Feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

AIM: To assess the safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy(SILC) for acute cholecystitis.METHODS: All patients who underwent SILC at Sano Hospital(Kobe, Japan) between January 2010 and December 2014 were included in this retrospective study. Clinical data related to patient characteristics and surgical outcomes were collected from medical records. The parameters for assessing the safety of the procedure included operative time, volume of blood loss, achievement of the critical view of safety, use of additional trocars, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and duration of postoperative hospital stay. Patient backgrounds were statistically compared between those with and without conversion to laparotomy.RESULTS: A total of 100 patients underwent SILC for acute cholecystitis during the period. Preoperative endoscopic treatment was performed for suspected choledocholithiasis in 41 patients(41%). The mean time from onset of acute cholecystitis was 7.7 d. According to the Updated Tokyo Guidelines(TG13) for the severity of cholecystitis, 86 and 14 patients had grade Ⅰ and grade Ⅱ acute cholecystitis, respectively. The mean operative time was 87.4 min. The mean estimated blood loss was 80.6 mL. The critical view of safety was obtained in 89 patients(89%). Conversion laparotomy was performed in 12 patients(12%). Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅲ or greater were observed in 4 patients(4%). The mean duration of postoperative hospital stay was 5.7 d. Patients converted from SILC to laparotomy tended to have higher days after onset.CONCLUSION: SILC is feasible for acute cholecystitis; in addition, early surgical intervention may reduce the risk of laparotomy conversion.     

Learning curve of transumbilical suture-suspension single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

AIM: To investigate the learning curve of transumbilical suture-suspension single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC). METHODS: The clinical data of 180 consecutive transumbilical suture-suspension SILCs performed by a team in our department during the period from August 2009 to March 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into nine groups according to operation dates, and each group included 20 patients operated on consecutively in each time period. The surgical outcome was assessed by comparing operation time, blood loss during operation, and complications between groups in order to evaluate the improvement in technique.RESULTS: A total of 180 SILCs were successfully performed by five doctors. The average operation time was 53.58 ± 30.08 min (range: 20.00-160.00 min) and average blood loss was 12.70 ± 11.60 mL (range: 0.00-100.00 mL). None of the patients were converted to laparotomy or multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There were no major complications such as hemorrhage or biliary system injury during surgery. Eight postoperative complications occurred mainly in the first three groups (n = 6), and included ecchymosis around the umbilical incision (n = 7) which resolved without special treatment, and one case of delayed bile leakage in group 8, which was treated by ultrasound-guided puncture and drainage. There were no differences in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications and length of postoperative hospital stay among the groups. Bonferroni’s test showed that the operation time in group 1 was significantly longer than that in the other groups (F = 7.257, P = 0.000). The majority of patients in each group were discharged within 2 d, with an average postoperative hospital stay of 1.9 ± 1.2 d. CONCLUSION: Following scientific principles and standard procedures, a team experienced in multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy can master the technique of SILC after 20 cases.     

Single incision laparoscopic surgery

As a complement to standard laparoscopic surgery and a safe alternative to natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery,single incision laparoscopic surgery is gaining popularity.There are expensive ports,disposable hand instruments and flexible endoscopes that have been suggested to do this surgery and would increase the cost of operation.For a simple surgery like laparoscopic cholecystectomy,these extras are not needed and the surgery can be performed using standard ports,instruments and telescopes.Tri...     

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.     

Safety considerations in laparoscopic surgery: A narrative review

Laparoscopic surgery has many advantages over open surgery. At the same time, it is not without its risks. In this review, we discuss steps that could enhance the safety of laparoscopic surgery. Some of the important safety considerations are ruling out pregnancy in women of the childbearing age group; advanced discussion with the patient regarding unexpected intraoperative situations, and ensuring appropriate equipment is available. Important perioperative safety considerations include thromboprophylaxis; antibiotic prophylaxis; patient allergies; proper positioning of the patient, stack, and monitor(s); patient appropriate pneumoperitoneum; ergonomic port placement; use of lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure; use of additional five-millimetre (mm) ports as needed; safe use of energy devices and laparoscopic staplers; low threshold for a second opinion; backing out if unsafe to proceed; avoiding hand-over in the middle of the procedure; ensuring all planned procedures have been performed; inclusion of laparoscopic retrieval bags and specimens in the operating count; avoiding 10-15 mm ports for placement of drains; appropriate port closures; and use of long-acting local anaesthetic agents for analgesia. Important postoperative considerations include adequate analgesia; early ambulation; careful attention to early warning scores; and appropriate discharge advice.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术后切口感染预防策略

目的 观察新的预防方案对经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术后切口感染的预防效果.方法 经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者57例随机分为观察组31例和对照组26例.观察组切口感染预防措施：术前24 h常规备皮后应用双氧水消毒,安尔碘消毒两遍,最后放置安尔碘棉球于脐部至手术开始;麻醉诱导前半小时预防性应用头孢西丁钠2.0g;切口缝合前应用庆大霉素生理盐水清洗切口;术后24 h换药,术后72 h第2次换药并拆线出院.对照组按照传统措施进行防感染处理.分别于术后12、24、36、48、60、72 h检测两组体温、WBC、中性粒细胞比率（GR）,观察切口局部有无红肿热痛症状,统计两组切口感染发生率.结果 对照组术后24、36、48、60h体温高于观察组,术后24、72 h WBC高于观察组,术后24、72 h GR高于观察组（P均＜0.05）.观察组术后体温、WBC、GR较术前略升高,但无统计学意义,对照组体温、WBC、GR较术前升高（P均＜0.05）.观察组无切口感染（0％）,对照组2例（7.7％）,两组切口感染发生率相比,P ＜0.05.结论 用新预防方案即术前应用双氧水、安尔碘消毒、麻醉诱导前预防性应用抗生素、调整术后换药时间可降低经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术后切口感染发生率.     

Totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes compared with open surgery

AIM: To systematically review the surgical outcomes of totally laparoscopic gastrectomy (TLG) vs open gastrectomy (OG) for gastric cancer.METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted. All original studies comparing TLG with OG were included for critical appraisal. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.1 software.RESULTS: One RCT and 13 observational studies involving 1532 patients were included (721 TLG and 811 OG). TLG was associated with longer operation time [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 58.04 min, 95%CI: 37.77-78.32, P < 0.001], less blood loss [WMD = -167.57 min, 95%CI: -208.79-(-126.34), P < 0.001], shorter hospital stay [WMD = -3.75 d, 95%CI: -4.88-(-2.63), P < 0.001] and fewer postoperative complications (RR = 0.71, 95%CI: 0.58-0.86, P < 0.001). The number of harvested lymph nodes, surgical margin, mortality and cancer recurrence rate were similar between the two groups.CONCLUSION: TLG may be a technically safe, feasible and favorable approach in terms of better cosmesis, less blood loss and faster recovery compared with OG.     

快速康复外科在胆道结石患者围手术期护理中安全性和有效性的Meta分析

目的系统评价快速康复外科(FTS)在胆道结石手术围手术期护理中的有效性和安全性。方法系统检索Pubmed、Cochrane library、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国知网、维普和万方数据库中的随机对照试验(RCT)。采用Cochrane工具评估文献风险,数据分析使用Rev Man 5.3软件。各研究间的统计学异质性采用χ2检验。结果纳入11项RCT,共计1455例患者(FTS组738例,对照组717例)。Meta分析结果显示:FTS组显著缩短了术后住院时间[均数差(MD)=-4.10,95%可信区间(95%CI):-5.68~-2.52,P0.000 01)],减少了住院费用(MD=-0.47,95%CI:-0.60~-0.34,P0.000 01);加快了胃肠恢复时间[标准均数差(SMD)=-2.05,95%CI:-2.84~-1.27,P0.000 01)],并缩短了首次排便时间(SMD=-1.27,95%CI:-2.08~-0.46,P0.000 01)。安全性方面,FTS显著降低了胆管结石[风险比(RR)=0.53,95%CI:0.43~0.65,P0.000 01]和肝胆管结石(RR=0.52,95%CI:0.35~0.77,P=0.001)的总并发症。结论 FTS应用于胆道结石手术围手术期护理是安全有效的,可显著减少术后住院时间、加快胃肠恢复和缩短首次排便时间,同时降低了术后总并发症。     

Innovative technique of needlescopic grasper-assisted single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: A comparative study

AIM: To investigate the safety and feasibility of needlescopic grasper-assisted single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (nSIL-CBDE) by comparing the surgical outcomes of this technique with those of conventional laparoscopic CBDE (CL-CBDE).METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients who underwent CL-CBDE or nSIL-CBDE for the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones between January 2000 and December 2014. For performing nSIL-CBDE, a needlescopic grasper was also inserted through a direct puncture below the right subcostal line after introducing a single-port through the umbilicus. The needlescopic grasper helped obtain the critical view of safety by retracting the gallbladder laterally and by preventing crossing or conflict between laparoscopic instruments. The gallbladder was then partially dissected from the liver bed and used for retraction. CBD stones were usually extracted through a longitudinal supraduodenal choledochotomy, mostly using flushing a copious amount of normal saline through a ureteral catheter. Afterward, for the certification of CBD clearance, CBDE was performed mostly using a flexible choledochoscope. The choledochotomy site was primarily closed without using a T-tube, and simultaneous cholecystectomies were performed.RESULTS: During the study period, 40 patients underwent laparoscopic CBDE. Of these patients, 20 underwent CL-CBDE and 20 underwent nSIL-CBDE. The operative time for nSIL-CBDE was significantly longer than that for CL-CBDE (238 ± 76 min vs 192 ± 39 min, P = 0.007). The stone clearance rate was 100% (40/40) in both groups. Postoperatively, the nSIL-CBDE group required less intravenous analgesic (pethidine) (46.5 ± 63.5 mg/kg vs 92.5 ± 120.1 mg/kg, P = 0.010) and had a shorter hospital stay than the CL-CBDE group (3.8 ± 2.0 d vs 5.1 ± 1.7 d, P = 0.010). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups.CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that nSIL-CBDE could be safe and feasible while improving cosmetic outcomes when performed by surgeons trained in conventional laparoscopic techniques.     

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 898patients 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.     

A totally mini-invasive approach for colorectal laparoscopic surgery

AIM: To study the short-term outcome of patients treated with laparoscopic right colectomy and how intracorporeal anastomosis has improved the outcome.METHODS: We retrospectively examined all patients affected by colorectal cancer who underwent a laparoscopic right colectomy between January 2006 and December 2010 in our department. Our evaluation criteria were: diagnosis of colorectal carcinoma at presurgical biopsy, elective surgery, and the same surgeon. We excluded: emergency surgery, conversions from laparotomic colectomy, and other surgeons. The endpoints we examined were: surgical time, number of lymph nodes removed, length of stay (removal of nasogastric tube, bowel movements, gas evacuation, solid and liquid feeding, hospitalization), and major complications. Seventy-two patients were divided into two groups: intracorporeal anastomosis (39 patients) and extracorporeal anastomosis (33 patients).RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between intracorporeal vs extracorporeal anastomosis, respectively, for surgical times (186.8 min vs 184.1 min, P < 0.001), time to resumption of gas evacuation (3 d vs 3.5 d, P < 0.001), days until resumption of bowel movements (3.8 d vs 4.9 d, P < 0.001), days until resumption of liquid diet (3.5 d vs 4.5 d, P < 0.001), days until resuming a solid diet (4.6 d vs 5.7 d, P < 0.001), and total hospitalization duration (7.4 d vs 8.5 d, P < 0.001). In the intracorporeal group, on average, 19 positive lymph nodes were removed; in the extracorporeal group, on average, 14 were removed P < 0.001). Thus, intracorporeal anastomosis for right laparoscopic colectomy improved patient outcome by providing faster recovery of nutrition, faster recovery of intestinal function, and shorter hospitalization than extracorporeal anastomosis.CONCLUSION: Short-term outcomes favor intracorporeal anastomosis, confirming that a less traumatic surgical approach improves patient outcome.     

Laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy vs three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A large-scale retrospective study

AIM: To perform a large-scale retrospective comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy (LESSC) and three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (TPLC) in a single institution. METHODS: Data were collected from 366 patients undergoing LESSC between January 2005 and July 2008 and were compared with the data from 355 patients undergoing TPLC between August 2008 and November 2011 in our department. Patients with body mass index greater than 35 kg/m2 , a history of major upper abdominal surgery, signs of acute cholecystitis, such as fever, right upper quadrant tenderness with or without Murphy’s sign, elevated white blood cell count, imaging findings suggestive of pericholecystic fluid, gallbladder wall thickening > 4 mm, and gallstones > 3 cm, were excluded to avoid bias. RESULTS: Altogether, 298 LESSC and 315 TPLC patients met the inclusion criteria. The groups were well matched with regard to demographic data. There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative complications (contusion: 19 vs 25 and hematoma at incision: 11 vs 19), hospital stay (mean ± SD, 1.4 ± 0.2 d vs 1.4 ± 0.7 d) and visual analogue pain score (mean ± SD, 8 h after surgery: 2.3 ± 1.4 vs 2.3 ± 1.3 and at day 1: 1.2 ± 0.4 vs 1.3 ± 1.2) between the LESSC and TPLC patients. Four patients required the addition of extra ports and 2 patients were converted to open surgery in the LESSC group, which was not significantly different when compared with TPLC patients converted to laparotomy (2 vs 2). LESSC resulted in a longer operating time (mean ± SD, 54.8 ± 11.0 min vs 33.5 ± 9.0 min), a higher incidence of intraoperative gallbladder perforation (56 vs 6) and higher operating cost (mean ± SD, 1933.7 ± 64.4 USD vs 1874.7 ± 46.2 USD) than TPLC. No significant differences in operating time (mean ± SD, 34.3 ± 6.0 min vs 32.7 ± 8.7 min) and total cost (mean ± SD, 1881.3 ± 32.8 USD vs 1876.2 ± 33.4 USD) were found when the last 100 cases in the two groups were compared. A correlation was observed between red     

右美托咪定用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者全麻苏醒期的有效性和安全性

目的探讨右美托咪定应用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者中对全麻苏醒期的效果及应用价值。方法选取该院进行腹腔镜手术治疗的104例子宫肌瘤或者卵巢囊肿患者,按随机数字表法将患者分为观察组(右美托咪定组)和对照组(生理盐水组)各52例,观察两组麻醉效果和苏醒期的有效性和安全性。结果观察组拔管时平均动脉压(MAP)(101.84±5.41)mm Hg,拔管后5 min MAP(91.38±5.06)mm Hg,拔管后10 min MAP(90.34±4.89)mm Hg,拔管后15 min MAP(86.47±4.32)mm Hg;拔管时心率(HR)(88.34±6.45)次/min,拔管后5 min HR(83.48±5.78)次/min,拔管后10 min HR(81.53±5.15)次/min,拔管后15 min HR(80.02±4.47)次/min;均优于对照组,组间比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组呼吸恢复时间(5.32±1.83)min,意识恢复时间(9.22±2.36)min,拔管时间(11.89±2.88)min;对照组分别为(5.41±1.79)min、(9.19±2.41)min、(11.95±2.79)min,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组Riker镇静和躁动评分(4.03±0.57)分,躁动发生率为5.77%,对照组为(5.32±1.63)分、34.62%,组间比较差异有统计学意义(P0.01)。结论右美托咪定应用于妇科腹腔镜手术患者中可以让血流动力学更加稳定,术后苏醒迅速、完全,值得临床推广应用。     

Comparison between single-incision and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a meta-analysis from eight RCTs

Purpose

To assess the efficacy and safety of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA), we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy (CTLA).

Methods

RCTs comparing the effects of SILA and CTLA were searched for in PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase. Operative time, the pain visual analogue scales scores (VAS scores), dose of analgesics, postoperative complications, hospital charges, and duration of postoperative hospitalization in SILA and CTLA were pooled and compared by meta-analysis. Odds ratios and weighted mean differences (WMDs) were calculated with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the effect of SILA.

Result

Eight original RCTs investigating 760 adults and 684 children, 1,444 patients in total, of whom 721 received SILA only and 723 received CTLA only, met the inclusion criteria. Both in adults and children, the mean operative time was significantly longer in SILA than CTLA (WMD5.45, 95 % CI 2.15 to 8.75, p?=?0.01). Compared with CTLA, in children, SILA have higher analgesic consumption (WMD 0.69, 95 % CI 0.08 to 1.3, p?=?0.03) and greater hospital charges (WMD 0.87, 95 % CI 1.26 to 1.48, p?=?0.005), which was not statistically different in adults (p?>?0.05). Pooling the results for SILA and CTLA revealed no significant difference in VAS scores, wound infection rate, overall complications, and postoperative hospital stay.

Conclusion

SILA failed to show any obvious advantages over CTLA in perioperative and postoperative outcomes. Therefore, it represents a possible alternative to conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy.     

Outcomes following laparoscopic versus open major hepatectomy: a meta-analysis

Objective: The role of laparoscopic major hepatectomy (LMH) remains uncertain in current liver surgery. This meta-analysis aimed to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of LMH versus open major hepatectomy (OMH).

Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library database to identify all relevant publications. The statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.3. Continuous variables were calculated by standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas dichotomous variables were calculated by odds ratio (OR) with 95%CI.

Results: A total of 10 eligible studies with 1130 patients were identified, of which 455 (40.3%) patients in the LMH group and 675 (59.7%) patients in the OMH group. LMH was associated with less blood loss (SMD?=??0.30, 95%CI: ?0.43 to ?0.18, p?p?=?.007), decreased postoperative morbidity (OR?=?0.56, 95%CI: 0.42–0.76, p?=?.0001), and shorter hospital stay (SMD?=??0.46, 95%CI: ?0.69 to ?0.24, p?p?=?.01). Both the two groups achieved similar surgical margin and R0 resection rate for malignant lesions.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrated that LMH appeared to be feasible and safe in current liver surgery. LMH is associated with less blood loss, decreased postoperative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and comparable oncological outcomes compared with OMH.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜技术在肝胆外科疾病治疗中的应用

目的 探讨经脐单孔腹腔镜技术在肝胆外科疾病治疗中的安全性和可行性.方法 分析总结我院2010年5月至2011年5月应用单孔腹腔镜技术选择性对71例患有肝胆疾病患者的手术资料,其中胆囊结石39例,胆囊息肉15例,肝囊肿14例,肝癌1例.结果 69例患者均成功实施了单孔手术,2例胆囊结石患者,由于局部粘连较重,改常规腹腔镜手术.行胆囊切除54例,手术时间45～ 95 min;肝囊肿14例,行囊肿开窗术手术时间25～45 min;左肝外叶边缘肝癌1例,行肝楔形切除术,手术时间145 min.术后无黄疸、胆汁漏、出血和切口感染等并发症.脐部切口瘢痕小而隐蔽,无明显可视瘢痕.结论在现有条件下单孔腹腔镜手术操作难度较大,术前和术中慎重把握手术适应证,及时改变手术方法,对多数患者经脐单孔腹腔镜手术是安全的,具有极好的美容效果.     

Laparo-endoscopic single-site surgery vs conventional laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective:To systematically review and evaluate the safety, advantages and clinical application value of laparo-endoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) for endometrial cancer by comparing it with conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS).Methods:We conducted a systematic review of the published literature comparing LESS with CLS in the treatment of endometrial cancer. English databases including PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library and Chinese databases including Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang and China Biology Medicine were searched for eligible observational studies up to July 10, 2019. We then evaluated the quality of the selected comparative studies before performing a meta-analysis using the RevMan 5.3 software. The complications, surgical time, blood loss during surgery, postoperative length of hospital stay and number of lymph nodes removed during surgery were compared between the 2 surgical approaches.Results:Four studies with 234 patients were finally included in this meta-analysis. We found that there was no statistically significant difference in complications between the 2 surgical approaches [odds ratio (OR): 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.18–2.21, P = .47, I² = 0%]. There was no statistically significant difference in blood loss between the 2 surgical approaches [mean difference (MD): –61.81, 95% CI: –130.87 to –7.25, P = .08, I² = 74%]. There was no statistically significant difference in surgical time between the 2 surgical approaches (MD: –11.51, 95% CI: –40.19 to 17.16, P = .43, I² = 81%). There was also no statistically significant difference in postoperative length of hospital stay between the 2 surgical approaches (MD: –0.56, 95% CI: –1.25 to –0.13, P = .11, I² = 72%). Both pelvic and paraaortic lymph nodes can be removed with either of the 2 procedures. There were no statistically significant differences in the number of paraaortic lymph nodes and total lymph nodes removed during surgery between the 2 surgical approaches [(MD: –0.11, 95% CI: –3.12 to 2.91, P = .29, I² = 11%) and (MD: –0.53, 95% CI (–3.22 to 2.16), P = .70, I² = 83%)]. However, patients treated with LESS had more pelvic lymph nodes removed during surgery than those treated with CLS (MD: 3.33, 95% CI: 1.05–5.62, P = .004, I² = 32%).Conclusion:Compared with CLS, LESS did not reduce the incidence of complications or shorten postoperative hospital stay. Nor did it increase surgical time or the amount of bleeding during surgery. LESS can remove lymph nodes and ease postoperative pain in the same way as CLS. However, LESS improves cosmesis by leaving a single small scar.     

Single-port laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid volvulus

AIM:To report our experience with single-port laparoscopic surgery(SPLS)for sigmoid volvulus(SV).METHODS:Between October 2009 and April 2013,10patients underwent SPLS for SV.SPLS was performed transumbilically or through a predetermined stoma site.Conventional straight and rigid-type laparoscopic instruments were used.After intracorporeal,segmental resection of the affected sigmoid colon,the specimen was extracted through the single-incision site.Patientdemographics and perioperative data were analyzed.RESULTS:SPLS for SV was successful in all 10 patients(4,resection and primary anastomosis;6,Hartmann’s procedure).The median operative time and postoperative hospitalization period were 168(range,85-315)min and 6.5(range,4-29)d,respectively.No intraoperative complications were noted;there were 2 postoperative complications,including 1 anastomotic leak.CONCLUSION:SPLS was a safe and feasible therapeutic approach for SV,when performed by a surgeon experienced in conventional laparoscopic surgery.