Robotic-Assisted Fertility-Sparing Surgery for Early Ovarian Cancer

Objective:

To show the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted laparoscopic fertility-sparing surgery for early-stage ovarian cancer in women of reproductive age.

Methods and Design:

The first patient was a 29-year-old para 0 woman with well-differentiated endometrioid adenocarcinoma of the ovary and complex endometrial hyperplasia with marked atypia. The second patient was a 31-year-old para 0 woman with an immature grade 1 teratoma. Both patients underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgical staging.

Results:

In the first patient, there were no intra- or postoperative complications. Operative time was 5 hours 43 minutes and estimated blood loss was 100 mL. She was discharged home on postoperative day 1. She received 3 cycles of carboplatin and paclitaxel, as well as medroxyprogesterone acetate for the duration of chemotherapy. She conceived twice spontaneously since surgery and had two successful deliveries. She currently has no evidence of disease.In the second patient, there were no intra- or postoperative complications. Operative time was 2 hours 52 minutes and estimated blood loss was 200 mL. She was discharged home on postoperative day 1. She declined adjuvant chemotherapy with bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin. She conceived spontaneously 4 months later and had a normal vaginal delivery. She currently has no evidence of disease.

Conclusions:

Because fertility-sparing surgery is now accepted as a viable option in young women with early-stage ovarian cancer, less invasive techniques are being used. With the advent of robotic-assisted surgery and its advantages over conventional laparoscopy, we show that it is a safe and feasible approach in select patients. This is the first reported series on robotic fertility-sparing surgery, but more research is needed.     

Operative Time and Outcome of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery After Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Background and Objectives:

Combining laparoscopy and enhanced recovery provides benefit to short-term outcomes after colorectal surgery. Advances in training and techniques have allowed surgeons to operate on cases that are technically challenging and associated with prolonged operative time. Laparoscopic techniques improve the outcome of enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery; however, there are no specifications on the effect of prolonged operations on the outcome. The objective was to elucidate the impact of prolonged surgery and blood loss on the outcome of enhanced recovery after surgery after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Methods:

Four-hundred patients who underwent elective colorectal resection on enhanced recovery after surgery in Yeovil District Hospital between 2002 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. Delayed discharge was defined as a prolonged length of stay beyond the mean in this series (≥8 days).

Results:

Three-hundred eighty-five patients were included. Median operative time was 180 minutes with a median blood loss of 100 mL. Conversion was not associated with a prolonged length of stay. Operative time and blood loss correlated with length of stay in a stepwise fashion. There were 2 cutoff points of operative time at 160 minutes and 300 minutes (5 hours), where risk of prolonged stay increased significantly (odds ratio [OR] = 2.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05–3.90; P = .027), and blood loss of >500 mL (OR = 3.114; 95% CI, 1.501–6.462, P = .002).

Conclusions:

Total operative timing impacts negatively on the outcome of enhanced recovery after laparoscopic colorectal resections with increased risk of delayed discharge seen after ∼2.5 hours and 5-hour duration.     

Robotic Liver Resection: Initial Experience With Three-Arm Robotic and Single-Port Robotic Technique

Background and Objective:

Robotic-assisted surgery offers a solution to fundamental limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery, and its use is gaining wide popularity. However, the application of this technology has yet to be established in hepatic surgery.

Methods:

A retrospective analysis of our prospectively collected liver surgery database was performed. Over a 6-month period, all consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted hepatic resection for a liver neoplasm were included. Demographics, operative time, and morbidity encountered were evaluated.

Results:

A total of 7 robotic-assisted liver resections were performed, including 2 robotic-assisted single-port access liver resections with the da Vinci-Si Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical Sunnyvalle, Calif.) USA. The mean age was 44.6 years (range, 21–68 years); there were 5 male and 2 female patients. The mean operative time (± SD) was 61.4 ± 26.7 minutes; the mean operative console time (± SD) was 38.2 ± 23 minutes. No conversions were required. The mean blood loss was 100.7 mL (range, 10–200 mL). The mean hospital stay (± SD) was 2 ± 0.4 days. No postoperative morbidity related to the procedure or death was encountered.

Conclusion:

Our initial experience with robotic liver resection confirms that this technique is both feasible and safe. Robotic-assisted technology appears to improve the precision and ergonomics of single-access surgery while preserving the known benefits of laparoscopic surgery, including cosmesis, minimal morbidity, and faster recovery.     

Robot-Assisted Versus Standard Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

Background and Objectives:

Over the years, there has been a continual shift toward more minimally invasive surgical techniques, such as the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery. Recently, there has been increasing adoption of robotic technology. Our study aims to compare and contrast robot-assisted and laparoscopic approaches to colorectal operations.

Methods:

Forty patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic colorectal surgery performed by 2 surgeons at an academic center, regardless of indication, were included in this retrospective review. Patients undergoing open approaches were excluded. Study outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, complications, and conversion rate to an open procedure.

Results:

Twenty-five laparoscopic and fifteen robot-assisted colorectal surgeries were performed. The mean patient age was 61.1 ± 10.7 years in the laparoscopic group compared with 61.1 ± 8.5 years in the robotic group (P = .997). Patients had a similar body mass index and history of abdominal surgery. Mean blood loss was 163.3 ± 249.2 mL and 96.8 ± 157.7 mL, respectively (P = .385). Operative times were similar, with 190.8 ± 84.3 minutes in the laparoscopic group versus 258.4 ± 170.8 minutes in the robotic group (P = .183), as were lengths of hospital stay: 9.6 ± 7.3 and 6.5 ± 3.8 days, respectively (P = .091). In addition, there was no difference in the number of lymph nodes harvested between the laparoscopic group (14.0 ± 6.5) and robotic group (12.3 ± 4.2, P = .683).

Conclusions:

In our early experience, the robotic approach to colorectal surgery can be considered both safe and efficacious. Furthermore, it also preserves oncologically sufficient outcomes when performed for cancer operations.     

Novel Port Placement and 5-mm Instrumentation for Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy

Background and Objectives:

The value of robotic surgery for gynecologic procedures has been critically evaluated over the past few years. Its drawbacks have been noted as larger port size, location of port placement, limited instrumentation, and cost. In this study, we describe a novel technique for robotic-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy (RALH) with 3 important improvements: (1) more aesthetic triangular laparoscopic port configuration, (2) use of 5-mm robotic cannulas and instruments, and (3) improved access around the robotic arms for the bedside assistant with the use of pediatric-length laparoscopic instruments.

Methods:

We reviewed a series of 44 women who underwent a novel RALH technique and concomitant procedures for benign hysterectomy between January 2008 and September 2011.

Results:

The novel RALH technique and concomitant procedures were completed in all of the cases without conversion to larger ports, laparotomy, or video-assisted laparoscopy. Mean age was 49.9 years (SD 8.8, range 33–70), mean body mass index was 26.1 (SD 5.1, range 18.9–40.3), mean uterine weight was 168.2 g (SD 212.7, range 60–1405), mean estimated blood loss was 69.7 mL (SD 146.9, range 20–1000), and median length of stay was <1 day (SD 0.6, range 0–2.5). There were no major and 3 minor peri- and postoperative complications, including 2 urinary tract infections and 1 case of intravenous site thrombophlebitis. Mean follow-up time was 40.0 months (SD 13.6, range 15–59).

Conclusion:

Use of the triangular gynecology laparoscopic port placement and 5-mm robotic instruments for RALH is safe and feasible and does not impede the surgeon''s ability to perform the procedures or affect patient outcomes.     

Robotic-Assisted Hysterectomy for the Management of Severe Endometriosis: A Retrospective Review of Short-Term Surgical Outcomes

Objectives:

The primary objective was to examine the safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted laparoscopy in a cohort of women treated surgically for stage III and IV endometriosis. The secondary objective was to explore whether the stage of endometriosis affected surgical outcome.

Methods:

In this cohort study, 43 women with severe endometriosis were treated with robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy with unilateral or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy for stage III (n = 19) or stage IV (n = 24) disease.

Results:

Histopathologic evaluation confirmed endometriosis in all patients, and fibroids were also shown in 12 patients. The median actual operative time was 145 min (range, 67–325 min), and the median blood loss was 100 mL (range, 20–400 mL). All but one of the procedures were completed successfully robotically. The length of hospital stay was 1 d for 95% of patients (41 of 43), and 2 patients had prolonged stays of 4 d and 5 d, respectively. One patient was readmitted for a vaginal cuff abscess; this represented the only complication identified in this series.

Conclusions:

Robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery appears to be a reasonably safe and feasible method for the definitive surgical management of women with severe endometriosis.     

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery Versus Standard Laparoscopic Surgery for Unroofing of Hepatic Cysts

Background and Objectives:

The aim of this report is to document the feasibility and safety of umbilical single-incision laparoscopic liver cyst unroofing in the treatment of simple hepatic cysts in a retrospective case-control study. We also introduce some operative skills for single-incision laparoscopic surgery.

Methods:

From May 2009 to July 2011, 15 patients underwent umbilical single-incision laparoscopic liver cyst unroofing. All the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Another 15 simple liver cyst patients who received standard laparoscopic liver cyst unroofing at our hospital during the same period—with a similar age, nature of the cyst, and position to the single-incision group—were selected to undergo a case-control study. The operative time, blood loss, recovery time of gastrointestinal function, volume of postoperative drainage, postoperative drainage time, postoperative hospitalization time, and postoperative recurrence rate were compared between the two groups.

Results:

There was no significant difference between the single-incision group and standard group in operative time (58.3 ± 7.43 minutes vs 58.7 ± 6.14 minutes), blood loss (17.0 ± 3.19 mL vs 14.7 ± 1.86 mL), recovery time of gastrointestinal function (2.5 ± 0.22 days vs 2.4 ± 0.22 days), volume of postoperative drainage (408.0 ± 119.5 mL vs 450.0 ± 89.5 mL), postoperative drainage time (2.6 ± 0.55 days vs 3.7 ± 0.59 days), or postoperative hospitalization time (4.8 ± 0.44 days vs 5.2 ± 0.56 days) (P > .05). The postoperative follow-up period was 1 to 24 months.

Conclusions:

Compared with standard laparoscopic liver cyst unroofing, single-incision laparoscopic liver cyst unroofing shows no significant difference during the overall treatment process. In addition to the advantages of less trauma, more rapid recovery, and shorter hospital stay, single-incision laparoscopic surgery can reach the effect of “no scar” and can be safely and effectively carried out.     

Single incision laparoscopic adjustable gastric band: technique,feasibility, safety and learning curve

Introduction

Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is established in many procedures but not in bariatric surgery. One explanation may be that SILS is technically demanding in morbidly obese patients. This report describes our technique and experience with single incision laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (SILAGB).

Methods

Prospective data collection was performed on consecutive obese patients who underwent SILAGB between November 2009 and February 2011. A single 3cm transverse incision in the right upper quadrant was used for a Covidien SILS^™ multichannel access port. The technique is described with a standard pars flaccida approach and the ‘tips and tricks’ needed for a wide range of candidates using standard laparoscopic equipment.

Results

A total of 29 patients (27 female) with a median body mass index of 41kg/m² (range: 35–52kg/m²) and median age of 44 years (range: 22–57 years) underwent SILAGB. There were no ‘conversions’ to a standard laparoscopic technique. Two cases required the addition of one single 5mm port. The only complications were two postoperative wound infections (one with a port site infection requiring replacement of the port) and one faulty band requiring replacement. There were therefore two returns to theatre and no 30-day deaths. All patients were discharged on the first postoperative day. In this series, operative times reduced significantly to be comparable with the conventional laparoscopic approach.

Conclusions

SILAGB is safe and feasible in the morbidly obese. Proficiency in this technique using conventional laparoscopic equipment can be achieved with a short learning curve.     

Needlescopic Surgery Versus Single-port Laparoscopy for Inguinal Hernia

Background and Objectives:

In recent years, 2 modifications of laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) inguinal hernia repair—needlescopic (nTAPP) surgery and single-port (sTAPP) surgery—have greatly improved patient outcomes over traditional approaches. For a comparison of these 2 modifications, we sought to investigate and compare the extent of surgical trauma and postoperative consequences for the abdominal wall in these two procedures.

Methods:

In a retrospective study, 50 nTAPP and 35 sTAPP procedures occurring at a community hospital from November 1, 2009, through July 31, 2012 were reviewed. Intraoperative data, including length of the umbilical skin incision and operative time, were recorded. A follow-up evaluation included investigation of hernia recurrence, postoperative pain, abdominal wall mobility, cosmetic satisfaction, and period of sick leave.

Results:

The mean umbilical skin incision was 13 ± 4 mm in nTAPP vs 27 ± 3 mm in sTAPP (P < .001). The nTAPP procedure required less operating time than the sTAPP procedure (54.8 ± 16.9 minutes vs 85.9 ± 19.7 minutes; P < .001). The mean immediate postoperative pain score on the visual analog scale was 2.7 ± 2.1 in the nTAPP group and 4.4 ± 1.9 in the sTAPP group (P = .016). In addition, patients who underwent nTAPP had a shorter period of sick leave (11.2 ± 8.4 days vs 24.1 ± 20.1 days; P = .02). At the follow-up evaluation after approximately 30 months, abdominal wall mobility and cosmetic satisfaction were equally positive, with no hernia recurrence.

Conclusion:

In patients with uncomplicated inguinal hernia, the nTAPP procedure, with less surgical trauma and operating time, has distinct advantages in reduction of immediate postoperative pain and sick leave time.     

Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding

Background and Objectives:

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding is an effective and popular bariatric surgery for weight loss in obese patients that traditionally involves up to 5 incisions. Recently, a more minimally invasive single-incision technique has been developed. In this retrospective study, we compare conventional and single-incision laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding with regard to weight loss and complication rates in a cohort of demographically similar patients.

Methods:

From February 2009 to February 2010, 59 patients underwent laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding by one surgeon at an outpatient surgery center. All patients were compared by age, sex, preoperative body mass index, 30-day complication rates, and excess weight loss. Thirty-seven operations were performed by a conventional, 5-incision technique, whereas 22 patients underwent the single-incision technique. The success of these techniques was determined by comparing complication rates and average percentage excess weight loss at 6-month follow-up intervals.

Results:

Patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding had a mean age of 41.2 years and preoperative body mass index of 48.2 kg/m² compared with 43.9 years and 40.3 kg/m², respectively, for the single-incision patients. The mean operative time in the single-incision group was longer than that in the conventional group: 47.1 minutes versus 37.4 minutes (P = .0027). The overall percentage excess weight loss was not statistically different between the 2 groups for each follow-up period. There were no complications or deaths in either group.

Conclusion:

Although patients undergoing bariatric surgery may choose the single-incision technique for cosmetic purposes, this retrospective review comparing single-incision and conventional laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding shows longer operative times with equivalent weight loss and morbidity.     

Robotic Versus Abdominal Hysterectomy for Very Large Uteri

Background and Objectives:

We sought to examine the outcomes of patients with myomatous uteri weighing >1000 g who underwent hysterectomy by one of two modalities, either with a robotic system or by laparotomy.

Methods:

All patients who underwent robotic hysterectomy for uteri weighing >1000 g at our institution between May 2007 and January 2011 were identified, and a retrospective chart review was performed. These patients were matched to a laparotomy control group by body mass index and uterine weight, and the postoperative outcomes in both groups were analyzed and compared.

Results:

Sixty patients with uteri weighing >1000 g underwent hysterectomy, 30 with the robotic system and 30 by laparotomy. The median body mass index was 31.8 kg/m² (range, 18.5–56.3 kg/m²) and the median uterine weight was 1259 g (range, 1000–3543 g) in the robotic group versus 30.2 kg/m² (range, 18–48 kg/m²) and 1509 g (range, 1000–3570 g), respectively, in the laparotomy group (P = .31). The median operating time was 255 minutes (range, 180–372 minutes) in the robotic group versus 150 minutes (range, 100–285 minutes) in the laparotomy group (P < .001). There were no conversions to laparotomy. In both groups the operative time was not increased with increasing specimen weight. The median blood loss was 150 mL in the robotic group versus 425 mL in the laparotomy group. Of 30 patients in the robotic group, 23 (76.6%) were discharged from the hospital on postoperative day 1. The median hospital stay for the robotic group was 1 day, and for the laparotomy group, it was 2.5 days (P < .01).

Conclusion:

Robotic surgeries for very large myomatous uteri are feasible and have minimal morbidity even in morbidly obese patients. The robotic surgery requires a longer operative time but results in a shorter hospital stay and decreased intraoperative blood loss.     

Transumbilical Retrieval of Surgical Specimens Through a Multichannel Port

Background:

Laparoscopic surgery is often used to excise adnexal masses; however, the retrieval of specimens such as large cystic masses through conventional 5- or 10-mm ports is difficult and time-consuming. We compared outcomes between conventional laparoscopic surgery for adnexal masses and transumbilical specimen retrieval through a multichannel port during single- or 2-port laparoscopy.

Methods:

A total of 341 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for adnexal masses from November 2006 to December 2010 were included. The patients were divided into 2 groups: group I consisted of 249 patients who underwent conventional laparoscopy, and group II consisted of 92 patients who underwent single- or 2-port laparoscopy using a multichannel port. The clinical characteristics and operative outcomes of the 2 groups were compared.

Results:

The mean operation time was 51.8 ± 21.5 minutes in group I and 57.2 ± 23.9 minutes in group II. The mean specimen retrieval time was longer in group I (2.9 ± 4.0 minutes) than in group II (2.2 ± 1.8 minutes). Endoscopic bag rupture during specimen retrieval occurred in 11 patients in group I and in no patients in group II.

Conclusions:

The transumbilical retrieval of surgical specimens through a multichannel port with a wound retractor was safe and did not result in leakage of the cystic contents. This technique reduced the specimen retrieval time, especially for large masses. However, the mean operation time was not shortened with this procedure, because of the learning period and the time required to prepare the umbilical multichannel port.     

Proceed? Mesh for Laparoscopic Ventral Hernia Repair

Background and Objectives:

Laparoscopic technique to repair ventral hernia offers advantages over conventional open surgery such as shorter recovery time, decreased pain, and lower recurrence rates. There are a myriad of meshes available for laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias. This study evaluated the outcomes of laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias with Proceed mesh (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA) in a single academic institution.

Methods:

An institutional review board–approved retrospective review was performed for 100 consecutive patients with ventral hernia who underwent a laparoscopic approach at our institution from August 2006 to February 2009. All patients were operated on by a single surgeon using a standard technique with transabdominal suture fixation and tacks.

Results:

The study included 100 consecutive patients (57 female and 43 male patients). The mean age was 55 years (range, 16–78 years), and the mean body mass index was 33.3 kg/m² (range, 19.6–68.9 kg/m²). Of the repairs, 27% were performed for a recurrent hernia. The mean and median size of the defect were 128 cm² and 119.5 cm² (range, 4–500 cm²), respectively. To ensure appropriate mesh overlap, the mean size of mesh was 253 cm² (range, 36–700 cm²). There were 4 conversions. The mean operative time was 117 minutes (range, 35–286 minutes). The mean length of stay was 1.9 days. There were no major abdominal complications. With a mean follow-up period of 50 months (range, 38–68 months), we have not recorded any recurrences. No mesh-related complications have been documented.

Conclusions:

The laparoscopic approach to ventral hernia repairs using Proceed mesh is associated with a low conversion rate and no major complications. At 50 months of follow-up, the recurrence rate is 0%. There were no mesh-related complications.     

Single-Port Laparoscopic Parastomal Hernia Repair with Modified Sugarbaker Technique

Introduction:

Laparoscopic parastomal hernia repair with modified Sugarbaker technique has become increasingly the operation of choice because of its low recurrence rates. This study aimed to assess feasibility, safety, and efficiency of performing the same operation with single-incision laparoscopic surgery.

Materials and Methods:

All patients referred from March 2010 to February 2013 were considered for single-port laparoscopic repair with modified Sugarbaker technique. A SILS port (Covidien, Norwalk, Connecticut, USA) was used together with conventional straight dissecting instruments and a 5.5- mm/52-cm/30° laparoscope. Important technical aspects include modified dissection techniques, namely, “inline” and “chopsticks” to overcome loss of triangulation, insertion of a urinary catheter into an ostomy for ostomy limb identification, safe adhesiolysis by avoiding electocautery, saline -jet dissection to demarcate tissue planes, dissection of an entire laparotomy scar to expose incidental incisional hernias, adequate mobilization of an ostomy limb for lateralization, and wide overlapping of defect with antiadhesive mesh.

Results:

Of 6 patients, 5 underwent single-port laparoscopic repair, and 1 (whose body mass index [BMI] of 39.4 kg/m² did not permit SILS port placement) underwent multiport repair. Mean defect size was 10 cm, and mean mesh size was 660 cm² with 4 patients having incidental incisional hernias repaired by the same mesh. Mean operation time was 270 minutes, and mean hospital stay was 4 days. Appliance malfunction ceased immediately, and pain associated with parastomal hernia disappeared. There was no recurrence with a follow-up of 2 to 36 months.

Conclusion:

Compared with multiport repair, single-port laparoscopic parastomal repair with modified Sugarbaker technique is safe and efficient, and it may eventually become the standard of care.     

Outcomes and Use of Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastric Resection

Background and Objectives:

The advantages of laparoscopy over open surgery are well established. Laparoscopic resection for gastric cancer is safe and results in equivalent oncologic outcomes when compared with open resection. The purpose of this study was to assess the use of laparoscopy to treat gastric cancer and the associated outcomes.

Methods:

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) dataset was queried for patients with gastric cancer (ICD-9 Code 151.0–151.9) from January 2005 through December 2012. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the 30-day morbidity and mortality of open gastrectomy (CPT code 43620-2, 43631-4) versus that of the laparoscopic procedure on the stomach (CPT code 43650), while adjusting for preoperative risk factors.

Results:

A total of 4116 patients with gastric cancer were identified and divided by surgical approach into 2 groups: open gastrectomy (n = 3725; 90.5%) and laparoscopic procedure on the stomach (n = 391; 9.5%). After adjustment for preoperative risk factors, complications were significantly fewer in laparoscopic versus open gastric resection (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.45–0.82; P = .001). After adjusting for preoperative risk factors, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality with laparoscopic compared to open gastric resection (OR 0.74; 95% CI = 0.32–1.72; P = .481).

Conclusions:

Laparoscopy is underused in the treatment of gastric cancer. Given that laparoscopic gastric resection has a lower morbidity in comparison to open resection, steps should be made toward advancing the use of laparoscopy for gastric cancer.     

The Effect of Product Safety Courses on the Adoption and Outcomes of LESS Surgery

Background and Objectives:

As technology in surgery evolves, the medical instrument industry is inevitability involved in promoting the use and appropriate (ie, effective and safe) application of its products. This study was undertaken to evaluate industry-supported product safety courses in laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery, by using the metrics of surgeons'' adoption of the technique, safety of the procedure, and surgeons'' perception of the surgery.

Methods:

LESS surgery courses that involved didactic lectures, operative videos, operation observation, collaborative learning, and simulation, were attended by 226 surgeons. With Florida Hospital Tampa Institutional Review Board approval, the surgeons were queried before and immediately after the course, to assess their attitudes toward LESS surgery. Then, well after the course, the surgeons were contacted, repeatedly if necessary, to complete questionnaires.

Results:

Before the course, 82% of the surgeons undertook more than 10 laparoscopic operations per month. Immediately after the course, 86% were confident that they were prepared to perform LESS surgery. Months after the course, 77% of the respondents had adopted LESS surgery, primarily cholecystectomy; 59% had added 1 or more trocars in 0–20% of their procedures; and 73% held the opinion that operating room observation was the most helpful learning experience. Complications with LESS surgery were noted 12% of the time. Advantages of the technique were better cosmesis (58%) and patient satisfaction (38%). Disadvantages included risk of complications (37%) and higher technical demand (25%). Seventy-eight percent viewed LESS surgery as an advancement in surgical technique.

Conclusion:

In multifaceted product safety courses, operating room observation is thought to provide the most helpful instruction for those wanting to undertake LESS surgery. The procedure has been safely adopted by surgeons who frequently perform laparoscopies. The tradeoff is in performing a more difficult technique to obtain better cosmesis for the patient. We must continue to conduct critical evaluations of product safety courses for the introduction of new technology in surgery.     

A Technique for Simultaneous Cholecystectomy During Bariatric Surgery

Background and Objectives:

Cholecystectomy performed during bariatric surgery is technically demanding. Herein is described a technique we term the Glissonian approach along with an evaluation of its effectiveness and safety.

Methods:

From April 1, 2009, through February 28, 2014, laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed during laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in 38 patients with proven cholecystopathy on diagnostic imaging. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the patients operated on with the Glissonian approach and those who underwent conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Results:

The Glissonian approach was adopted in 13 patients—11 during LRYGB and 2 during LSG—and the conventional operation was performed on 16 patients during LRYGB and 9 during LSG. Mean body mass indexes were 40.1 kg/m² in the Glissonian-approach group and 37.6 kg/m² in the conventional group. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy by the Glissonian approach saved a mean operative time of 7 minutes compared with the operative time of the conventional operation. No surgical complications related to cholecystectomy were noted in either group.

Conclusion:

This simple technique can be performed safely in morbidly obese patients, with low resultant morbidity and acceptable operation times.     

Transperitoneal Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy in Children

Purpose:

The use of a minimally invasive approach for adrenalectomy is poorly defined in pediatric patients, although laparoscopic adrenalectomy is considered a standard procedure in adults. The aim of our study was to describe the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive adrenalectomy in children on the basis of surgical skills and results.

Materials and Methods:

This was a retrospective study of 4 pediatric laparoscopic adrenalectomies performed at our center between 2009 and 2012. All patients underwent transperitoneal lateral laparoscopic adrenalectomies (2 right and 2 left adrenalectomies).

Results:

Four laparoscopic adrenalectomies were performed. Indications for surgery were neuroblastoma in 2 patients, secernent adrenocortical tumor in 1 patient, and adrenocortical nodular hyperplasia in 1 patient. Patients had a mean age of 87 months (range, 17–156 months) at diagnosis, and the average lesion size was 3.23 cm (range, 0.7–6.4 cm). All laparoscopic adrenalectomies were successful, no conversions to open surgery were required, and no postoperative complications or deaths occurred. The average operating time was 105 minutes (range, 80–130 minutes), blood loss during surgery was minimal, and the mean postoperative hospital stay was 3.75 days (range, 3–5 days). None of the patients showed signs of recurring disease at 15-month follow-up.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy is a safe, feasible, and reproducible technique offering numerous advantages, including shortening of operating times and postoperative hospital stays, as well as reduction of blood loss and complications. It also provides good visibility and easy access to other organs.     

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.