Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a single-institution case-control study

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery to treat hepatopancreatobiliary cancer: A technical review

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), or laparoendoscopic single-site surgery, was launched to minimize incisional traumatic effects in the 1990s. Minor SILS, such as cholecystectomies, have been gaining in popularity over the past few decades. Its application in complicated hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgeries, however, has made slow progress due to instrumental and technical limitations, costs, and safety concerns. While minimally invasive abdominal surgery is pushing the boundaries, advanced laparoscopic HPB surgeries have been shown to be comparable to open operations in terms of patient and oncologic safety, including hepatectomies, distal pancreatectomies (DP), and pancreaticoduodenectomies (PD). In contrast, advanced SILS for HPB malignancy has only been reported in a few small case series. Most of the procedures involved minor liver resections and DP; major hepatectomies were rarely described. Single-incision laparoscopic PD has not yet been reported. We herein review the published SILS for HPB cancer in the literature and our three-year experience focusing on the technical aspects.

Safety and Feasibility of Single-incision Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Comparative studies regarding single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (SILS-DP) are limited. This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of SILS-DP with conventional laparoscopic DP (C-LDP) under strict indication criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the patient characteristics and surgical outcomes of those who underwent either SILS-DP or C-LDP at National Taiwan University (NTU) and C-LDP at Nara Medical University (NMU) between 2009 and 2019. SILS-DP was indicated for benign or low-grade malignant pancreatic tail tumors and was performed along with splenectomy.

RESULTS

We compared 12 cases of SILS-DP with 31 of C-LDP from NTU and 17 of C-LDP from NMU. Patients in the SILS-DP group had significantly less blood loss than the C-LDP group at NTU (P=0.028). Postoperative outcomes, including the postoperative hospital stay and clinically relevant pancreatic fistula, were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Although SILS-DP was performed by a surgeon who was well-experienced with laparoscopic surgeries, the first few cases had a larger amount of blood loss, longer operation time, and a higher rate of complications. Such unfavorable outcomes were likely to be resolved shortly. No reoperations and deaths were noted.

CONCLUSION

SILS-DP is feasible when performed by an experienced surgeon and in carefully selected patients.

Dual trocar laparoscopy improves reduced-port surgery of the distal pancreas

BACKGROUND

The technical feasibility of transumbilical single-incision surgery (SIL) for pancreatic resections has been demonstrated. However, this technique is hampered by the limited degrees of freedom for instrument handling. Dual-incision laparoscopy (DIL) with an additional trocar may simplify dissection and allow drainage.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between December 2009 and May 2017, 21 patients were treated with SIL (12/2009 to 01/2014) or DIL (02/2014 to 05/2017) pancreatic resection. All data were collected in a database and retrospectively analysed.

RESULTS

Demographic parameters of the patients did not differ significantly in the DIL or the SIL group. No conversion to open surgery was required. No intraoperative complication occurred in either group. The surgical difficulty score was significantly higher in the SIL group (4.4 ± 1.56 vs 2.18 ± 1.95; p = .006). Postoperative serum amylase levels were higher (101.9 U/l ± 50.11 vs 48.91 U/l ± 35.20; p = .01) and return to normal levels (6.4 ± 9.66 days vs 2.09 ± 1.98 days; p = .045) was later in the SIL group. Three complications requiring radiological or surgical intervention were witnessed in the SIL group and one complication in the DIL group (p = .42).

CONCLUSION

DIL surgery is a safe and feasible alternative to SIL surgery, facilitating key steps of distal pancreatic tail resection.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Minimally Invasive Distal Pancreatectomy: Review of the English Literature

BACKGROUND

Recently, the superiority of the minimally invasive approach, which results in a better cosmetic result, faster recovery, and shorter length of hospital stay, is a technique that has been progressively recognized as it has developed. And the minimally invasive approach has been applied to distal pancreatectomy (DP), which is a standard method for the treatment of benign, borderline, and part of malignant lesions of the pancreatic body and tail. This article aims to analyze the types, postoperative recovery, and outcomes of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the scientific literature was performed using PubMed, EMBASE, online journals, and the Internet for all publications on LDP. Articles were selected if the abstract contained patients who underwent LDP for pancreatic diseases. All selected articles were reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

If there were no contraindications for LDP, this operation is suitable for benign, borderline, or malignant tumors of the pancreatic body and tail, which should try to be performed with preservation of the spleen. LDP is safe and feasible under some conditions to experienced surgeon. Single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (S-LDP) and robotic laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (R-LDP) perioperative outcomes are similar with conventional multi-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (C-LDP). And the advantages of S-LDP and R-LDP require further exploration. With the application of enhanced recovery program (ERP), length of hospital stay and costs are reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

LDP is safe and feasible under some conditions. Compared with open distal pancreatectomy, LDP has a lot of advantages; a trend was observed for LDP to replace traditional open surgery. LDP combined with ERP is expected to become standard in the treatment of pancreatic body and tail lesions.

The Role of the Single Incision Laparoscopic Approach in Liver and Pancreatic Resectional Surgery

Introduction. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has gained increasing support over the last few years. The aim of this narrative review is to analyse the published evidence on the use and potential benefits of SILS in hepatic and pancreatic resectional surgery for benign and malignant pathology. Methods. Pubmed and Embase databases were searched using the search terms "single incision laparoscopic", "single port laparoscopic", "liver surgery", and "pancreas surgery". Results. Twenty relevant manuscripts for liver and 9 for pancreatic SILS resections were identified. With regard to liver surgery, despite the lack of comparative studies with other minimal invasive techniques, outcomes have been acceptable when certain limitations are taken into account. For pancreatic resections, when compared to the conventional laparoscopic approach, SILS produced comparable results with regard to intra- and postoperative parameters, including length of hospitalisation and complications. Similarly, the results were comparable to robotic pancreatectomies, with the exception of the longer operative time reported with the robotic approach. Discussion. Despite the limitations, the published evidence supports that SILS is safe and feasible for liver and pancreatic resections when performed by experienced teams in the tertiary setting. However, no substantial benefit has been identified yet, especially compared to other minimal invasive techniques.

Single-incision laparoscopic excision of pancreatic tumor in children

PURPOSE

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) as a surgical approach in treatment of pancreatic disease has recently been reported in adults. However, its application in pancreatic surgery in children is limited. In this article, we report our preliminary experience of SILS in children with pancreatic disease.

METHODS

Three children with pancreatic tumor underwent single-incision laparoscopic partial pancreatectomy between July 2011 and August 2013. Two of three children were girls, and one was a boy. The ages ranged from 2 to 10 months, with an average age of 6.7 months.

RESULTS

All operations were successfully performed. There was no conversion to the conventional multi-incision surgery. The mean operation time of the 3 cases was 153.3 minutes (range 120-200 minutes). The postoperative hospital stay was 7 days. The drainage tubes were kept for 3 to 4 days after surgery. There was no pancreatic juice leak in this case series. All patients were followed up and there was no recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-incision laparoscopic partial pancreatectomy for children with pancreatic tumor is feasible.

Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: preliminary experience and comparison to conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), which has been demonstrated to be safely applied on kinds of surgeries, may represent an improvement over conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery. However, there are still few clinical experiences of SILS in pancreatic surgery until now. In this study, we will summarize our experience of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (TUSI-LDP), and compare its related parameters with conventional multi-port laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (C-LDP).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted for the patients who underwent C-LDP or TUSI-LDP in our department. The demographic data, operative parameters, and postoperative complications in the two groups were summarized and compared.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was performed in a total of 21 cases, among which TUSI-LDP was performed in 14 cases. As far as the demographical results concerned, there were no significant differences between the two groups. The conversion to open surgery was conducted in one case in the TUSI-LDP group because of severe adhesion between pancreatic cyst and surrounding tissues, while in the C-LDP group the only one conversion was for the difficult detection of small lesion. The mean operating time and intraoperative blood loss in TUSI-LDP group was a little shorter (166.4 ± 57.4 versus 202.1 ± 122.5 minutes, p > 0.05, and 157.1 ± 162.4 versus 168.6 ± 157.4 ml, p > 0.05). The postoperative pain and post-operation lengths of hospital stay in the TUSI-LDP group were also less, though there was no significant statistical difference between the two groups. For the post-operation complications, in TUSI-LDP group the pancreatic leakage occurred in only one case, and ceased spontaneously with only a drain for 61 days. There were no other complications including postoperative hemorrhage, venous thrombosis, infections and so on in both groups.

CONCLUSION

For the experienced laparoscopic surgeons, in selected patients, TUSI-LDP is a feasible technique, with excellent cosmetic effect, less postoperative pain and post-operation lengths of hospital stay. With the experience accumulated, the operating time and intraoperative blood loss of TUSI-LDP could also gradually reduce.

Therapeutic advances: Single incision laparoscopic hepatopancreatobiliary surgery

Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is proposed to be a step towards minimizing the invasiveness of surgery, and has since gained popularity in several surgical sub-specialties including hepatopancreatobiliary surgery. SPLS has since been applied to cholecystectomy, liver resection as well as pancreatectomy for a multitude of pathologies. Benefits of SPLS over conventional multi-incision laparoscopic surgery include improved cosmesis and potentially post-operative pain at specific time periods and extra-umbilical sites. However, it is also associated with longer operating time, increased rate of complications, and increased rate of port-site hernia. There is no significant difference between length of hospital stay. SPLS has a significant learning curve that affects operating time, rate of conversion and rate of complications. In this article, we review the literature on SPLS in hepatobiliary surgery - cholecystectomy, hepatectomy and pancreatectomy, and offer tips on overcoming potential technical obstacles and minimizing the complications when performing SPLS - surgeon position, position of port and instruments, instrument crossing position, standard hand grip vs reverse hand grip, snooker cue guide position, prevention of incisional hernia. SPLS is a promising direction in laparoscopic surgery, and we recommend step-wise progression of applications of SPLS to various hepatopancreatobiliary surgeries to ensure safe adoption of the surgical technique.

Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic combined cholecystectomy and appendectomy: a retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) developed rapidly in recent years. This report describes our initial experience on SILS combined cholecystectomy and appendectomy (SILSC&A) with a unique method of umbilical reconstruction. In addition, a retrospective comparison with conventional combined laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendectomy (LC&A) was analyzed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between April 2009 and December 2013, 62 patients with benign gallbladder and appendix disease underwent laparoscopic combined cholecystectomy and appendectomy at our institution. Of these, 34 (54.8%) underwent SILSC&A (Group 1), and 28 (45.2%) underwent LC&A (Group 2). Demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative data were analyzed retrospectively and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

No significant differences were identified in the preoperative patient characteristics between the two groups. SILSC&A was associated with a shorter operative time (62.2 ± 19.7 versus 77.5 ± 21.4 minutes, respectively; P = .005) and better cosmetic results (4.6 ± 0.7 versus 4.1 ± 0.6, respectively; P = .004). There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to other postoperative variables.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that SILSC&A is as safe and efficacious as conventional LC&A in experienced hands. A uniform method of umbilical reconstruction is helpful in improving cosmesis and decreasing hernia rate. Long-term follow-up and further prospective randomized trials are anticipated.