Pain after laparoscopic appendectomy: a comparison of transumbilical single-port and conventional laparoscopic surgery

Purpose

Conventional laparoscopic appendectomy is performed using three ports, and single-port appendectomy is an attractive alternative in order to improve cosmesis. The aim of this study was to compare pain after transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SA) with pain after conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TA).

Methods

From April to September 2011, 50 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy for simple appendicitis without gangrene or perforation. Patients who had undergone appendectomy with a drainage procedure were excluded. The type of surgery was chosen based on patient preference after written informed consent was obtained. The primary endpoint was postoperative pain evaluated by the visual analogue scale score and postoperative analgesic use. Operative time, recovery of bowel function, and length of hospital stay were secondary outcome measures.

Results

SA using a SILS port (Covidien) was performed in 17 patients. The other 33 patients underwent TA. Pain scores in the 24 hours after surgery were higher in patients who underwent SA (P = 0.009). The change in postoperative pain score over time was significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.021). SA patients received more total doses of analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) in the 24 hours following surgery, but the difference was not statistically significant. The median operative time was longer for SA (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgeons should be concerned about longer operation times and higher immediate postoperative pain scores in patients who undergo SA.

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.

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery changed the management of numerous surgical conditions. It was associated with many advantages over open surgery, such as decreased postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay and excellent cosmesis. Since two decades single-incision endoscopic surgery (SIES) was introduced to the surgical community. SIES could possibly result in even better postoperative outcomes than multi-port laparoscopic surgery, especially concerning cosmetic outcomes and pain. However, the single-incision surgical procedure is associated with quite some challenges.

METHODS

An expert panel of surgeons has been selected and invited to participate in the preparation of the material for a consensus meeting on the topic SIES, which was held during the EAES congress in Frankfurt, June 16, 2017. The material presented during the consensus meeting was based on evidence identified through a systematic search of literature according to a pre-specified protocol. Three main topics with respect to SIES have been identified by the panel: (1) General, (2) Organ specific, (3) New development. Within each of these topics, subcategories have been defined. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Recommendations were made according to the GRADE criteria.

RESULTS

In general, there is a lack of high level evidence and a lack of long-term follow-up in the field of single-incision endoscopic surgery. In selected patients, the single-incision approach seems to be safe and effective in terms of perioperative morbidity. Satisfaction with cosmesis has been established to be the main advantage of the single-incision approach. Less pain after single-incision approach compared to conventional laparoscopy seems to be considered an advantage, although it has not been consistently demonstrated across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the increased direct costs (devices, instruments and operating time) of the SIES procedure and the prolonged learning curve, wider acceptance of the procedure should be supported only after demonstration of clear benefits.

Repair of acute and chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures using the EndoButton

There are many ways to repair distal biceps tendon ruptures with no outcome studies demonstrating superiority of a specific technique. There are few studies reporting on the repair of acute and chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures using the EndoButton via an anterior single-incision approach. We report on 27 patients who underwent distal biceps tendon repair with an EndoButton. The average age was 50.1 years (range, 36-78). There were 17 acute repairs (within 4 weeks of injury), nine chronic repairs (greater than 4 weeks), and one revision of a previous acute repair. All chronic repairs were repaired without the need for graft augmentation. Patients were assessed postoperatively using the ASES elbow outcome instrument and isokinetic flexion and supination strength and endurance testing. Eight control subjects were also tested for comparison. At an average follow-up of 30.9 months, 26 of 27 patients returned to their previous employment and activity level. The average ASES elbow score was 98.2 (range, 81-100). Compared with the contralateral extremity, there was no loss of motion. Average flexion strength recovery was 101% and mean supination strength recovery was 99%. There was no significant difference in function or strength with repair of acute versus chronic ruptures. Using the EndoButton technique, acute and chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures can be repaired safely with excellent clinical results.

Single incision vs conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid colon cancer: a case-matched study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the safety and effects of single-incision laparoscopic anterior resection (SILAR) for sigmoid colon cancer by comparing it with conventional laparoscopic anterior resection (CLAR).

METHODS

Twenty-four patients who underwent SILAR between April 2010 and July 2011 were case matched 1:2 with patients who underwent CLAR, with respect to age, sex, body mass index, tumor location, and history of abdominal surgery.

RESULTS

Two patients in the SILAR group and 1 patient in the CLAR group experienced anastomotic leakage. The operative time was longer in the SILAR group than in the CLAR group (251 ± 50 vs 237 ± 49 minutes; P = .253). The number of harvested lymph nodes (19.6 ± 10.7 vs 20.8 ± 7.7; P = .630) was not different. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the SILAR group (7.1 ± 3.4 days) than in the CLAR group (8.1 ± 3.5 days) (P = .234).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the early outcomes, we conclude that SILAR is feasible and safe. Moreover, the adequate lymph node harvest and free margins support the use of this procedure.

Remains of the day: Biliary complications related to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

AIM: To assesse the rate of bile duct injuries (BDI) and overall biliary complications during single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).

METHODS: SPLC has recently been proposed as an innovative surgical approach for gallbladder surgery. So far, its safety with respect to bile duct injuries has not been specifically evaluated. A systematic review of the literature published between January 1990 and November 2012 was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing SPLC versus CLC reporting BDI rate and overall biliary complications were included. The quality of RCT was assessed using the Jadad score. Analysis was made by performing a meta-analysis, using Review Manager 5.2. This study was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A retrospective study including all retrospective reports on SPLC was also performed alongside.

RESULTS: From 496 publications, 11 RCT including 898 patients were selected for meta-analysis. No studies were rated as high quality (Jadad score ≥ 4). Operative indications included benign gallbladder disease operated in an elective setting in all studies, excluding all emergency cases and acute cholecystitis. The median follow-up was 1 mo (range 0.03-18 mo). The incidence of BDI was 0.4% for SPLC and 0% for CLC; the difference was not statistically different (P = 0.36). The incidence of overall biliary complication was 1.6% for SPLC and 0.5% for CLC, the difference did not reached statistically significance (P = 0.21, 95%CI: 0.66-15). Sixty non-randomized trials including 3599 patients were also analysed. The incidence of BDI reported then was 0.7%.

CONCLUSION: The safety of SPLC cannot be assumed, based on the current evidence. Hence, this new technology cannot be recommended as standard technique for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Application of single incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomies in patients with complicated appendicitis

Purpose

Recently, single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been studied for its being less invasive surgery and having cosmetic improvement. We investigated the application of SILS for an appendectomy (SILS-A) in cases of complicated appendicitis and compare it with a conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (C-LA).

Methods

This study involved a total of 40 patients who underwent C-LA or SILS-A in patients with complicated appendicitis; 25 patients received a C-LA, and the other 15 patients received a SILS-A. The clinical outcomes and cosmetic results were compared between the groups.

Results

The SILS-A procedures were performed successfully in patients with complicated appendicitis, but 6 patients who underwent SILS-A needed an additional port for dissection and drainage. Clinical outcomes and postoperative complications were similar in both study groups. The SILS-A group showed significantly higher numbers of pain control than the C-LA group, and the one port SLLS-A group showed significantly better cosmetic result than the C-LA group.

Conclusion

SILS-A is technically feasible and safe in patients with complicated appendicitis. However, SILS-A has more postoperative pain than C-LA, and more active pain control should be considered for patients undergoing SILS-A.

Congenital anomaly rectified at birth: one-stage single-incision laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty for newborns with anorectal malformations and recto-urethral fistula

OBJECTIVE

Currently, staged procedures involving stoma formation and closure are the widely accepted treatment for newborns suffering from anorectal malformations (ARM) with recto-urethral fistula. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of one-stage single-incision laparoscopic-assisted anorectoplasty (SILAARP) as an alternative to the conventional approach.

METHODS

Newborns with ARMs and recto-urethral fistula who underwent one-stage SILAARP between June 2013 and December 2014 were reviewed. The procedure involved decompression of the meconium via a small temporary incision of the proximal sigmoid colon followed by a laparoscopic-assisted pull-through.

RESULTS

Sixteen ARM newborns [recto-prostatic fistula (6), recto-bulbar fistula (10)] successfully underwent a one-stage SILAARP. The mean age of the neonates at operation was 42.1 h. The average operative time was 2.4 h. The actual pull-through took 1.7 h, which did not differ significantly from 1.9 h in the pull-through procedure of our three-stage SILAARP control group. The median follow-up period was 16 months (8-26 months). No complications were encountered. Postoperative pelvic magnetic resonance imaging verified the centrally placed rectum within the muscle complex. Most patients started having bowel movements on postoperative day 1. Two constipated patients periodically required an enema for 1-3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

One-stage SILAARP is safe and effective. It provides complete rectification of ARM with recto-urethral fistula immediately after birth with good cosmesis.

Robotic single-site cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive approaches for cholecystectomy are evolving in a surge for the best possible clinical outcome for the patients. As one of the most recent developments, a robotic set of instrumentation to be used with the da Vinci Si Surgical System has been developed to overcome some of the technical challenges of manual single incision laparoscopy.

METHODS

From February 2011 to February 2013, all consecutive robotic single site cholecystectomies (RSSC) were prospectively collected in a dedicated database. Demographic, intra- and postoperative data of all patients that underwent RSSC at our institution were analyzed. Data were evaluated for the overall patient cohort as well as after stratification according to patient BMI (body mass index) and surgeon's experience.

RESULTS

During the study period, 82 patients underwent robotic single site cholecystectomy at our institution. The dominating preoperative diagnosis was cholelithiasis. Mean overall operative time was 91 min. Intraoperative complications occurred in 2.4% of cases. One conversion to open surgery due to the intraoperative finding of a gallbladder carcinoma was observed and two patients needed an additional laparoscopic trocar. The rate of postoperative complications was 4.9% with a mean length of stay of 2.4 days. No significant differences were observed when comparing results between robotic novices and robotic experts. Patients with higher BMI trended towards longer surgical console and overall operative time, but resulted in similar rates of conversions and complications when compared to normal weight patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic Single-Site cholecystectomy can be performed safely and effectively with low rates of complications and conversions in patients with differing BMI and by surgeons with varying levels of experience.

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.

Single incision laparoscopic colectomy for colorectal cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopic colectomy

Purpose

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the feasibility of single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), and to compare the short-term surgical outcomes with those of conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

Methods

Forty-four patients who underwent SILS were compared with 263 patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal adenocarcinoma between November 2011 and September 2012.

Results

In the SILS group, eleven cases (25.0%) of right hemicolectomy, 15 (34.1%) anterior resections, and 18 (40.9%) low anterior resections were performed. Additional ports were required in 10 rectal patients during SILS operation. In the 32 patients with rectosigmoid and rectal cancer in the SILS group, patients with mid and lower rectal cancers had a tendency to require a longer operation time (168.2 minutes vs. 223.8 minutes, P = 0.002), additional ports or multiport conversion (P = 0.007), than those with rectosigmoid and upper rectal cancer. Both SILS and conventional groups had similar perioperative outcomes. Operation time was longer in the SILS group than in the conventional laparoscopic surgery group (185.0 minutes vs. 139.2 minutes, P < 0.001). More diverting stoma were performed in the SILS group (64.7% vs. 24.2%, P = 0.011). Multivariate analysis showed that tumor location in the rectum (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.858-10.560; P = 0.001), SILS (95% CI, 3.450-20.233; P < 0.001), diverting stoma (95% CI, 1.606-9.288; P = 0.003), and transfusion (95% CI, 1.092-7.854; P = 0.033) were independent risk factors for long operation time (>180 minutes).

Conclusion

SILS is a feasible, not inferior treatment option for colorectal cancer, and appears to have similar results as standard conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy, despite the longer operative time.

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To assess the differences in clinical benefits and disadvantages of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were electronically searched up through January 2013 to identify randomized controlled trails (RCTs) comparing SILA with CLA. Data was extracted from eligible studies to evaluate the pooled outcome effects for the total of 1068 patients. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.2.0. For dichotomous data and continuous data, the risk ratio (RR) and the mean difference (MD) were calculated, respectively, with 95%CI for both. For continuous outcomes with different measurement scales in different RCTs, the standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated with 95%CI. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed when necessary.

RESULTS: Six RCTs were identified that compared SILA (n = 535) with CLA (n = 533). Five RCTs had a high risk of bias and one RCT had a low risk of bias. SILA was associated with longer operative time (MD = 5.68, 95%CI: 3.91-7.46, P < 0.00001), higher conversion rate (RR = 5.14, 95%CI: 1.25-21.10, P = 0.03) and better cosmetic satisfaction score (MD = 0.52, 95%CI: 0.30-0.73, P < 0.00001) compared with CLA. No significant differences were found for total complications (RR = 1.15, 95%CI: 0.76-1.75, P = 0.51), drain insertion (RR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.41-1.25, P = 0.24), or length of hospital stay (SMD = 0.04, 95%CI: -0.08-0.16, P = 0.57). Because there was not enough data among the analyzed RCTs, postoperative pain was not calculated.

CONCLUSION: The benefit of SILA is cosmetic satisfaction, while the disadvantages of SILA are longer operative time and higher conversion rate.

Uniportal Versus Multiportal Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy for Lung Cancer: An Updated Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the available literature on patients with lung cancer undergoing either uniportal (UVATS) or multiport video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (MVATS).

METHODS

Original research studies that evaluated perioperative and long-term outcomes of UVATS versus MVATS were identified, from January 1990 to April 2020. The perioperative, along with the oncologic and long-term survival outcomes, were calculated according to either a fixed or a random effect model, appropriately. The Q statistics and I2 statistic were used to test for heterogeneity among the studies.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were included, incorporating a total of 1,469 patients treated with UVATS and 3,231 treated with MVATS. The incidence of complications was lower in patients treated with UVATS [OR: 0.76 (95% CI 0.62, 0.93); p = 0.008]. The chest tube duration was significantly lower in the UVATS group (WMD: - 0.63 [95% CI - 1.03, - 0.23]; p = 0.002). Length of hospital stay (L.O.S.) was also lower in the UVATS patient group (WMD: - 0.54 [- 0.94, - 0.13]; p = 0.009), along with postoperative pain [WMD: - 0.57 (95% CI - 0.97, - 0.18); p = 0.004]. No significant differences were found regarding the mean operative time (M.O.T.), mean blood loss, the number of resected lymph nodes, the 30-day mortality, along with the survival at 1 and 3 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis indicates that UVATS is associated with enhanced outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for lung cancer. Well-designed, randomized studies, comparing UVATS to MVATS, are necessary to further assess their long-term clinical outcomes.

Distal biceps ruptures: open and endoscopic techniques

Distal biceps tendon ruptures are relatively rare. Patients are usually middle-aged men involved in heavy labor. Patients usually present with the history of a pop and a proximal migration of the biceps muscle belly. Clinical exam should be sufficient to diagnose a complete rupture. Several specific tests have been described. Ultrasound scanning or MRI can help confirm the diagnosis. Radiographs are not needed to diagnose distal biceps tendon rupture but may show typical findings. Imaging, more specifically the flexion-abduction-supination (FABS) view MRI, is particularly helpful in the case of a partial rupture or chronic rupture of the distal biceps tendon. Results of surgical reinsertion of the distal biceps have been shown to be superior to conservative treatment. Different techniques and approaches have been described with specific advantages and disadvantages. Primary repair of the tendon is preferred. If this is no longer possible in chronic tears, an augmentation can be done using tendon graft. Results of surgical treatment are good in the vast majority of patients. Reruptures are rare but minor complications are common. Major complications may include posterior interosseous nerve palsy or radioulnar synostosis, but the risk of these complications may be decreased by meticulous attention to detail during surgery.

Safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomies: A meta-analysis

AIM: To compare single incision laparoscopic surgery for an appendectomy (SILS-A) with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (C-LA) when implemented by experienced surgeons.

METHODS: Studies and relevant literature regarding the performance of single-incision laparoscopic surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery for appendectomy were searched for in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and World Health Organization international trial register. The operation time (OR time), complications, wound infection and postoperative day using SILS-A or C-LA were pooled and compared using a meta-analysis. The risk ratios and mean differences were calculated with 95%CIs to evaluate the effect of SILS-A.

RESULTS: Sixteen recent studies including 1624 patients were included in this meta-analysis. These studies demonstrated that, compared with C-LA, SILS-A has a similar OR time in adults but needs a longer OR time in children. SILS-A has similar complications, wound infection and length of the postoperative day in adults and children, and required similar doses of narcotics in children, the pooled mean different of -0.14 [95%CI: -2.73-(-2.45), P > 0.05], the pooled mean different of 11.47 (95%CI: 10.84-12.09, P < 0.001), a pooled RR of 1.15 (95%CI: 0.72-1.83, P > 0.05), a pooled RR of 1.9 (95%CI: 0.92-3.91, P > 0.05), a pooled RR of 1.01 (95%CI: 0.51-2.0, P > 0.05) a pooled RR of 1.86 (95%CI: 0.77-4.48, P > 0.05), the pooled mean different of -0.25 (95%CI: -0.50-0, P = 0.05) the pooled mean different of -0.01 (95%CI: -0.05-0.04, P > 0.05) the pooled mean different of -0.13 (95%CI: -0.49-0.23, P > 0.05) respectively.

CONCLUSION: SILS-A is a technically feasible and reliable approach with short-term results similar to those obtained with the C-LA procedure.

Single- versus double-incision technique for the treatment of distal biceps tendon rupture

AIMS

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate differences in functional outcomes and complications between single- (SI) and double-incision (DI) techniques for the treatment of distal biceps tendon rupture.

METHODS

A comprehensive search on PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central databases was conducted to identify studies reporting comparative results of the SI versus the DI approach. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was used for search strategy. Of 606 titles, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria; methodological quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Random- and fixed-effects models were used to find differences in outcomes between the two surgical approaches. The range of motion (ROM) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores, as well as neurological and non-neurological complications, were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 2,622 patients were identified. No significant differences in DASH score were detected between the techniques. The SI approach showed significantly greater ROM in flexion (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.508; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.904 to -0.112) and pronation (SMD -0.325, 95% CI -0.637 to -0.012). The DI technique was associated with significantly less risk of lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve damage (odds ratio (OR) 4.239, 95% CI 2.171 to 8.278), but no differences were found for other nerves evaluated. The SI group showed significantly fewer events of heterotopic ossification (OR 0.430, 95% CI 0.226 to 0.816) and a lower reoperation rate (OR 0.503, 95% CI 0.317 to 0.798).

CONCLUSION

No significant differences in functional scores can be expected between the SI and DI approaches after distal biceps tendon repair. The SI approach showed greater flexion and pronation ROM and a lower risk of heterotopic ossification and reoperation. The DI approach was favourable in terms of lower risk of neurological complications. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1608-1617.

Robotic-assisted single-site cholecystectomy in children

BACKGROUND

Though single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is cosmetically appealing, it is technically a difficult operation. The recent introduction of robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) has made single incision cholecystectomy easier to perform. While a few papers have reported its application in adults, it has not been documented in children.

METHODS

Data on seventeen consecutive children who underwent RSSC by a single surgeon over a ten-month period were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographics, total operative time, console time, hospital stay, complications and reasons for procedural delay were recorded.

RESULTS

Sixteen operations were completed robotically using the single incision robotic platform. No major postoperative complications were noted. Median total operative time was 94 minutes with interquartile range (IQR) being 81.5-119.5 minutes. The median console time was 39 minutes (IQR: 30-72 minutes). The median total operative time for the first eight cases was 118 minutes (IQR: 103-127 minutes) and for the next nine cases 90 minutes (IQR: 76-93 minutes). Common causes for procedural delay were slipped clips, bile spillage, bleeding and leaking Single-Site® port.

CONCLUSIONS

This unique series of RSSC documents its feasibility and safety in children. A short learning curve and operative times comparable to RSSC in adults and SILC in children were observed. Being technically easier, RSSC becomes an attractive alternative to SILC to sustain its cosmetic benefit.

Long-term follow-up after single-incision laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is growing in popularity. The increased diameter of the umbilical incision might raise questions about the possibility of a greater risk of postoperative incisional hernia in comparison to conventional laparoscopy. This study aims to disclose the frequency of incisional hernia after SILS in long-term follow-up as well as to reveal the factors predisposing patients to this feared complication.

METHODS

The patient collective consists of cholecystectomy and appendectomy patients, who were operated on using SILS technique. Follow-up was achieved through letter correspondence, telephone interview, and clinical examination. Effects of demographic variables and operative parameters including age, sex, BMI, ASA score, duration of surgery, pre-existing hernia as well as postoperative incidence of incisional hernia were investigated using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 286 cases with complete follow-up were included in the analyses. Mean follow-up duration was 58.4 months. 192 patients (67.1%) underwent cholecystectomy; 94 (32.9%) had an appendectomy. The study collective consisted of 218 women (76.2%) and 68 men (23.8%). Mean age at the date of the operation was 38.5 (median 36, range 13-74). In 5 cases (1.7%), the surgical approach was converted into conventional laparoscopy. Intraoperative complication rate was 0.3% and postoperative complication rate was 5.9%. 7 patients (2.4%) developed an incisional hernia. Obese patients had an incisional hernia incidence of 10.9%. 3 out of 19 patients (15.8%) with a pre-existing umbilical hernia developed an incisional hernia during follow-up. Obesity and pre-existing umbilical hernia proved to have a significant association with incisional hernia incidence in univariate and multivariate analyses. Sex, age, procedure (appendectomy vs cholecystectomy), presence of acute inflammation, and duration of surgery did not show a statistically significant association with incisional hernia.

CONCLUSION

Detection of incisional hernia necessitates a long follow-up duration. Obesity and pre-existing umbilical hernia are associated with a higher incidence of this complication. Following a careful patient selection, SILS offers a safe approach for cholecystectomy and appendectomy procedures.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Single-incision laparoscopic splenectomy

Background and Objectives:

The single-incision approach in laparoscopic surgery is a relatively new concept. This systematic review of the literature was performed to appraise the existing clinical evidence concerning the use of the single-incision technique for spleen resection.

Methods:

We performed a systematic search of the PubMed and Scopus databases, and the studies retrieved were included in our review. The references of the included studies were also hand searched.

Results:

Thirty-one relevant studies were found in the field including 81 patients with an age range from 0.6 to 90 years and a body mass index range from 18 to 36.7 kg/m². Splenomegaly (44.6%), idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (31%), and immune thrombocytopenic purpura (6.8%) were the most common indications for the procedure. Concerning the applied port system, multiple single ports (5 to 12 mm) were used in 54.4% of patients, the SILS port (Covidien, Mansfield, Massachusetts) was used in 26.6%, the TriPort (Advanced Surgical Concepts, Wicklow, Ireland) was used in 7.6%, glove ports were used in 6.3%, and the GelPort (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, California) was used in 5.1%. The median operative time was 125 minutes (range, 45–420 minutes), and the median quantity of blood loss was 50 mL (range, 10–450 mL). No conversion to open surgery and no transfusion were needed. The length of hospital stay was between 1 and 9 days. Low rates of complications and no patient deaths were found. The existing evidence on cosmesis is limited.

Conclusion:

Single-site/single-port laparoscopic surgery is a minimally invasive procedure that seems to be a challenging alternative in the management of spleen resection.

Robot-assisted single-site compared with laparoscopic single-incision cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Recent advances in robotic technology suggest that the utilization of the da Vinci Single-Site™ platform for cholecystectomy is safe, feasible and results in a shorter learning curve compared to conventional single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Moreover, the robot-assisted technology has been shown to reduce the surgeon’s stress load compared to standard single-incision laparoscopy in an experimental setup, suggesting an important advantage of the da Vinci platform. However, the above-mentioned observations are based solely on case series, case reports and experimental data, as high-quality clinical trials to demonstrate the benefits of the da Vinci Single-Site™ cholecystectomy have not been performed to date.

Methods

This study addresses the question whether robot-assisted Single-Site™ cholecystectomy provides significant benefits over single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in terms of surgeon’s stress load, while matching the standards of the conventional single-incision approach with regard to peri- and postoperative outcomes. It is designed as a single centre, single-blinded randomized controlled trial, which compares both surgical approaches with the primary endpoint surgeon’s physical and mental stress load at the time of surgery. In addition, the study aims to assess secondary endpoints such as operating time, conversion rates, additional trocar placement, intra-operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, costs of procedure, health-related quality of life, cosmesis and complications. Patients as well as ward staff are blinded until the 1^st postoperative year. Sample size calculation based on the results of a previously published experimental setup utilizing an estimated effect size of surgeon’s comfort of 0.8 (power of 0.8, alpha-error level of 0.05, error margin of 10–15%) resulted in a number of 30 randomized patients per arm.

Discussion

The study is the first randomized controlled trial that compares the da Vinci Single Site™ platform to conventional laparoscopic approaches in cholecystectomy, one of the most frequently performed operations in general surgery.

Trial registration

This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (trial number: NCT02485392). Registered February 19, 2015.

Single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery subsegmentectomy: The learning curve and initial outcome

BACKGROUND

We report initial surgical results and learning process of single-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) subsegmentectomy in comparison with segmentectomy in our institution as the presentative of minimal invasiveness and precise resection for early stage lung cancer.

METHODS

All patients undergoing single-port VATS sublobar anatomic resection between January 2014 and December 2018 for clinical diagnosis of lung cancer were included. The learning curve was analyzed using the cumulative summation (CUSUM) method. Comparisons were done between those who underwent single-port VATS subsegmentectomy and segmentectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 364 patients underwent single-port VATS segmentectomy and 91 patients underwent single-port VATS subsegmentectomy were included. Lung adenocarcinoma was the most common (61.1%) diagnosis. The operative time and blood loss in the subsegmentectomy group were less than the segmentectomy group. The incidence of intraoperative complication was also lower in the subsegmentectomy group. The surgical proficiency was reached at 28 cases in single-port VATS subsegmentectomy. For primary lung cancer, the tumor size in subsegmentectomy group was smaller than segmentectomy group (1.1 cm versus 1.4 cm, p = 0.026). The resection margin was smaller in subsegmentectomy group, and both groups reached adequate margin without significant difference (94.7% versus 95.5%, p = 0.737). During the follow-up period, 2 (3.5%) patients in subsegmentectomy group and 9 (4.1%) patients in segmentectomy group developed distant metastasis.

CONCLUSION

Single-port VATS subsegmentectomy is safe and feasible for small-sized lung lesion, providing the benefit of minimal invasiveness, preservation of pulmonary function, and clearance of lymphatic drainage at the intersegmental plane. The surgical proficiency could be achieved based on the experiences in single-port VATS segmentectomy.

Application of single incision laparoscopic surgery for appendectomy in children

Purpose

Recently, single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been popular in use with its progress studied for more minimally invasive surgery and cosmetic improvement. We investigated the feasibility and efficacy of SILS for appendectomy (SILS-A) in children and compare it with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (C-LA).

Methods

We studied, retrospectively, adolescent patients who underwent C-LA or SILS-A. There were 25 patients in the C-LA group and 30 patients in the SILS-A group. The clinical outcomes were compared between the groups.

Results

The SILS-A procedures were performed successfully in adolescent patients . There were no significant difference between the C-LA and SILS-A group with respect to demographic data and post-operative outcomes. There was one complication (4%) in the C-LA group and two complications (6.6%) in the SILS-A group, but there was no significant difference.

Conclusion

SILS-A was technically feasible and safe in children. Considering little postoperative scar and no difference in post-operative outcomes compared to C-LA, SILA could be applicable in adolescent patients. Larger studies and further technical implements will be necessary to assess the true benefit of this approach.

Subxiphoid single-incision thoracoscopic bilateral ablative sympathectomy for hyperhidrosis

We describe the first case of severe palmar hyperhidrosis treated with single-incision subxiphoid thoracoscopic ablative sympathectomy, bilaterally, at T3 level. The single-incision subxiphoid thoracoscopic approach required only a 2-cm incision in the upper abdomen. In addition, the technique does not cause postoperative intercostal neuropathy and postoperative pain is minimal as the intercostal space is bypassed. Total operative time was ∼60 min and the volume of blood loss was 10 ml. The patient was discharged from the hospital the next day with complete remission of her symptoms. Excess palmar sweating released after operation and there was no compensatory sweating after a 6-month follow-up.

First report comparing the two types of single-incision robotic sacrocolpopexy: Single site using the da Vinci Xi or Si system and single port using the da Vinci SP system

OBJECTIVE

The gold standard procedure for treating patients with apical pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is sacrocolpopexy. However, no report comparing the two types of single-incision robotic sacrocolpopexy, namely, single-site robotic sacrocolpopexy (SS-RSC) and single-port robotic sacrocolpopexy (SP-RSC) exists. Therefore, we compared the safety and effectiveness of SS-RSC and SP-RSC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, 48 patients who underwent single-incision RSC, 40 non-consecutive patients who underwent SS-RSC, and 8 consecutive patients who underwent SP-RSC for symptomatic POP quantification stage III-IV and were eligible for the 1-year follow-up (FU) were included. We compared the surgical time and operative outcomes of SS-RSC and SP-RSC. We also compared the data of the initial 8 cases in each group.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 59.2 ± 11.0 years and 66.1 ± 8.0 years in the SS-RSC (n = 40) and SP-RSC (n = 8) groups, respectively. The mean operative time (OT) and console time were comparable between the SS-RSC and SP-RSC groups (135.3 ± 31.6 min vs 141.8 ± 23.5 min; 94.6 ± 32.2 min vs 89 ± 9.5 min, respectively). The docking time and cervix suturing time were short in the SP-RSC group (P < 0.05). However, in the analysis of the initial 8 cases in each group, all surgical times except the cervix suturing time were shorter in the SP-RSC group (P < 0.05). Three cases had intraoperative bladder injury (two [5.0%] in the SS-RSC and one [12.5%] in the SP-RSC group). Two cases (5.0%) had umbilical incisional hernia in the SS-RSC group. Two cases had vaginal mesh erosion on the posterior vaginal wall, with 1 case in each group. One case (2.5%) experienced a recurrence of POP; an anterior compartment POP-Q stage 2 following SS-RSC at the 4-week FU.

CONCLUSION

Single-incision RSC, both SS-RSC and SP-RSC, is a feasible and effective surgical option for treating symptomatic apical POP with an aesthetic finish.