, sigmoid resection, fundoplication and cholecystectomy between September 2016 and January 2018 were included. Stratified block randomization was used for group allocation. The primary aim of this study was to compare the efficiency of robotic and human camera control, measured with surgical team size and total operating time. Secondary outcome parameters were number of cleaning moments of the laparoscope and the post-study system usability questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were randomized to have robotic (50) versus human (50) camera control. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. In the robotic group, 49/50 (98%) of procedures were carried out without human camera control, reducing the surgical team size from four to three individuals. The median total operative time (60.0 versus 53.0 min, robotic vs. control) was not significantly different, p = 0.122. The questionnaire showed a positive user satisfaction and easy control of the robotic camera holder.

CONCLUSION

Image-based robotic camera control can reduce surgical team size and does not result in significant difference in operative time compared to human camera control. Moreover, robotic image-guided camera control was associated with positive user experience.

Comparison of Survival between Single-Access and Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery in Rectal Cancer

Introduction

Innovative laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer can be classified into 2 types: firstly, new instruments such as robotic surgery and secondly, new technique such as single-access laparoscopic surgery (SALS) and transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME). Most reports of SALS for rectal cancer have shown pathologic outcomes comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS); however, SALS is considered to be superior to CLS in terms of lower levels of discomfort and faster recovery rates. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes of the two approaches.

Methods

From 2011 to 2014, 84 cases of adenocarcinoma of the rectum and anal canal were enrolled. The operations were anterior, low anterior, intersphincteric, and abdominoperineal resections. Data collected included postoperative outcomes. The oncological outcomes recorded included 3-year and 5-year survival, local recurrence, and metastasis.

Results

SALS was performed on 41 patients, and CLS was utilized in 43 cases. The demographic data of the two groups were similar. Intraoperative volumes of blood loss and conversion rates were similar, but operative time was longer in the SALS group. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications or pathological outcomes. The oncologic results were similar in terms of 3-year survival (100% and 97.7%; p = 1.00), 5-year survival (78.0% and 86.0%; p = 0.401), local recurrence rates (19.5% vs 11.6%, p = 0.376), and metastasis rates (19.5% vs 11.6%; p = 0.376) for SALS and CLS, respectively.

Conclusion

SALS and CLS for rectal and anal cancer had comparable pathological and survival results, but SALS showed some superior benefits in the early postoperative period.

Is Single-Incision Laparoscopic Liver Surgery Safe and Efficient for the Treatment of Malignant Hepatic Tumors? A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The objective of this review was to evaluate the safety and efficiency of single-incision laparoscopic liver surgery (SILLS) for malignant liver lesions.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the Medline database was performed, including studies published up to February 2019.

RESULTS

Overall, 69 patients (50 males) with a median age of 61 years (range, 31-90) from 16 studies underwent SILLS for malignant liver disease and were included in this review. The majority of patients underwent resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 52, 75 %), followed by metastatic disease (n = 15, 22 %). The hepatic lesions were located in anterolateral liver segments in 62 patients (90 %) and in posterosuperior liver segments in 7 patients (10 %). Sixty-five patients (94 %) underwent minor liver resection. The median blood loss was 200 mL (range 0-2500), while 4 patients that underwent single-port resection were converted to either conventional laparoscopy or open resections. Two cases were reported to be associated with postoperative complications in the single-port group (1 [1.7 %] grade Dindo-Clavien I-II, 1 [1.7 %] grade Dindo-Clavien III-IV), while no complications were noted in the multiport group. All patients successfully underwent R0 resection.

CONCLUSIONS

SILLS seems to be a safe and efficient treatment modality for malignant liver disease when performed by experienced surgeons in carefully selected patients. More studies are needed to better identify which patients may benefit from such an operative approach.

Learning curve of surgical novices using the single-port platform SymphonX: minimizing OR trauma to only one 15-mm incision

Background

Minimally invasive single-port surgery is always associated with large incisions up to 2–3 cm, complicated handling due to the lack of triangulation, and instrument crossing. The aim of this prospective study was to report how medical students without any laparoscopic experience perform several laparoscopic tasks (rope pass, paper cut, peg transfer, recapping, and needle threading) with the new SymphonX single-port platform and to examine the learning curves in comparison to the laparoscopic multi-port technique.

Methods

A set of 5 laparoscopic skill tests (Rope Pass, Paper cut, Peg Transfer, Recapping, Needle Thread) were performed with 3 repetitions. Medical students performed all tests with both standard laparoscopic instruments and the new platform. Time and errors were recorded.

Results

A total of 114 medical students (61 females) with a median age of 23 years completed the study. All subjects were able to perform the skill tests with both standard laparoscopic multi-port and the single-port laparoscopic system and were able to significantly improve their performance over the three trials for all five tasks—rope pass (p < 0.001), paper cut (p < 0.001), peg transfer (p < 0.001), needle threading (p < 0.001), and recapping (p < 0.001). In 3 out of 5 tasks, medical students performed the tasks faster using the standard multi-port system—rope pass (p < 0.001), paper cut (p < 0.001), and peg transfer (p < 0.001). In the task recapping, medical students performed the task faster using the new single-port system (p = 0.003). In the task needle threading, there was no significant difference between the standard multi-port system and the new single-port system (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

This is the first study analyzing learning curves of the commercially available SymphonX platform for abdominal laparoscopic surgery when used by novices. The learning curve and the error rate are promising.

Feasibility of Single-Incision Plus One Port Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is a recently developed minimally invasive surgical technique. We aimed to compare the feasibility and safety of single-incision plus one port laparoscopic low anterior resection (S+1-LAR) with those of multi-port laparoscopic low anterior resection (M-LAR) for mid-to-low rectal cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patient characteristics and surgical outcomes by assessing data collected from the medical records of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic low anterior resection for mid-to-low rectal cancer at the Gangneung Asan Hospital.

RESULTS

From April 2015 to April 2019, 52 patients underwent S+1-LAR (n=28) or M-LAR (n=24) for mid-to-low rectal cancer at Gangneung Asan Hospital. There were no significant between-group differences in clinical characteristics. The mean postoperative 1-day pain score was significantly lower in the S+1-LAR group. Surgical outcomes and postoperative complications did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

S+1-LAR is a feasible and safe technique and is comparable with M-LAR in terms of surgical outcomes of patients with mid-to-low rectal cancer.

A Systematic Review of Comparing Single-incision Versus Traditional Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy For Right Colon Diseases

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (SILS) has been promoted in clinic since 2008, but a systematic review of comparing SILS and traditional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (TLS) with long-term follow-up is rare. Here, in this study, comparison of SILS and TLS with long-term follow-up was evaluated by a meta-analysis method.

METHODS

All studies about SILS and TLS for right hemicolectomy from 2010 to 2018 were searched from databases including Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Wanfang. Operation index, recovery, and midterm follow-up data were evaluated by fixed-effects models, random-effects models, and Begg test.

RESULTS

We collected 22 studies with 2218 patients. SILS groups contained 1038 (46.7%) patients, and 1180 (53.3%) patients were observed in the TLS group. Patients' baseline data were similar in the 2 groups. Compared with TLS, SILS had shorter operation duration [standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.61 to -0.08, P<0.001, χ=49.40], shorter hospitalization time (SMD: -0.27, 95% CI: -0.37 to -0.16, P<0.001, χ=9.17), slightly less blood loss (SMD: -0.23, 95% CI: -0.36 to -0.10; P<0.001; χ=5.36), and smaller incision length (SMD: -2.19, 95% CI: -3.66 to -0.71, P<0.001; χ=316.1). No statistical differences were observed in other figures.

CONCLUSION

SILS is more convenient and has better efficacy than TLS and could provide a promising surgical approach for right colon diseases.

Characteristic findings of appendicular endometriosis treated with single incision laparoscopic ileocolectomy: Case report

INTRODUCTION

We report the case of characteristic findings of appendicular endometriosis that presented as a submucosal tumor in the cecum without any abdominal symptoms treated with single-incision laparoscopic ileocolectomy.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

The patient was a 51-year-old woman (body mass index: 21.5) who underwent an examination to investigate the cause of a positive fecal occult blood test. Her laboratory test results were normal, without anemia or tumor marker elevation. Colonoscopy revealed a submucosal tumor in the cecum. Enhanced computed tomography (CT), fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography-CT and magnetic resonance imaging failed to produce a clear diagnosis. Given the malignant potentiality of the tumor, ileocolectomy was considered potentially necessary, but she wished for minimally invasive surgery. She ultimately underwent ileocolectomy and lymphadenectomy with single-incision laparoscopic surgery. A pathological examination revealed the lesion to be appendicular endometriosis, and 14 lymph nodes with no malignancy were resected.

CONCLUSION

Appendicular endometriosis can present as a submucosal tumor in the cecum without any abdominal symptoms. Appendicular endometriosis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of ileocecal submucosal tumor. Single-incision laparoscopic ileocolectomy was useful procedure for cecum tumor resection.

True single-port cholecystectomy with ICG cholangiography through a single 15-mm trocar using the new surgical platform "symphonX": first human case study with a commercially available device

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive single-port surgery is often associated with large incisions up to 2-3 cm, complicated handling due to the lack of triangulation, and instrument crossing. Aim of this prospective study was to perform true single-port surgery (cholecystectomy) without the use of assisting trocars using a new surgical platform that allows for triangulation incorporating robotic features, and to measure the perioperative outcome and cosmetic results.

METHODS

As the first European site after FDA and CE-mark approval, the new device has been introduced to our academic center. In patients with cholecystitis and cholecystolithiasis, the operation was performed through only one 15-mm trocar. For patients safety, intraoperative cholangiography using intravenous ICG and a standard Stryker 1588 system was routinely performed.

RESULTS

Symphonx was used in n = 12 patients for abdominal surgery (6 females, mean age 42.5 [30-77], mean BMI 26.2 [19.3-38.9]. A total of 8 patients underwent surgery using no additional ports besides the 15-mm trocar; in the remaining patients, one assisting instrument (3-5 mm) was used. Mean OR time was 107 [72-221] minutes. The postoperative course was uneventful in 11 patients; in one patient, a seroma at the surgical site required interventional drainage 1 month postoperatively. No intraoperative complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

This is the first human case series using the commercially available symphonX platform for abdominal laparoscopic surgery and the first series using the system without assisting instruments. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with cholecystitis and cholecystolithiasis using the symphonX platform through only one 15-mm trocar is feasible, safe, and more cost-efficient compared to robotic platforms.