Cholecystectomy using single-incision laparoscopic surgery with a new SILS port. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2010;17:688-691. [PMID: 20703847 DOI: 10.1007/s00534-010-0266-4]

Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with Mirizzi syndrome

Since multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become a standard treatment for gallbladder (GB) disease, a single incision laparoscopic surgical technique has been tried to decrease the surgical site pain and achieve a better cosmetic out come in selected patients. The development of devices dedicated for single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is expanding the indication of this single incision laparoscopic technique to more complicated GB diseases. Mirizzi syndrome (MS) is one of the complex uncommon gallstone diseases in patients undergoing cholecystectomy. Because the laparoscopic procedure has become a routine treatment for cholecystectomy, several studies have reported their experience with the laparoscopic technique for the treatment of MS with a comparable outcome in Csendes type I or II. Because the indication for SILC cholecystectomy is expanded to more complicated GB conditions, and the desire of patients for a less painful, better cosmetic surgical outcome has increased, our medical center used this single incision laparoscopic surgical technique for MS Csendes types I and II patients. Here, we report 2 successful cases of SILC for patients with MS types I and II without significant morbidity.

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.

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.

Cholecystectomy for biliary dyskinesia: how did we get there?

BACKGROUND

The focus of biliary dyskinesia (BD) shifted within the last 30 years, moving from symptoms after cholecystectomy (CCY) to symptoms with morphological normal gallbladder, but low gallbladder ejection fraction.

METHODS

We searched the pubmed database to systematically review studies focusing on the diagnosis and treatment of gallbladder dysfunction.

RESULTS

Impaired gallbladder contraction can be found in about 20% of healthy controls and an even higher number of patients with various other disorders. Surgery for BD increased after introduction of laparoscopic CCY, with BD now accounting for >20% of CCY in adults and up to 60% in pediatric patients. The majority of cases reported were operated in the USA, which differs from surgical series for cholelithiasis. Postoperative outcomes do not differ between groups with abnormal or normal gallbladder function.

CONCLUSION

Functional gallbladder testing should not be seen as an indicator of relevant biliary tract disease or prognostic marker to identify patients who may benefit from operative intervention. Instead biliary dyskinesia should be considered as a part of a spectrum of functional disorders, which are generally managed conservatively. Small proof of concept studies have demonstrated effects of medical therapy on biliary dysfunction and should thus be never tested in appropriately designed trials.

Enlargement of umbilical incision in standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy is frequently necessary: An argument for the single incision approach?

OBJECTIVE

Cosmetic result after cholecystectomy is up for debate. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and extent of enlargement of initial skin and fascia incision in standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to detect predictive factors for such an enlargement.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The size of the umbilical incision was measured before and after standard laparoscopic gallbladder removal in 391 patients from August 2009 to October 2012. Predisposing factors for the need of enlargement of the umbilical incision were analysed.

RESULTS

Additional enlargement of the umbilical incision for gallbladder removal was required in 35.8% of the patients at skin level, and in 40.4% at fascia level. The median enlargement of the umbilical skin incision was 11 mm, from 25 mm to 36 mm. Gallbladder weight, total stone weight, maximum diameter of largest stone and shorter initial length of incision were independent predisposing factors for enlargement of the incision.

CONCLUSIONS

In standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy the umbilical incision frequently requires secondary enlargement, especially if a large stone mass is involved. Therefore, the cosmetic result after laparoscopic cholecystectomy depends on more than only the technique used for access and the surgical technique for cholecystectomy should be chosen individually for each patient according to the stone mass.

Single-incision versus standard multiple-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies

OBJECTIVE

The advantages of single-incision surgery for the treatment of gallstone disease is debated. Previous meta-analyses comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and standard laparoscopic multiport cholecystectomy (SLMC) included few and underpowered trials. To overcome this limitation, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studies.

METHODS

A MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library literature search of studies published in and comparing SILC with SLMC was performed. The primary outcome was safety of SILC as measured by the overall rate of postoperative complications and biliary spillage. Feasibility was another primary outcome as measured by the conversion and operative time. Postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, perioperative blood loss, time to return to normal activity, and cosmetic satisfaction were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 43 studies of which 30 were observational reports and 13 experimental trials, for a total of 7489 patients (2090 SILC and 5389 SLMC). The overall rate of complications was comparable between groups (relative risk [RR] = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.87-1.35; P = .46), as were the rates of biliary spillage (RR = 1.16; 95% CI = 0.73-1.84; P = .53) and conversion rate (RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.53-1.46; P = .62). Operative time was in favor of SLMC (weighted mean difference = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.67-0.79; P < .0001). Secondary outcomes favored SILC, but with marginal advantages.

CONCLUSIONS

SILC is a feasible technique but without any significant advantage over SLMC for relevant end points. Although secondary outcomes favored SILC, the small magnitude of the advantage and the low quality of assessment methods question the clinical significance of these benefits.

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

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

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

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

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

Robotic single port cholecystectomy (R-LESS-C): experience in 36 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) has emerged as a result of a search for "pain-less" and "scar-less" surgery. Laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy (LESS-C) is probably the most common application in general surgery, although it harbors certain limitations. It was proposed that the da Vinci Single-Site (Si) robotic system may overcome some of the difficulties experienced during LESS, providing three dimensional views and the ability to work in a right-handed fashion. Thirty-six robotic single port cholecystectomies (R-LESS-C) performed with the da Vinci Si robotic system are evaluated in this paper

MATERIALS AND METHODS

R-LESS-C performed in 36 patients were reviewed. The data related to the perioperative period (i.e., anesthesia time, operation time, docking time, and console time) was recorded prospectively, whereas the hospitalization period, postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores were collected retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total number of 36 patients, with a mean age of 40.1 years (21-64 years), underwent R-LESS-C. There were five men and 31 women. The mean anesthesia and operation times were 79.3 minutes (45-130 minutes) and 61.8 minutes (34-110 minutes), respectively. The mean docking time was 9.8 minutes (4-30 minutes) and the mean console time was 24.9 minutes (7-60 minutes). The mean hospital stay was 1.05 days (1-2 days) and the mean pain score (VAS) was 3.6 (2-8) in the first 24 hours. Incisional hernia was recorded in one patient.

CONCLUSION

R-LESS-C can be performed reliably with acceptable operative times and safety. The da Vinci Si robotic system may ease LESS-C. Two issues should be considered for routine use: expensive resources are needed and the incidence of incisional hernia may increase.

Safety and feasibility for single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in local community hospital: a retrospective comparison with conventional 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility for single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) by retrospective comparison with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) in a local community hospital.

METHODS

SILC was introduced and performed in 57 patients for benign gallbladder diseases. Their clinical data were compared with those of 62 patients treated with CLC. They included patient demographic data and operative outcomes.

RESULTS

SILC was attempted in 57 patients and 52 cases (91.2%) were successfully completed. There were no statistical differences between the 2 groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, and postoperative complications. The length of hospital stay in the SILC group was significantly shorter compared with CLC (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

SILC has been successfully introduced in a local community hospital. The safety and feasibility was also confirmed. The SILC procedure may become 1 standard option for the treatment of benign gallbladder diseases.

Endoloop retraction technique in single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: experience in 27 patients

BACKGROUND

Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) has been one of the hottest topics in minimally invasive surgery. Various techniques have been described, but the search for better techniques and equipment still continues. The aim of this study is to share a new retraction technique and the results in 27 patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between May 2010 and May 2011, 27 patients underwent SPLC with the presented technique. The data related to the operative and postoperative measures were collected prospectively. Operation time, pain score (visual analog scale) in the first 24 hours after the operation, and length of hospital stay were recorded by an independent nurse.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven SPLCs were performed. Indications were symptomatic gallstone disease or gallbladder polyps without active inflammation. Mean operation time was 45.7 minutes (range, 30-80 minutes). In none of the patients was introduction of an additional port or conversion to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy needed.

CONCLUSIONS

The endoloop technique can be used to overcome retraction problem while preventing spillage of bile and reducing crowding of instruments with a practically invisible scar in selected patients.

Single-incision multiport laparoendoscopic surgery using a newly developed short-type flexible endoscope: a combined procedure of flexible endoscopic and laparoscopic surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that using a flexible endoscope as a working scope in laparoscopic surgery through a single incision might provide many benefits. To this end, a short-type flexible endoscope with a working length of 600 mm was newly developed. In this animal experimental study, we aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility of our new approach, single-incision multiport laparoendoscopic (SIMPLE) cholecystectomy, using this endoscope.

METHODS

Eight pigs were subjected to SIMPLE cholecystectomy using the short-type flexible endoscope. The endoscope was inserted through a 12-mm trocar in an SILS Port followed by the insertion of two additional 5-mm trocars in the SILS Port. Encirculation and ligation of the pedicle of the cystic artery and duct were carried out using laparoscopic instruments through the 5-mm trocars, while the dissection of the gallbladder from the intrahepatic fossa was predominantly performed using a cutting device through the endoscope.

RESULTS

A complete gallbladder excision, with complete encirculation and ligation of the pedicle, was completed in all cases. The mean operating time was 58 min (range 34-78 min). The endoscope provided a good view of the operating field, and it allowed some degree of freedom to the working laparoscopic instruments without compromising the field of view. Dissection of the gallbladder using the cutting device through the endoscope was much easier than that using the laparoscopic device, because the articulating instruments together with the endoscope enabled operation with triangulation. Furthermore, the water-jet and suctioning functions and the self-cleaning lens capability of the endoscope served the surgery well.

CONCLUSIONS

SIMPLE cholecystectomy using the newly developed short-type flexible endoscope is a technically feasible procedure. Using this flexible endoscope for various tasks, such as resection, suctioning, and smoke evacuation, can make the surgical procedures easier.

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: Up-to-date and literature review

Pancreatic surgery represents one of the most challenging areas in digestive surgery. In recent years, an increasing number of laparoscopic pancreatic procedures have been performed and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) has gained world-wide acceptance because it does not require anastomosis or other reconstruction. To date, English literature reports more than 300 papers focusing on LDP, but only 6% included more than 30 patients. Literature review confirms that LDP is a feasible and safe procedure in patients with benign or low grade malignancies. Decreased blood loss and morbidity, early recovery and shorter hospital stay may be the main advantages. Several concerns still exist for laparoscopic pancreatic adenocarcinoma excision. The individual surgeon determines the technical conduction of LDP, with or without spleen preservation; currently robotic pancreatic surgery has gained diffusion. Additional researches are necessary to determine the best technique to improve the procedure results.

Transumbilical single port laparoscopic appendectomy using basic equipment: a comparison with the three ports method

PURPOSE

Single port laparoscopic surgery is a rapidly evolving laparoscopic surgical approach. We report a comparison of transumbilical single port laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSPLA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA) in a Korean military hospital.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study of 63 patients who received laparoscopic appendectomy was conducted between May 2011 and October 2011. Nineteen patients received TUSPLA and 44 patients received CLA. Clinical outcomes such as operation time, hospital stay, postoperative pain, diet, and postoperative complication were reviewed.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between TUSPLA and CLA patients, respectively, in operation time (58.9 minutes vs. 52.3 minutes, P = 0.262), duration of hospitalization (10.2 days vs. 10.6 days, P = 0.782), mean visual analogue scale score (2.6 vs. 2.5, P = 0.894), and return to diet (1.6 days vs. 1.7 days, P = 0.776). There were two cases (10.5%) of short-term complications in the TUSPLA group and four cases (9.1%) of short-term complications in the CLA group. All patients were fully recovered at discharge.

CONCLUSION

TUSPLA is a feasible alternative for CLA. When a glove port is used, no special instruments are needed. Thus, it can be performed in a hospital equipped with basic laparoscopic surgical instruments.

Comparison of two entry methods for laparoscopic port entry: technical point of view

Laparoscopic entry is a blind procedure and it often represents a problem for all the related complications. In the last three decades, rapid advances in laparoscopic surgery have made it an invaluable part of general surgery, but there remains no clear consensus on an optimal method of entry into the peritoneal cavity. The aim of this paper is to focus on the evolution of two used methods of entry into the peritoneal cavity in laparoscopic surgery.

Are natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and single-incision surgery viable techniques for cholecystectomy?

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision surgery (SIS) are less invasive alternatives to traditional laparoscopic techniques. Concerns exist over the safety of these new approaches, and randomized controlled trials have yet to confirm a net benefit. If NOTES and SIS techniques are to become standard practice, then they should be shown to be safe and hold clear benefits to patients. We aim at comparing the available results by using these techniques in a standard laparoscopic operation (cholecystectomy).

METHODS

A systematic review using available databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register) and the published English language medical literature was performed. All the archived articles were cross-referenced. Outcome data obtained from a Cochrane review of laparoscopic cholecystectomy were used as the control group. All the operations performed via a single incision were grouped under SIS, and operations in which a natural orifice (alone or as a hybrid technique) was analyzed, under NOTES group. Mortality and complications were the primary outcome measures.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-five papers including 4703 patients (714 NOTES, 3989 SIS) were selected for analysis. Overall complication rate was 4.2% in the NOTES group versus 4.3% in the SIS group, with a distinct complication profile. No mortality was reported in either group. NOTES procedures had a longer mean operative time than SIS techniques (107 versus 79 minutes). The conversion rate between NOTES and SILS was similar (3.4% versus 3.3%, respectively).

DISCUSSION

No difference in the incidence of complications was observed with the newer techniques. Adequately powered randomized control trials are needed to clarify whether SIS/NOTES cholecystectomy has a similar length of hospital stay to traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The increased occurrence of specific types of complications and their use in acute pathology needs further investigation to warrant further use in routine surgical practice.

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in children: a retrospective comparison with traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy

PURPOSE

The natural progression of minimal access surgery is to perform the same technical operation with minimal or no evidence of scarring. In children, small case series of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy suggests that the operation is feasible; however, no comparison has been made to traditional, multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patient safety, outcomes, and cost.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomies in children was performed from January 2009 to November 2010. Demographics and outcome measures were recorded, including operative time, operative costs, length of stay, need for intravenous analgesia, and operative complications. A concurrent group of pediatric patients undergoing traditional, multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy was used for comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 69 pediatric laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed from January 2009 to October 2010. Forty-two patients with a mean age of 14.7 years (range, 5.9-18.9 years) underwent attempted single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and 27 patients with a mean age of 15 years (range, 2.8-19.4 years) underwent multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Mean operative time (68 vs 64.5 minutes; P, not significant [NS]), length of stay (1.45 vs 1.19 days; P, NS), and doses of intravenous analgesia (1.7 vs 2; P, NS) were not significantly different for patients undergoing single-incision or multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy, respectively. Two patients (5%) undergoing the single-incision approach required 1 additional port be placed to complete the operation. In addition, there was no significant difference in operative costs between the single-incision and multiport approach ($7766 vs $8383; P, NS).

CONCLUSION

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and effective in the pediatric population. It can be performed with the same technical exposure and outcomes as multiport laparoscopy, with the added benefit of little to no scarring and no increase in cost.