Single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a safe alternative to conventional laparoscopy

Comparison of clinical efficacy of single-incision and traditional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies

Background

Single-incision laparoscopy surgery (SILS) is a new laparoscopic technique that has emerged in the past decade. Whether it has advantages over conventionl laparoscopy surgery (CLS) is inconclusive. This article aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer through high-quality literature text mining and meta-analysis.

Methods

Relevant articles were searched on the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from January 2012 to November 2021. All data was from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in order to increase the confidence of the analytical results.The main outcomes were intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Results

A total of 10 RCTs were included, involving 1609 patients. The quality of the included studies was generally high. No significant difference was found between SILS and CLS in the postoperative complications, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, number of lymph nodes removed, readmission, reoperation, complication level I- II, complication level IIIa, complication level IIIb, prolonged Ileus, blood loss, infection, anastomotic leakage and operation time. The results showed that SILS group had a higher rate of intraoperative complications, but it had lower incision length and better cosmetic effects.

Conclusion

These results indicate that SILS did not have a comprehensive and obvious advantage over the CLS. On the contrary, SILS has higher intraoperative complications, which may be related to the more difficulty of SILS operation, but SILS still has better cosmetic effects, which is in line with the concept of surgical development. Therefore, the SILS needs to be selected in patients with higher cosmetic requirements and performed by more experienced surgeons.

Short- and long-term outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer: A multicenter propensity score-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colon cancer is a recent innovation in minimally invasive surgery that can improve short-term outcome. However, several biases exist in current favorable comparisons of SILS with conventional laparoscopic (CL) surgery. Moreover, the oncological outcomes in SILS remain unclear. The aim of this study was to identify outcomes following SILS and CL for right colectomy using a propensity score-matched analysis.

METHODS

A total of 553 patients underwent curative resection for right colon cancer (58 SILS and 495 CL). After propensity score matching, 58 patients in each group were matched.

RESULTS

Before matching, median age was younger (p = 0.037) and clinical stage was lower (p < 0.001) in the SILS group. After matching, operation time was shorter (172 versus 193 min, p = 0.007) and blood loss was less (12 versus 20 mL, p = 0.037) in the SILS group. Most of the SILS cases were performed (43.1%) or supervised (51.7%) by an expert surgeon. Median follow-up duration was 30 and 37 mo in the SILS and CL groups, respectively. Three-year relapse-free survival was 92.5% and 92.4% (p = 0.781); and overall survival was 100% versus 98.1% (p = 0.177).

CONCLUSIONS

Under the control of expert surgeons, SILS appeared to be a safe and feasible approach and had similar oncological outcomes compared with CL in a propensity score-matched cohort of patients with right-sided colon cancer.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Single-incision Laparoscopy Versus Multiport Laparoscopy for Colonic Surgery: A Multicenter, Double-blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcome of single-port laparoscopy (SPL) and multiport laparoscopy (MPL) laparoscopy for colonic surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Benefits of SPL over MPL are yet to be demonstrated in large randomized trials.

METHODS

In this prospective, double-blinded, superiority trial, patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic resection for benign or malignant disease were randomly assigned to SPL or MPL (NCT01959087). Primary outcome was length of theoretical hospital stay (LHS).

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-eight patients were randomized and 125 analyzed: 62 SPL and 63 MPL, including 91 right (SPL: n = 44, 71%; MPL: n = 47, 75%) and 34 left (SPL: n = 18, 29%; MPL: n = 16, 25%) colectomies, performed for Crohn disease (n = 53, 42%), cancer (n = 36, 29%), diverticulitis (n = 21, 17%), or benign neoplasia (n = 15, 12%). Additional port insertion was required in 5 (8%) SPL patients and conversion to laparotomy occurred in 7 patients (SPL: n = 3, 5%; MPL: n = 4, 7%; P = 1.000). Total length of skin incision was significantly shorter in the SPL group [SPL: 56 ± 41 (range, 30-300) mm; MPL: 87 ± 40 (50-250) mm; P < 0.001]. Procedure duration, intraoperative complication rate, postoperative 30-day morbidity, postoperative pain, and time to first bowel movement were similar between the groups, leading to similar theoretical LHS (SPL: 6 ± 3 days; MPL: 6 ± 2; P = 0.298). At 6 months, quality of life was similar between groups, but patients from the SPL group were significantly more satisfied with their scar aspect than patients from the MPL group (P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

SPL colectomy does not confer any additional benefit other than cosmetic result, as compared to MPL.

Single-Center Experience with Magnetic Retraction in Colorectal Surgery

Background: Appropriate tissue retraction is essential in laparoscopic surgery, and colorectal operations often require an additional incision and trocar that can disturb visualization and maneuverability. Each incision carries an increased risk for complications as well as increased pain and cosmetic issues. Magnetic devices have been developed for a less invasive retraction. The objective of this study is to report our initial experience using magnet retraction. Methods: Ten consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal procedures by a single surgeon using a magnetic retractor (Levita Magnetics^® Surgical System, San Mateo, CA) between October 2017 and June 2018 at Duke Regional Hospital in Durham, NC, were included. Results: The cases included four single-port right colectomies, one sigmoidectomy, and five rectopexies. Nine cases were completed laparoscopically, as one right colectomy required conversion due to adhesions and bulky specimen. Indications included adenocarcinoma, diverticular disease, and rectal prolapse. The magnet was successfully used for uterus, colon, or colonic pedicle retraction. No intraoperative or 30-day complications were observed. Conclusion: Magnetic surgical retractors are a safe, dynamic, and incision-less option for surgical field exposure during laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Reduced trocars decrease tissue trauma, enhances maneuverability, and potentially improves outcomes; however, further studies are required.

A review of reports on single-incision laparoscopic surgery for Crohn's disease

The aim of this review was to analyze the currently available literature on single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for Crohn's disease (CD) with respect to surgical indications, surgical techniques, feasibility, and possible benefits of SILS for CD. A systematic query of articles published from January 2010 to July 2018 was performed. The studies were assessed for patient's age, gender, body mass index, disease type, SILS procedure, surgical procedure, incision length, operation time, rates of conversion to open surgery, postoperative complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, and rates of reoperation. After an initial review, 11 reports were selected. The surgical techniques and instruments showed wide variation. The mean operation time for SILS tended to be shorter than that for multiport laparoscopic surgery (MLS). The reported rates of conversion to open surgery and postoperative complications were not very different from those reported for MLS. In conclusion, the present review suggests that the SILS technique may be feasible and safe for select patients with CD. However, because we reviewed only a few studies with small sample sizes, prospectively designed trials with a large number of patients are required to clarify the true benefits of SILS for CD.

Single-incision laparoscopic ileostomy is a safe and feasible method of fecal diversion for anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection

Purpose

Currently, many operations are performed using the single-incision laparoscopic method. Although there have been recent reports on single-incision laparoscopic ileostomy, none have compared this method to conventional laparoscopic ileostomy. This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic ileostomy for anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resections.

Methods

From April 2012 to April 2017, 38 patients underwent laparoscopic ileostomy (single-incision; 19 patients referred to as group A, conventional laparoscopy; 19 patients referred to as group B) for anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection. We analyzed surgical and clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. Patients in whom a protective ileostomy was carried out during the initial laparoscopic low anterior resection were excluded from this study.

Results

No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of patient demographics and initial operation details. Incisional surgical site infections occurred less in group A than in group B (2 of 19 vs. 9 of 19, P = 0.029). The median ileostomy operation time, amount of intraoperative bleeding, parastomal hernia ratio, hospital stay duration after ileostomy, postoperative pain score were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

Conclusion

Single-incision laparoscopic ileostomy is safe and feasible method of fecal diversion for anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic low anterior resection.

Clinical and oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for right colon cancer is going to be considered as a new option. The potential benefits, clinical, and oncologic outcomes are still controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate clinical and oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) for right colon cancer using propensity score matching analysis.

METHODS

From December 2013 to June 2017, 174 patients underwent laparoscopic radical right hemicolectomy through a single-incision (n = 32) or a conventional (n = 142) approach. The data were prospectively collected and the patients were matched at a radio of 1:1 according to age, sex, body mass index (BMI), previous abdominal surgeries, comorbidities, ASA score (≤ 2/> 2), and pathologic stage.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed in estimated blood loss, time to diet, postoperative pain score, length of hospital stay between the SILS and CLS groups. However, the SILS group showed longer operation time (175 (40) vs 145 (52.5), p = 0.011) and shorter incision length (4 (1.4) vs 7 (1.9), p < 0.001). There were 2 (6.3%) postoperative complications in the SILS group and 5 (15.6%) in the CLS group (p = 0.426). The pathologic outcomes were similar between two groups. The median follow-up period was 26.5 months in the SILS group and 34.9 months in the CLS group (p = 0.002). There were 3 recurrences (9.4%) in the SILS group and 3 (9.4%) in the CLS group. The 3-year disease-free survival rates were 92.4 and 93.8% (p = 0.984), and overall survival rates were 92.3 and 93.0% (p = 0.884) in the SILS and the CLS groups, respectively. No incisional hernia was observed during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Though single-incision laparoscopic surgery for right colon cancer showed longer operation time in this study, it appears to be a safe and feasible option with comparable clinical and oncologic outcomes to conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Single-incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic right colectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery has gained widespread attention because of its potential benefits such as less skin incision and faster recovery. Up to now, only one meta-analysis (performed in 2013; including 9 studies, a total of 585 cases) compared single-incision laparoscopic right colectomy (SILRC) with conventional laparoscopic right colectomy (CLRC). An updated meta-analysis was undertaken to explore more convinced comparative findings between SILRC and CLRC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The search for studies that compared SILRC with CLRC was done on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. A total of 17 studies (including 1778 cases) were identified, the data of appointed outcomes were extracted and analyzed.

RESULTS

Patient demographics (age, gender, body mass index and previous abdominal operation) did not differ significantly. No significant differences were found between SILRC and CLRC in operative time, conversion, reoperation, perioperative complications, postoperative mortality, and 30-days readmission. Pathological outcomes, including lymph nodes harvested, proximal resection margin, and distal resection margin, were similar. SILRC showed less estimated blood loss (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -15.67 ml; 95% confidence interval [CI], -24.36 to -6.98; p = 0.0004), less skin incisions (WMD: -1.56 cm; 95%CI, -2.63 to -0.49; p = 0.004) and shorter hospital stay (WMD: -0.73d; 95%CI, -1.04 to -0.41; p < 0.00001), without publication bias.

CONCLUSION

SILRC may provide a safe and feasible alternative to CLRC with similar short-term outcomes and aesthetic advantage of less skin incision. Well-designed randomized controlled trials, involving large cases and carrying long-term outcomes, are needed.

Single Port and Conventional Laparoscopy in Colorectal Surgery: Comparison of Two Techniques

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) was introduced to further the enhanced outcome of conventional multiport laparoscopy (CML). We compared their short- and long-term outcomes in colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery during 3-year period. Patients' data, surgery outcomes, and oncological results were compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients (33 male, 28 female), mean age 67.4 years, underwent laparoscopic colonic resections: 28 SILS and 33 CML. Twenty-three (37.7%) patients had previous abdominal surgery. There were 19 (31.2%) right, 9 (14.7%) left, and 2 (3.3%) total colectomies, 16 (26.2%) sigmoidectomies, 13 (21.3%) anterior and 2 (3.3%) abdominoperineal resections. Colonic malignancy was a main indication for the surgery in 51 (83.6%) patients. Mean surgery time and postoperative stay were 92.0 minutes and 9 days, respectively. Pathological examination revealed stage I colon cancer in 16 (32%), stage II in 22 (44%), stage III in 10 (20%), and stage IV in 2 (4%) patients. Mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was 19 ± 13.5. No differences were found between groups in demographic data, type of surgery, surgery time and hospital stay, pathological results and tumor staging, and disease-free and overall survivals. In the SILS group, placement of additional trocar was required in 7 (25%) and conversion in 3 (10.7%) cases compared with 1 (3%) case of conversion to formal laparotomy in the CML group. Overall postoperative morbidity was 16.4%. There was no mortality in both the groups. During the study period, 3 patients from the CML group had cancer recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

SILS is a feasible and safe technique compared with CML in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes.

Comparison of Early Results and Complications between Multi-and Single-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Randomized Clinical Study

BACKGROUND

In recent years, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become more acceptable for obese patients. Single-port sleeve gastrectomy (SPSG) is more popular since each abdominal incision carries the risk of bleeding, hernia, and internal organ injury as well as exponentially affecting cosmesis. This cross-sectional study aimed at comparing multi-port sleeve gastrectomy (MPSG) and SPSG in terms of their early results and complications.

METHODS

Out of129 obese patients candidated for LSG, 102 patients were assigned to 2 groups of SPSG and MPSG. Complications and demographic data such as body mass index (BMI), age, gender, operation time, and hospital stay were measured. All surgeries were carried out between2013 and 2015 in Shiraz, Iran. Data analysis was performed using SPSS, version 16 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). The continuous and categorical variables were compared using the Student t-test and the Chi-square test or the Fisher exact test, respectively.

RESULTS

The patients' data from both groups were similar in terms of age, intraoperative and postoperative bleeding volume, and length of hospital stay. Mean BMI was 42.8±0.7 in the SPSG group and 45.3±1.2 in the MPSG group. Duration of surgery was significantly lower in the SPSG group (P<0.001). Only 1 patient from the SPSG group and 5 patients from the MPSG group had bleeding as an early complication.

CONCLUSION

The differences in each complication between the groups were not statistically significant. SPSG seems to be safe and is the same as MPSG in terms of major postoperative complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

IRCT201512229936N12 The abstract was presented in the 4^th International Congress of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Iran, as a poster and published in Iran J Med Sci Journal as a supplement (May 2015; Vol. 40, No. 3).

Single-incision versus standard multi-incision laparoscopic colectomy in patients with malignant or benign colonic disease: a systematic review, meta-analysis and assessment of the evidence

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) requires only one umbilical port site and (depending on technique) a specimen extraction site. The aim of this study was the assessment of the available evidence for the comparison of SILC to conventional multi-port laparoscopic colectomy (MLC) in adult patients, in whom elective colectomy is indicated because of malignant or benign disease. First, previous meta-analyses on this topic were assessed. Secondly, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, was performed.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches (CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE; up to March 2016) were performed. Additionally, we searched clinical trials registries and abstracts from surgical society meetings. For meta-analysis, risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95 % confidence intervals were calculated and pooled. The quality of previous meta-analyses was evaluated against established criteria (AMSTAR) and their reported results were investigated for consistency.

RESULTS

We identified 6 previous meta-analyses of mostly low methodological quality (AMSTAR total score: 2 - 5 out of 11 items). To fill the evidence gaps, all these meta-analyses had included non-randomised studies, but usually without assessing their risk of bias. In our systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials exclusively, we included two randomised controlled trials with a total of 82 colorectal cancer patients. There was insufficient evidence to clarify whether SILC leads to less local complications (RR = 0.52, 95 % CI 0.14 - 1.94) or lower mortality (1 death per treatment group). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SILC group (MD = -1.20 days, 95 % CI -1.95 to -0.44). One of the two studies found postoperative pain intensity to be lower at the first day. We also identified 7 ongoing trials with a total sample size of over 1000 patients.

CONCLUSION

The currently available study results are too sparse to detect (or rule out) relevant differences between SILC and MLC. The quality of the current evidence is low, and the additional analysis of non-randomised data attempts, but does not solve this problem. SILC should still be considered as an experimental procedure, since the evidence of well-designed randomised controlled trials is too sparse to allow any recommendation.

Single-Incision Laparoscopy Could Be Better than Standard Laparoscopy in Right Colectomy for Cancer

BACKGROUND

Human natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is slowed down by technical hurdles. Concomitantly, single-incision laparoscopy has been increasingly reported as an alternative. By reducing the invasiveness of standard laparoscopy, we may further reduce postoperative pain, decrease morbidity, preserve abdominal wall, and enhance cosmesis. Such techniques have been widely applied, including in colorectal surgery. The aim of this multicenter study is to compare the results of single-incision right colectomy (SIRC) with the results of the standard laparoscopic right colectomy (SLRC) in patients with colon cancer.

METHODS

The files of patients who underwent right colectomy for cancer in five hospitals between January 2010 and December 2013 have been reviewed. Exclusion criteria were open surgery, emergency setting, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score >3. Patients were distributed in Groups A (SIRC) or B (SLRC).

RESULTS

Five hundred ninety-two patients were included in this study, 336 in Group A and 256 in Group B. Mean operative time was 129.0 minutes (range 65-245) in Group A and 168.1 minutes in the Group B (range 70-290), respectively (P < .001). No mortality occurred in either group. The overall 30-day morbidity rates were 21.4% in Group A and 25% in Group B, respectively (P = .64). The median length of hospital stay was 4.95 days (range 3-14) in Group A and 5.5 days in Group B (range 3-12), respectively (P = .28). Conversion to laparotomy occurred in four patients in each group (P = 1). Length of skin incision was significantly shorter in Group A than in Group B (2.99 ± 0.63 cm versus 4.94 ± 0.65 cm, P < .001). Histological analysis of the operative specimens showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

SIRC is feasible and sure for patients with colon cancer. As compared with SLRC, SIRC may offer some advantages, including lower operative morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and better cosmoses, without compromising the oncological quality of the resected specimen.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery: Current status and implementation of the latest technological innovations

The introduction of laparoscopy is an example of surgical innovation with a rapid implementation in many areas of surgery. A large number of controlled studies and meta-analyses have shown that laparoscopic colorectal surgery is associated with the same benefits than other minimally invasive procedures, including lesser pain, earlier recovery of bowel transit and shorter hospital stay. On the other hand, despite initial concerns about oncological safety, well-designed prospective randomized multicentre trials have demonstrated that oncological outcomes of laparoscopy and open surgery are similar. Although the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery has increased in recent years, the percentages of patients treated with surgery using minimally invasive techniques are still reduced and there are also substantial differences among centres. It has been argued that the limiting factor for the use of laparoscopic procedures is the number of surgeons with adequate skills to perform a laparoscopic colectomy rather than the tumour of patients’ characteristics. In this regard, future efforts to increase the use of laparoscopic techniques in colorectal surgery will necessarily require more efforts in teaching surgeons. We here present a review of recent controversies of the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery, such as in rectal cancer operations, the possibility of reproducing complete mesocolon excision, and the benefits of intra-corporeal anastomosis after right hemicolectomy. We also describe the results of latest innovations such as single incision laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for colon and rectal diseases.

Does Transumbilical Incision Influence Surgical Site Infection Rates of the Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy and Anterior Resection?

Laparoscopic surgery is widespread and is safe and effective for the management of patients with colorectal cancer. However, surgical site infection (SSI) remains an unresolved complication. The present study investigated the comparative effect of supraumbilical incision versus transumbilical incision (TU) on the incidence of SSI in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. Medical records from patients with colorectal cancer who underwent laparoscopic sigmoid and rectosigmoid colon surgeries with either supraumbilical incision (n = 150) or TU (n = 150) were retrospectively reviewed. There was no difference in demographics, comorbidities, or operative variables between the two groups. The transumbilical group and the supraumbilical group were comparable with regards to overall SSI (6.0% vs 4.0%; P = 0.4062), superficial SSI (6.0% vs 3.3%; P = 0.2704), and deep SSI (0% vs 0.7%; P = 0.2385). SSI developed after laparoscopic sigmoid and rectosigmoid colon cancer surgery in 15 (5.0%) of the 300 patients. Of these superficial SSI, all wounds were in the left lower quadrant incision, and the transumbilical port sites did not become infected. Univariate analysis failed to identify any risk factors for SSI. Avoidance of the umbilicus offers no benefit with regard to SSI compared with TU.

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.

New trends in colorectal surgery: Single port and natural orifice techniques

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) have rapidly gained pace worldwide, potentially replacing conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) as the preferred colorectal surgery technique. Currently available data mainly consist of retrospective series analyzed in four meta-analyses. Despite conflicting results and lack of an objective comparison, SILS appears to offer cosmetic advantages over CLS. However, due to conflicting results and marked heterogeneity, present data fail to show significant differences in terms of operative time, postoperative morbidity profiles, port-site complications rates, oncological appropriateness, duration of hospitalization or cost when comparing SILS with conventional laparoscopy for colorectal procedures. The application of “pure” NOTES in humans remains limited to case reports because of unresolved issues concerning the ideal access site, distant organ reach, spatial orientation and viscera closure. Alternatively, minilaparoscopy-assisted natural orifice surgery techniques are being developed. The transanal “down-to-up” total mesorectum excision has been derived for transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) and represents the most encouraging NOTES-derived technique. Preliminary experiences demonstrate good oncological and functional short-term outcomes. Large-scale randomized controlled trials are now mandatory to confirm the long-term SILS results and validate transanal TEM for the application of NOTES in humans.

Rational manipulation of the standard laparoscopic instruments for single-incision laparoscopic right colectomy

This report clarifies the rational manipulation of standard laparoscopic instruments for single-incision laparoscopic right colectomy (SILRC) using the SILS Port. We classified the manipulations required into 4 techniques. Vertical manipulation was required for medial-to-lateral retroperitoneal dissection. Frontal manipulation was needed for extension and establishment of a retroperitoneal plane. External crossing manipulation was used for dissection or ligation of the ileocolic or right colic vessels. Internal crossing manipulation was required for mobilization from the cecum to ascending colon. We performed SILRC for a series of 30 consecutive patients. One additional port was needed in 5 of the patients (16.7%) because of severe adhesion between the ileum and abdominal wall. No intraoperative complications were encountered. Four rational manipulations of the standard laparoscopic instruments are required for SILRC using the SILS Port. However, more experience and comparative trials are needed to determine the exact role of SILRC.

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery-systematic review and pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this pooled analysis is to determine the effect of single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery (SILC) on short-term clinical and oncological outcomes compared with conventional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery (CLC).

METHODS

An electronic search of Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was performed. Weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated for the effect size of SILC on continuous variables and pooled odds ratios (POR) were calculated for discrete variables.

RESULTS

No significant differences between the groups were noted for mortality or morbidity including anastomotic leak, reoperation, pneumonia, wound infection, port-site hernia, and operative time. The benefits of a SILC approach included reduction in time to return of bowel function (WMD = -1.11 days; 95 % C.I. -2.11 to -0.13; P = 0.03), and length of hospital stay (WMD = -1.9 days; 95 % C.I. -2.73 to -1.07; P < 0.0001). Oncological surgical quality was also shown for SILC for the treatment of colorectal cancer with a similar average lymph node harvest, proximal and distal resection margin length compared to CLC.

CONCLUSIONS

SILC can be performed safely by experienced laparoscopic surgeons with similar short-term clinical and oncological outcomes to CLC. SILC may further enhance some of the benefits of minimally invasive surgery with a reduction in blood loss and length of hospital stay.

A systematic review of outcome reporting in colorectal cancer surgery

AIM

Evaluation of surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) is necessary to inform clinical decision-making and healthcare policy. The standards of outcome reporting after CRC surgery have not previously been considered.

METHOD

Systematic literature searches identified randomized and nonrandomized prospective studies reporting clinical outcomes of CRC surgery. Outcomes were listed verbatim, categorized into broad groups (outcome domains) and examined for a definition (an appropriate textual explanation or a supporting citation). Outcome reporting was considered inconsistent if results of the outcome specified in the methods were not reported. Outcome reporting was compared between randomized and nonrandomized studies.

RESULTS

Of 5644 abstracts, 194 articles (34 randomized and 160 nonrandomized studies) were included reporting 766 different clinical outcomes, categorized into seven domains. A mean of 14 ± 8 individual outcomes were reported per study. 'Anastomotic leak', 'overall survival' and 'wound infection' were the three most frequently reported outcomes in 72, 60 and 44 (37.1%, 30.9% and 22.7%) studies, respectively, and no single outcome was reported in every publication. Outcome definitions were significantly more often provided in randomized studies than in nonrandomized studies (19.0% vs 14.9%, P = 0.015). One-hundred and twenty-seven (65.5%) papers reported results of all outcomes specified in the methods (randomized studies, n = 21, 61.5%; nonrandomized studies, n = 106, 66.2%; P = 0.617).

CONCLUSION

Outcome reporting in CRC surgery lacks consistency and method. Improved standards of outcome measurement are recommended to permit data synthesis and transparent cross-study comparisons.

Single-port laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in Korea: retrospective analysis of the multicenter, pooled database

INTRODUCTION

Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS), one of the advanced techniques of laparoscopic surgery, is performed through a single multichannel port. Regarding colorectal surgery, several colorectal procedures, including right colectomy, sigmoidectomy, and total proctocelectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis, have been performed successfully. The aim of this study was to elucidate the feasibility and safety of SPLS for the treatment of the patient with colorectal cancer in Korea.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively from six hospitals through a Web-based case reporting form, which requested baseline characteristics of the patient, intraoperative findings, postoperative course, pathologic results of the tumor, and postoperative surveillance.

RESULTS

From May 2009 to June 2012, 257 patients were included in this study. Anterior resection was performed in 117 patients, low anterior resection in 66 patients, and right colectomy in 53 patients. The primary entry incision site was umbilicus in all patients except for 2 cases; in these, stoma sites were used for the entry of the single port. The total mean incision length was 3.8±2.3 cm. Among 257 initially SPLS-attempted patients, 45 (17.5%) patients needed additional ports (one additional port in 44 patients), and 2 patients (0.78%) had to be converted to open laparotomy. Intraoperative complications were noted in 5 patients, including anastomotic failures in 3 patients and bleeding in 1 patient. Postoperative complications were noted in 34 patients (13.2%). Anastomotic leak developed in 11 patients, urinary retention in 5 patients, and wound complications in 4 patients. Re-admission was needed in 15 patients (5.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

SPLS could be performed safely and appropriately in selected colorectal cancer cases by experts in laparoscopic colorectal surgery in Korea. Prospective randomized trials to demonstrate the benefit and effectiveness of SPLS in colorectal cancer surgery with long-term oncologic results are needed.

Single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer: State of art

A number of clinical trials have demonstrated that the laparoscopic approach for colorectal cancer resection provides the same oncologic results as open surgery along with all clinical benefits of minimally invasive surgery. During the last years, a great effort has been made to research for minimizing parietal trauma, yet for cosmetic reasons and in order to further reduce surgery-related pain and morbidity. New techniques, such as natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) have been developed in order to reach the goal of “scarless” surgery. Although NOTES may seem not fully suitable or safe for advanced procedures, such as colectomies, SIL is currently regarded as the next major advance in the progress of minimally invasive surgical approaches to colorectal disease that is more feasible in generalized use. The small incision through the umbilicus allows surgeons to use familiar standard laparoscopic instruments and thus, perform even complex procedures which require extraction of large surgical specimens or intestinal anastomosis. The cosmetic result from SIL is also better because the only incision is made through the umbilicus which can hide the wound effectively after operation. However, SIL raises a number of specific new challenges compared with the laparoscopic conventional approach. A reduced capacity for triangulation, the repeated conflicts between the shafts of the instruments and the difficulties to achieve a correct exposure of the operative field are the most claimed issues. The use therefore of this new approach for complex colorectal procedures might understandingly be viewed as difficult to implement, especially for oncologic cases.

Feasibility of single-port laparoscopic surgery for sigmoid colon and rectal cancers and preoperative assessment of operative difficulty

PURPOSE

Single-port laparoscopic surgery is more difficult for sigmoid colon and rectal cancers than for right-sided colon cancer. We sought to analyze the feasibility of this procedure for sigmoid colon and rectal cancers and to estimate its difficulty.

METHODS

We analyzed prospectively collected data from 63 consecutive patients with sigmoid colon or rectal cancers who underwent single-port laparoscopic surgery at our institution from June 2009 to December 2011. Patient and tumor characteristics, including patients' pelvic anatomy which was assessed on CT scan imaging, were evaluated to elucidate what factors would affect the difficulty of the procedure and the necessity of using an additional trocar.

RESULTS

Overall, the median operative duration was 190 min and blood loss was 20 ml, with no postoperative complications. The median number of lymph nodes harvested was 17 and the distal margin was 58 mm. The tumor was located significantly closer to the anus in cases in which an additional trocar was required in the right lower quadrant (9.5 vs 18 cm, p < 0.0001). Procedural difficulty was significantly increased in cases in which the sacral promontory protruded ventrally (odds ratio 0.779 [95% confidence interval 0.613 to 0.945], p = 0.0236).

CONCLUSIONS

Depending on tumor location and sacral promontory shape, the introduction of an additional trocar might render single-port laparoscopic surgery feasible for sigmoid colon and rectal cancer resection.

Single incision laparoscopic right colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

A meta-analysis was performed to compare the outcome of single incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with standard multiport laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

METHOD

A systematic search of databases was carried out to extract comparative studies (randomized and non-randomized, prospective and retrospective). Data were analysed according to Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. A meta-analysis was performed when the data permitted this form of analysis.

RESULTS

Nine comparative studies were retrieved comprising 241 patients with single incision and standard laparoscopy. None of these was randomized. There was no significant difference between the two methods for the primary end-points of mortality, morbidity and cancer-specific parameters and for the secondary end-points of operation time, blood loss, ileus, hospital stay and conversion. It was not possible to analyse pain and cosmetics data owing to insufficient information.

CONCLUSION

Single incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is comparable with standard multiport laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in primary and secondary outcomes. Given current information it is justified to use single incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy, but there is a need for a prospective randomized study.

Mini-invasive surgery for colorectal cancer

Laparoscopic techniques have been extensively used for the surgical management of colorectal cancer during the last two decades. Accumulating data have demonstrated that laparoscopic colectomy is associated with better short-term outcomes and equivalent oncologic outcomes when compared with open surgery. However, some controversies regarding the oncologic quality of mini-invasive surgery for rectal cancer exist. Meanwhile, some progresses in colorectal surgery, such as robotic technology, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, natural orifice specimen extraction, and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, have been made in recent years. In this article, we review the published data and mainly focus on the current status and latest advances of mini-invasive surgery for colorectal cancer.

Robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis versus extracorporeal anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer: a case control study

INTRODUCTION

Extracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for cancer has a significant risk of complications. The aim of this study is to evaluate the operative and postoperative results of hybrid right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal robotic-assisted anastomosis for adenocarcinoma of the ascending colon compared with the standard extracorporeal anastomosis in a case control study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-eight right hemicolectomies for cancer (2009-2012) with laparoscopic medial to lateral dissection, vascular ligation, bowel transection, and robotic-assisted intracorporeal anastomosis with specimen extraction through a Pfannestiel incision (robotic group [RG]) were compared with 48 laparoscopic hemicolectomies (2009-2011) with extracorporeal anastomosis (laparoscopic group [LG]).

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable with respect to age, gender, stage of cancer, and body mass index. Surgery time was significantly longer in RG patients (RG, 266±41 minutes; LG, 223±51 minutes; P<.05). Operative results were similar in the two groups. Recovery of bowel function (day of first bowel movement: RG, 3.0±1.0 days; LG, 4.0±1.2 days; P<.05) and hospital stay (RG, 7.5±2.0 days; LG, 9.0±3.2 days; P<.05) were quicker and shorter, respectively, in RG. There were four anastomotic complications and four incisional hernias in LG and none in RG (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There are fewer anastomotic and wound complications in RG patients. Intracorporeal robotic-assisted ileocolic anastomosis allows a faster recovery compared with extracorporeal anastomosis.

Technique and short-term outcomes of single-port surgery for rectal cancer: A feasibility study of 25 patients

Background and Aims:

Although conventional laparoscopic surgery is less traumatic than open surgery, it does cause tissue trauma and multiple scar formation. The size and number of ports determine the extent of the trauma. Single-port laparoscopic surgery is assumed to minimize and perhaps eliminate the potential adverse effects of conventional laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to examine short-term outcomes of single-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.

Material and Methods:

Prospectively collected data from 25 consecutive patients who underwent single-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer between January 2010 and March 2012. Perioperative data, oncological resections, and short-term outcomes were assessed.

Results:

Male:female ratio was 10:15. Of the 25 patients, 44% had previously undergone abdominal surgery. Median body mass index was 24 kg/m2 (range: 19–32 kg/m2). In all, four patients (16%) had neoadjuvant therapy. Median operating time was 260 min (range: 136–397 min). An additional port was needed in two patients, and one case was converted to hand-assisted approach. Median postoperative stay was 7 days (range: 4–39 days), and three patients (12%) were readmitted. Median lymph node harvest was 13 (range: 3–33). The surgical margins were clear in all patients. Complications were seen in six patients.

Conclusion:

Single-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer can be performed in selected patients with rectal cancer without compromising oncological safety and with acceptable morbidity and mortality rates.

Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: feasibility based on our early experience

We report our experience of a reduced-port laparoscopic surgery as an advanced laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Twelve selected patients with clinical T1-2 and N0 rectal cancer (clinical stage I) underwent low anterior resection of the rectum. The procedures were performed with one port plus a multiple-instrument access port with three channels. The multiple-instrument access port was placed at the umbilicus or the site of diverting stoma, and another port was placed in the right abdomen or in the opposite abdomen of ostomy. The median operative time and intraoperative bleeding were 280 min and 15 mL, respectively. The median number of harvested lymph nodes was 20. No major perioperative morbidities occurred in this series. The median postoperative hospital stay was 10 days. Low anterior resection performed by reduced-port laparoscopic surgery is feasible as multiport laparoscopic surgery, and it is a reliable surgical option in selected patients with rectal cancer.

Single-incision laparoscopic stoma creation: experience with 31 consecutive cases

INTRODUCTION

Fecal diversion may be performed using various techniques. Each technique has advantages that affect patient selection. In this report, we report our experience with 31 patients who underwent single-incision laparoscopic stoma creation using only a pre-selected stoma site as the point of port access.

METHODS

A 2.5-cm skin incision was made at a previously marked stoma site, and two 5-mm trocars were placed into the abdomen through the stoma site. An optional third trocar was inserted at the stoma site only if the bowel needed to be mobilized or if adhesions needed to be divided. After full intra-abdominal exploration, a selected intestinal loop was brought up to the stoma site, and the ostomy was then matured using standard techniques.

RESULTS

Between April 2009 and March 2012, 31 patients (19 men) with a mean age of 68 years (range, 46-87 years) underwent single-incision laparoscopic stoma creation. Fecal diversion included ileostomy (n = 18) and colostomy (n = 13). There were no intraoperative complications. Two patients (6.5%) required additional port placement in the midline suprapubic area. Conversion to open laparotomy was required in two patients (6.5%) because of the presence of extensive adhesions. Postoperative complications were observed in two patients and included peristomal ileus and dehydration due to high ileostomy output.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-incision laparoscopic stoma creation is an effective technique that allows full intra-abdominal visualization and bowel mobilization, while reducing the need for additional skin incisions beyond that of the stoma site.

Single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: intermediate results

Single-port right hemicolectomy may be safely performed in patients who are candidates for conventional laparoscopic hemicolectomy with similar efficacy, safety, and oncologic outcomes.

Background:

Single-port laparoscopic colectomy was first described in 2008 as a new technique for colorectal surgery.¹ No available reports have stated the intermediate- or long-term outcome. We report our intermediate results for the first 20 single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomies performed by a single laparoscopically trained surgeon at our institution.

Design:

Between February 2009 and September 2010, 20 consecutive patients with an indication for right hemicolectomy who were candidates for laparoscopic surgery underwent a single-port laparoscopic approach. The only exclusion was a previous midline laparotomy. The patients were followed for outcomes after a median of 27 months (range: 15 to 35).

Results:

The mean age was 65 years (range: 59 to 88). The mean body mass index was 28 (range: 20 to 35). Seventy-five percent of patients had significant comorbidities, with an American Society of Anesthesiologists class of III or IV. The median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (range: 25 to 250). The mean number of lymph nodes was 13 (range: 0 to 29). There was one conversion to hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy and one to open colectomy secondary to bleeding. The mean hospital stay was 5 days (range: 3 to 7). Thirty-day postoperative complications included 1 wound infection, 1 patient with alcohol withdrawal, and 1 incidence of colitis caused by Clostridium difficile infection.

At a median follow-up of 27 months, there were no local recurrences or distant metastases. One death occurred at 17 months from myocardial infarction. Two patients developed incisional hernias, with one requiring a laparoscopic hernia repair. One patient required a completion proctocolectomy for a pathological diagnosis of hyperplastic polyposis syndrome.

Conclusions:

Single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy has been safely performed in patients who are candidates for conventional laparoscopic hemicolectomy. This small series indicates that intermediate-term results are similar to conventional laparoscopic surgery in efficacy, safety, and oncological outcomes. Larger datasets are necessary to determine cost-effectiveness, differences in postoperative outcomes, and patient satisfaction.

Single-incision laparoscopic versus traditional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery--a cumulative meta-analysis and systematic review

PURPOSE

The published data on the evaluation of feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery (SILC) compared with traditional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery (MLC) remained controversial. The present cumulative meta-analysis and systematic review were performed to provide a more objective and precise estimate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and also, manual searches were employed to identify potentially eligible studies which were published before June 7, 2012. The association was assessed by odds ratio (OR) and means with 95 % confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 20 comparative studies were included, with 670 patients underwent SILC and 838 patients underwent MLC. For overall pooled estimates, no evidence of between trial differences was found in overall conversion rate (OR, 1.7; 95 % CI, 0.97 to 3.01), overall complication rate (OR, 0.82; 95 % CI, 0.63 to 1.08), and operative time (mean, -3.59; 95 % CI, -10.95 to 3.77); significantly between trial differences were found in estimated blood loss (mean, -18.61; 95 % CI, -31.33 to -5.90) and post-operative hospital stay (mean, -0.54; 95 % CI, -0.95 to -0.12). The cumulative meta-analysis identified a potentially increased conversion rate of SILC compared with MLC with the increased percentage of malignancies, but no significant differences could be identified in overall complication rate.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested the feasibility and safety of SILC performed by experienced hands, though potentially higher overall conversion rate occurred in malignancies. SILC will benefit the patients much more with its superiority over MLC.

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.

Single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: the learning curve

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Single-port laparoscopic colectomy is described as a new technique in colorectal surgery. The initial case reports show the safety and feasibility, but the learning curve for this technique is unknown.

METHODS

Between July 2009 and September 2010, 20 consecutive patients with an indication for right hemicolectomy underwent a single-port laparoscopic approach without bias in selection. The only exclusion criterion was a prior midline laparotomy. The patients were followed up for 30 days. Chart review was completed for up to 35 months to assess long-term morbidity and mortality rates.

RESULTS

The median age was 65 years (range, 59-88 years). Ninety percent of patients were men. The median body mass index was 28 kg/m(2) (range, 20-35 kg/m(2)). Seventy-five percent of patients had significant comorbidities with an American Society of Anesthesiologists class of 3 or 4. The estimated blood loss was 25 mL (range, 25-250 mL). The median number of pathologic lymph nodes for patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma was 16 (range, 8-23). There was one conversion to hand-assisted laparoscopic (case 6) and one to open colectomy (case 9) because of the inability to achieve safe vessel ligation. The median hospital stay was 4.5 days (range, 3-7 days). The length of stay for the first 10 patients was 5.1 days, and it was 3.9 days for the last 10 patients (P = .045). There were no significant postoperative complications within 30 days. The mean operative time for the first 10 cases was 198 minutes (range, 148-272 minutes), and it was 123 minutes (range, 98-150 minutes) for the subsequent 10 cases (P = .0001). All intraoperative complications (minor bleeding) occurred within the first 10 patients, with no significant bleeding recorded for the last 10 cases.

CONCLUSION

Single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy can be safely performed in patients who are candidates for conventional or hand-assisted right hemicolectomy with very low intraoperative and postoperative complication rates. The 30-day morbidity rate remained low with this technique. The higher technical difficulty compared with conventional laparoscopy is reflected in the longer initial operative times. The learning curve for a surgeon with advanced laparoscopic skills and adequate procedure numbers seems to be short, requiring approximately 10 cases to decrease operative times to baseline. The role and feasibility of broad adaptation for single-incision laparoscopy in colorectal surgery need to be further evaluated in larger case series and trials.

Comparison of single-incision laparoscopic high anterior resection with standard laparoscopic high anterior resection

AIM

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is gaining momentum. The aim of the present study was to compare the outcome of SILS for high anterior resection with that of standard laparoscopic resection (StdLS).

METHOD

Patients undergoing laparoscopic high anterior resection were prospectively entered into an institutional approved database. Patients treated with SILS were compared with those undergoing StdLS.

RESULTS

Between April 2000 and April 2009, 327 (143 cancer) consecutive unselected patients underwent StdLS; there were three (1%) conversions and 12 (3.6%) covering ileostomies. After April 2009, 55 (29 cancer) consecutive, unselected patients underwent SILS; there were two conversions to a three-port technique (3.6%), no conversions to open resection and two (3.6%) covering ileostomies. There were no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, hospital of operation or American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) grade between the two groups. The operating time for SILS was significantly shorter (113 ± 44 min for StdLS vs 79 ± 37 min for SILS; P < 0.0001). SILS patients tolerated a normal diet earlier [10 (2-24) h for SILS vs 18 (2-96) h for StdLS] and were discharged faster [1 (1-8) days for SILS vs 3 (1-24) days for StdLS]. There were no significant differences in return to theatre, readmissions or 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

SILS for high anterior resection is feasible, safe and quicker to perform than standard three-port laparoscopic colectomy. It seems to be associated with a faster recovery and earlier discharge.

Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes after single-incision laparoscopic versus multiport laparoscopic right colectomy: a two-center, prospective case-controlled study of 100 patients

BACKGROUND

Recent case studies have demonstrated the feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC). Few comparative studies for SILC and multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC) have been conducted. The aim of this case-controlled study was to compare the short-term surgical outcomes between SILC and MLC for right-sided colectomies.

METHODS

Between January 2010 and February 2012, data from the first 50 consecutive patients that underwent right SILS at one of the two institutions were compared with a group of 50 consecutive patients that underwent right MLC in the same period.

RESULTS

Median operative time was significantly shorter in SILC (97 vs. 112 min; p < 0.001). Between both groups, no statistically significant differences were found regarding number and nature of short-term complications, number of reoperations [4 (8%) vs. 6 (12%)], and mortality rate [1 (2%) vs. 2 (4%)]. Median postoperative hospital stay was 6 days for both groups.

CONCLUSION

SILC is a safe and feasible procedure when performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. Length of hospital stay and overall complication rates are comparable with MLC. Until today, no clear advantages of SILC over MLC have been demonstrated. However, due to its smaller incisional trauma, SILC could be a major step in improving cosmetic outcomes.

Suprapubic single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) has gained significance recently. The umbilicus has been the preferred access site for SIL. Suprapubic access site (SAS) can be an alternative, especially for a right hemicolectomy (RH).

METHODS

Between November 2011 and July 2012, 7 consecutive patients underwent suprapubic SIL RH (SSILRH). The median age was 53 years, and the median body mass index was 23.9 kg/m2. Indications for surgery included appendicular tumor (1) and adenocarcinoma of the right colon (6). Three reusable trocars were used, and the resection was performed through the SAS. An intracorporeal linear stapled anastomosis was performed, the mesenteric defect was closed, and the access site was used for specimen extraction.

RESULTS

No patient required additional trocars or conversion to an open surgery. The median laparoscopic time was 222 minutes, and the median final incision length was 50 mm. The median Visual Analogue Scale score (0-10) at 6, 18, 30, 42, 54, 66, and 78 postoperative hours was 6, 6, 2, 2, 2, 2, and 2, respectively. The median hospital stay was 4 days.

CONCLUSIONS

SSILRH is useful because the SAS can be enlarged for extraction of the specimen without compromising the cosmetic outcome. The mesocolic and mesenteric dissections are on the same axis as the access site. The intracorporeal anastomosis can be performed without traction. Finally, positioning of the operative table improves exposure of the operative field and allows the surgeon to maneuver the colon and small bowel intracorporeally.

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy: a meta-analysis of comparative studies

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) to conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC).

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a minimally invasive technique being recently applied to colorectal surgery. A number of studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC have recently been published.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases for studies comparing SILC to conventional MLC was conducted. The primary outcome measures for meta-analysis were postoperative complications, length of stay, and operative time. Secondary outcome measures were incision length, estimated blood loss, and number of lymph nodes harvested.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies comparing 467 patients undergoing SILC to 539 patients undergoing conventional MLC were reviewed and the data pooled for analysis. Patients undergoing SILC had a shorter length of stay (pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.68; 95 % CI = -1.20 to -0.16; p = 0.0099), shorter incision length (pooled WMD = -1.37; 95 % CI = -2.74 to 0.000199; p = 0.05), less estimated blood loss (pooled WMD = -20.25; 95 % CI = -39.25 to -1.24; p = 0.037), and more lymph nodes harvested (pooled WMD = 1.75; 95 % CI = 0.12 to 3.38; p = 0.035), while there was no significant difference in the number of postoperative complications (pooled odds ratio = 0.83; 95 % CI = 0.57 to 1.20; p = 0.33) or operative time (pooled WMD = 5.06; 95 % CI = -2.91 to 13.03; p = 0.21).

CONCLUSION

SILC appears to have comparable results to conventional MLC in the hands of experienced surgeons. Prospective randomized trials are necessary to define the relative benefits of one procedure over the other.

Systematic review of single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have shown multiport laparoscopic surgery to be safe compared with open surgery in elective colonic disease. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) represents the latest advance in laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this systematic review was to establish the safety and complication profile of colonic SILS.

METHODS

The search was performed in October 2011 using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Search terms were 'colorectal', 'colon', 'colectomy', 'rectal' and single incision/port/trocar/site/scar. Only pure single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery for benign and malignant colonic disease was included. Primary outcomes were the early postoperative complication profiles of colonic SILS. Secondary outcomes were duration of operation, lymph node yields, conversion rate and duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Colonic SILS data were compared with data from a Cochrane review on the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic colonic surgery and four main RCTs on laparoscopic colonic surgery. Median operating times and time to first bowel motion for colonic SILS were comparable with those for laparoscopic colonic surgery. The median lymph node retrieval for malignant disease achieved with SILS was acceptable. Evidence for a reduction in postoperative pain with SILS was conflicting. There was no significant reduction in length of hospital stay with SILS. Most patients selected for colonic SILS had a low body mass index, non-bulky tumours and were operated on by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. There was significant heterogeneity in study group characteristics, indications for surgery, research methodology, operative techniques and follow-up time.

CONCLUSION

Colonic SILS should be restricted to highly selected patients; operations should be performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, with critical appraisal of clinical outcomes.