Single-incision laparoscopic surgery and the necessity for prospective evidence

What surgical approach would provide better outcomes in children and adolescents undergoing cholecystectomy? Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There is a lack of evidence on the surgical approach for children and adolescents undergoing cholecystectomy. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to compare the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive cholecystectomy to open cholecystectomy in children and/or adolescents.

Main body

A search was conducted on MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane and Embase from inception to October 2018. We included comparative studies investigating outcomes following robotic-assisted, laparoscopic and/or open cholecystectomy in children and/or adolescents. The outcomes of interest included post-operative complication rate, operation time, length of hospital stay, post-operative pain and conversion to open procedure. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effect models.

Twenty-one studies were included involving 927 children and/or adolescents. All, but one, compared outcomes between laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy. The great majority of the included studies presented a low risk of bias. Patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy had less post-operative complications (RR: 0.57; 95%CI 0.35 to 0.94), reduced length of hospital stay (MD − 3.73; 95%CI − 4.88 to − 2.59), but longer operative time (MD 26.61; 95%CI 9.35 to 43.86) when compared to open cholecystectomy. The average conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy was 7% across studies.

Conclusions

The current evidence suggested that laparoscopic cholecystectomy in children and/or adolescents is safe resulting in lower rates of postoperative complications and length of stay, but longer operative times, when compared to the open approach.

PROSPERO registration

CRD42017067641

Level of evidence

Level III

Single-incision laparoscopic ileocecectomy in children with Crohn's disease

INTRODUCTION

We previously reported our experience with standard laparoscopic ileocecectomy, but we have recently used a single-incision laparoscopic approach.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of a single surgeon's experience from 2009 to 2013.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight children 11-18 years of age (mean, 15.5 years) with a mean body mass index of 18.9±3 kg/m(2) underwent single-incision laparoscopic ileocecectomy for Crohn's disease. Mean operative time was 86.5±25.9 minutes (range, 56-166 minutes). There were no extra ports placed or conversions to open surgery. Five children (18%) were on parenteral nutrition at time of surgery, 14 (50%) were on steroids, and 9 (32%) were on tumor necrotic factor inhibitors. A stapled extracorporeal anastomosis was performed in all children. Complications included abscess (n=4), small bowel obstruction (n=3), superficial wound infection (n=3), and small bowel perforation (n=1). Some patients had more than one complication. Of those with complications, 5 (56%) were on steroids, 5 (56%) were on tumor necrotic factor inhibitors, and 1 patient was on both. The perforation occurred at a point of adhesiolysis also involved with Crohn's disease. There were no anastomotic leaks. Median follow-up was 17 months (range, 1-47 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-incision laparoscopic ileocecectomy is safe and feasible in pediatric patients with Crohn's disease.

Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy vs conventional laparoscopic appendectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM: To assess the differences in clinical benefits and disadvantages of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA) and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (CLA).

METHODS: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database were electronically searched up through January 2013 to identify randomized controlled trails (RCTs) comparing SILA with CLA. Data was extracted from eligible studies to evaluate the pooled outcome effects for the total of 1068 patients. The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.2.0. For dichotomous data and continuous data, the risk ratio (RR) and the mean difference (MD) were calculated, respectively, with 95%CI for both. For continuous outcomes with different measurement scales in different RCTs, the standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated with 95%CI. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed when necessary.

RESULTS: Six RCTs were identified that compared SILA (n = 535) with CLA (n = 533). Five RCTs had a high risk of bias and one RCT had a low risk of bias. SILA was associated with longer operative time (MD = 5.68, 95%CI: 3.91-7.46, P < 0.00001), higher conversion rate (RR = 5.14, 95%CI: 1.25-21.10, P = 0.03) and better cosmetic satisfaction score (MD = 0.52, 95%CI: 0.30-0.73, P < 0.00001) compared with CLA. No significant differences were found for total complications (RR = 1.15, 95%CI: 0.76-1.75, P = 0.51), drain insertion (RR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.41-1.25, P = 0.24), or length of hospital stay (SMD = 0.04, 95%CI: -0.08-0.16, P = 0.57). Because there was not enough data among the analyzed RCTs, postoperative pain was not calculated.

CONCLUSION: The benefit of SILA is cosmetic satisfaction, while the disadvantages of SILA are longer operative time and higher conversion rate.

Single incision versus standard 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy through a single umbilical incision is an emerging technique supported by case series, but prospective comparative data are lacking. Therefore, we conducted a prospective, randomized trial comparing single site umbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy to 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

After IRB approval, patients were randomized to laparoscopic cholecystectomy via a single umbilical incision or standard 4-port access. The primary outcome variable was operative time. Utilizing a power of 0.8 and an alpha of 0.05, 30 patients were calculated for each arm. Patients with complicated disease or weight over 100 kg were excluded. Post-operative management was controlled. Surgeons subjectively scored degree of technical difficulty from 1=easy to 5=difficult.

RESULTS

From 8/2009 through 7/2011, 60 patients were enrolled. There were no differences in patient characteristics. Operative time and degree of difficulty were greater with the single site approach. There were more doses of analgesics used and greater hospital charges in the single site group that trended toward significance.

CONCLUSION

Single site laparoscopic cholecystectomy produces longer operative times with a greater degree of difficulty as assessed by the surgeon. There was a trend toward more doses of post-operative analgesics and greater hospital charges with the single site approach.

Single-incision laparoscopy for colorectal resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of more than a thousand procedures

AIM

Single-incision laparoscopy for colorectal surgery is of growing importance. The experience of colorectal resection through single-incision laparoscopic surgery was assessed, including the patient outcomes.

METHOD

A meta-analysis was performed of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic with multiport laparoscopy. Endpoints included conversion to laparotomy, operation time, postoperative morbidity, length of skin incision and length of hospital stay. The MEDLINE database was searched and only comparative studies were included in the meta-analysis. Data were retrieved from full-text manuscripts. Meta-analysis was performed according to the Mantel-Haenszel method for random effects.

RESULTS

From October 2008 to December 2011, 1026 colorectal resections including 921 colonic and 105 rectal procedures using single-incision laparoscopic surgery were reported in 64 studies. Meta-analysis of the 15 comparative studies, including a total of 1075 procedures (494 single-incision and 581 multiport laparoscopies), showed no difference in conversion to open laparotomy [odds ratio (OR) 0.58 (0.24, 1.38); P=0.22], morbidity [OR 0.84 (0.61, 1.15); P=0.27] or operation time [weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.27 (-6.50, 5.95); P=0.93], but a significantly shorter total skin incision [WMD -0.52 (-0.79, -0.25); P<0.001] and a significantly shorter postoperative length of stay [WMD -0.75 (-1.30, -0.20); P=0.008] after single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared with a multiport laparoscopic approach.

CONCLUSION

Although only 15 nonrandomized comparative studies of varying methodology have been reported, this systematic review and meta-analysis of more than 1000 colorectal procedures suggest that single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery is feasible and safe.

Comparison of laparoscopic skills performance between single-site access (SSA) devices and an independent-port SSA approach

BACKGROUND

This study compared the performance of validated laparoscopic tasks on four commercially available single-site-access (SSA) devices with the performance of those tasks on an independent-port (IP) SSA setup.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized comparison of laparoscopic skills performance on four access devices (ADs) (GelPOINT, SILS Port, SSL Access System, TriPort) and one IP-SSA setup was conducted. A laparoscopic trainer box was used to train 18 (2nd- to 4th-year) medical students, four surgical residents, and five attending surgeons to proficiency in multiport laparoscopy using four laparoscopic drills (i.e., peg transfer, bean drop, pattern cutting, extracorporeal suturing). Drills then were performed in random order on each IP-SSA and AD-SSA setup using straight laparoscopic instruments. Repetitions were timed and errors recorded. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Statistical analysis was performed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey HSD post hoc tests.

RESULTS

The attending surgeons had significantly faster total task times than the residents or students (P < 0.001), but the difference between the residents and students was not significant. Pair-wise comparisons showed significantly faster total task times for the IP-SSA setup than for all four AD-SSAs within the student group only (P < 0.05). The total task times for the residents and attending surgeons showed a similar profile, but the differences were not significant. When the data for the three groups were combined, the total task time was less for the IP-SSA setup than for each of the four AD-SSA setups (P < 0.001). Similarly, the IP-SSA setup was significantly faster than three of the four AD-SSA setups for peg transfer, three of the four setups for pattern cutting, and two of the four setups for suturing. No significant differences in error rates between the IP-SSA and AD-SSA setups were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with an IP-SSA laparoscopic setup, AD-SSAs are associated with longer task performance times in a trainer box model, independently of the level of training. Task performance was similar across the different SSA devices.

Single-site incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in children: a single-center initial experience

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard approach in most pediatric surgical centers. In an attempt to further minimize the surgical trauma and improve cosmetic outcome, new techniques with a single incision through the umbilicus have been proposed. There are still few reports concerning this technique in the pediatric population. We evaluated the feasibility of the single incision for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in children. We performed the operation in 10 patients, with a mean age of 12 years, mean operating time of 122 minutes, and mean hospital stay of 2 days. No complications occurred, and no conversion to open surgery was needed. In 1 patient, an extra 5-mm port was necessary. The cosmetic results were very satisfactory. In our experience, despite its technical difficulty and initial learning curve, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the pediatric population is a safe and feasible method.

Single incision versus standard 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy through a single umbilical incision is an emerging approach supported by several case series. However, to date, prospective comparative data are lacking. Therefore, we conducted a prospective, randomized trial comparing single site umbilical laparoscopic appendectomy to 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy.

METHODS

After Internal Review Board approval, patients were randomized to laparoscopic appendectomy via a single umbilical incision or standard 3-port access. The primary outcome variable was postoperative wound infection. Using a power of 0.9 and an alpha of 0.05, 180 patients were calculated for each arm. Patients with perforated appendicitis were excluded. The technique of ligation/division of the appendix and mesoappendix was left to the surgeon's discretion. There were 7 participating surgeons dictated by the call schedule. All patients received the same preoperative antibiotics and postoperative management was controlled.

RESULTS

There were 360 patients were enrolled between August 2009 and November 2010. There were no differences in patient characteristics at presentation. There was no difference in wound infection rate, time to regular diet, length of hospitalization, or time to return to full activity. Operative time, doses of narcotics, surgical difficultly and hospital charges were greater with the single site approach. Also, the mean operative time was 5 minutes longer for the single site group.

CONCLUSION

The single site umbilical laparoscopic approach to appendectomy produces longer operative times resulting in greater charges. However, these small differences are likely of marginal clinical relevance. The study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov at the inception of enrollment (NCT00981136).

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery in children: initial single-center experience

BACKGROUND

In continued efforts to further improve the advantages of minimally invasive surgery to patients, surgeons have developed single-incision laparoscopic techniques. We report our initial experience in children with a variety of single-site procedures.

METHOD

A retrospective chart review was performed on patients who underwent a single-site procedure from April 2009 to April 2010.

RESULTS

There were 142 consecutive procedures: 24 cholecystectomies, 103 appendectomies for nonperforated appendicitis, 2 splenectomies, 1 combined splenectomy/cholecystectomy, 8 ileocecectomies, 2 Meckel diverticulectomies, 1 small bowel duplication resection, and 1 jejunal stricture resection. There were 12 conversions to conventional laparoscopy: 10 during appendectomy and 2 during cholecystectomy. Mean operative time was 34 minutes for appendectomy, 73 minutes for cholecystectomy, 90 minutes for splenectomy, 116 minutes for combined splenectomy/cholecystectomy, 86 minutes for ileocecectomy, and 43 minutes for the small bowel procedures. The only complications were umbilical surgical site infections after appendectomy in 6 patients.

CONCLUSION

This institution's preliminary experience suggests that single-incision laparoscopic surgery in children has at least comparable outcomes to conventional laparoscopic surgery. However, prospective data are needed to prove that single-incision laparoscopic surgery is superior to conventional laparoscopy.