Incisional hernia after robotic single-site cholecystectomy: a pilot study

Clinical status and future prospects of single-incision robotic-assisted surgery: a review

Since the advent of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery, the prosperity of minimally invasive surgery has been thriving on the advancement of endoscopic techniques. Cosmetic superiority, recovery benefits, and noninferior surgical outcomes weigh single-incision laparoscopic surgery as a promising modality. Although there are surgical challenges posed by steep learning curve and technological difficulties, such as instruments collision, triangulation loss and limited retraction, the establishment of robotic surgical platform as a solution to all is inspiring. Furthermore, with enhanced instrument maneuverability and stability, robotic ergonomic innovations adopt the advantages of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and surmount its recognized barriers by introducing a novel combination, single-incision robotic-assisted surgery. As was gradually diffused in general surgery and other specialties, single-incision robotic-assisted surgery manifests privileges in noninferior clinical outcomes an satisfactory cosmetic effect among strictly selected patients, and has the potential of a preferable surgical option for minimally invasive surgery.

A single-center experience of over 300 cases of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy comparing the da Vinci SP with the Si/Xi systems

Minimally invasive surgery is usually more beneficial than open surgeries in various fields of surgery. With the newly developed Single-Port (SP) robotic surgical system, even single-site surgery has become easier to access. We compared single-incision robotic cholecystectomy between the Si/Xi and SP systems. This retrospective single-center study enrolled patients who underwent single-incision robotic cholecystectomy between July 2014 and July 2021. The clinical outcomes of the da Vinci Si/Xi and SP systems were compared. In total, 334 patients underwent single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (118 Si/Xi vs. 216 SP). The SP group had more chronic or acute cholecystitis than the Si/Xi group did. There was more bile spillage in the Si/Xi group during the surgery. The total operative and docking times were significantly shorter in the SP group. There was no difference in the postoperative outcomes. The SP system is safe and feasible regarding comparable postoperative complication rates and is more convenient regarding docking and techniques.

Learning Curve of Single-site Robotic Cholecystectomy: A Cumulative Sum Analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery has significantly improved cosmesis and clinical outcomes after either laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy. In an effort to minimize the number of incisions in multiport procedures, single-site approaches have been developed. However, single-site robotic cholecystectomy (SSRC) can be technically challenging for novice surgeons. The goal of this study is to establish the learning curve (LC) of SSRC through an assessment of operative times and clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing SSRC over a period of 5 years was performed. Consecutive cholecystectomy cases were assessed based on the procedure setting (elective vs. emergent). Cumulative sum analysis were used to establish the LC through an evaluation of the skin-to-skin (STS) time and postoperative complications rate. Afterward, a direct comparison was performed between the established phases.

RESULTS

This study included a total of 259 SSRCs with an overall mean STS time of 41.1 minutes. Elective cases took on average of 38.8 minutes, whereas emergent cases spanned over 60.5 minutes ( P= 0.005). The cumulative sum-LC was obtained by summing the differences between each procedure's STS time, revealing a quadratic best-fit line maximum and an inflection point between the early and late phases at case 91. A significant difference between STS time was seen between the early and late phases (53.8 vs. 30.0 min, P< 0.0001). There were no significant differences in terms of postoperative complications between the 2 phases. Incisional hernia rates were comparable between the 2 phases (early: 4.4% vs. late: 2.5%, P< 0.461).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest study to assess the LC of SSRC through operative time and clinical outcomes. A steady decrease in STS time was observed during the completion of the first 91 consecutive cases.

Implementation of robotic surgery in Dubai: a focus on outcomes

The rapid acceptance of robotic surgery in gallbladder, inguinal, and ventral hernia surgery has led to the growth of robotic surgery programs around the world. As this is new technology, implementation of such programs needs to be done safely, with a focus on patient outcomes. We herein describe the implementation of a new robotic surgery program in a major hospital in the Middle East. A laparoendoscopic surgeon led the program after training and proctoring. Competency based credentialing were created and put in place. To confirm safety of the program, all laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomy and hernia operations were followed, and perioperative data analyzed. Out of the 304 patients included in this study, 157 were performed using the robotic approach. In the cholecystectomy group (n = 103) the single site approach offered shorter operative times (P < 0.05). Both the single site robotic and the robotic assisted approaches resulted in less pain (P < 0.05). In the inguinal hernia group (n = 146) the laparoscopic approach offered shorter operative times (P < 0.05), but the robotic approach was associated with less pain (P < 0.05). In the ventral hernia group (n = 55), the open approach offered the best operative times, but the robotic approach was associated with the least amount of pain (P < 0.05). This is the first report of the implementation of a robotic program in the MENA region where the primary measure of success is outcomes. We show that monitoring cholecystectomy, inguinal or ventral hernia data can confirm the quality of the program before expansion and moving forward to more complex procedures.

Laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for single-incision cholecystectomy: an updated systematic review

The role of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) is still unclear. We update the summarization of the feasibility and safety of SILC and SIRC. A comprehensive search of SILC and SIRC of English literature published on PubMed database between January 2015 and November 2020 was performed. A total of 70 articles were included: 41 covering SILC alone, 21 showing SIRC alone, 7 reporting both, and 1 study not specified. In total, 7828 cases were recorded (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 6234/1544/50); and the gender of 7423 cases was definitively reported: the female rate was 64.0% (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 62.1%/71.5%/74.0%). The weighted mean for body mass index (BMI), operative time, blood loss and post-operative hospital stay was 25.5 kg/m2 (SILC/SIRC, 25.0/27.0 kg/m2), 73.8 min (SILC/SIRC, 68.2/88.8 min), 12.6 mL (SILC/SIRC, 12.1/14.8 mL) and 2.5 days (SILC/SIRC, 2.8/1.9 days), respectively. The pooled prevalence of an additional port, conversion to open surgery, post-operative complications, intraoperative biliary injury, and incisional hernia was 4.1% (SILC/SIRC, 4.7%/1.9%), 0.9% (SILC/SIRC, 0.7%/1.5%), 5.9% (SILC/SIRC, 6.2%/4.1%), 0.1% (SILC/SIRC, 0.2%/0.09%), and 2.1% (SILC/SIRC, 1.4%/4.8%), respectively. Compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, SIRC has experienced more postoperative incisional hernias (risk difference = 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.07; P < 0.0001). By far, SILC and SIRC have not been considered a standard procedure. With the innovation of medical devices and gradual accumulation of surgical experience, feasibility and safety of performing SILC and SIRC will improve.

Low long-term incidence of incisional hernia after cholecystectomy: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Various surgical approaches are available for cholecystectomy, but their long-term outcomes, such as incidence of incisional hernia, are largely unknown. Our aim was to investigate the long-term incidence of incisional hernia after cholecystectomy for different surgical approaches.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020178906). Three databases were searched for original studies on long-term complications of cholecystectomy with n > 40 and follow-up ≥6 months for incisional hernia. Risk of bias within the studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane "risk of bias" tool. Meta-analysis of the incidence of incisional hernia after 6 and 12 months was conducted when possible.

RESULTS

We included 89 studies. Of these, 77 reported on multiport or single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Twelve studies reported on open cholecystectomy and 4 studies on robotic cholecystectomy. Weighted mean incidence proportion of incisional hernia after multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy was 0.3% (95% confidence interval 0-0.6) after 6 months and 0.2% after 12 months (95% confidence interval 0.1-0.3). Weighted mean incidence of incisional hernia 12 months postoperatively was 1.5% (95% confidence interval 0.4-2.6) after open cholecystectomy and 4.5% (95% confidence interval 0.4-8.6) after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. No meta-analysis could be conducted for robotic cholecystectomy, but incidences ranged from 0% to 16.7%.

CONCLUSION

We found low 1-year incidences of incisional hernia after multiport laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy, whereas risks of incisional hernia were considerably higher after single-incision laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomy.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery for benign ovarian masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the safety, efficiency and preferred indication for laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) compared with conventional laparoscopic (CL) surgery for benign ovarian masses.

DESIGN

A systemic review and cumulative meta-analysis were performed in line with the criteria of Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation: levels of evidence and grades of recommendation.

DATA SOURCES

We comprehensively searched the electronic databases including PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library in November 2018.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies published in recent 10 years, which investigated the performance of LESS versus CL in patients at all ages with benign ovarian masses.

RESULTS

Four RCTs and nine retrospective studies published in recent decade including 1542 cases (744 cases for LESS and 798 cases for CL) were identified. Perioperative complication was consisted of intraoperative and postoperative complications, including ileus, wound infection or dehiscence and incisional hernia. Although LESS has less postoperative analgesic consumption (46.78% and 79.25%; OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.74, p<0.001) and shorter hospital stay (weighted mean difference (WMD): -0.24 days; 95% CI: -0.35 to -0.14; p<0.001), CL has less perioperative complications (6.59% and 2.85%; OR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.05 to 4.11, p=0.04) and shorter operative time (WMD: 3.43 min; 95% CI: -0.03 to 6.88; p=0.05). Body mass index, history of previous abdominal surgery, size of adnexal mass, estimated blood loss and postoperative pain scores did not differ significantly between two techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The indications of LESS for benign ovarian masses are similar to CL and it has better postoperative recovery. However, with less perioperative complications, CL surgery is safer than LESS.