Single-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Assisted with Neodymium Magnets: Initial Prospective Experience with 60 Cases

Short-Term Efficacy of Transumbilical Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: With the rising demand for minimally invasive and cosmetically appealing surgeries, transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has been increasingly adopted, albeit in a limited number of medical centers. Our team has successfully executed transumbilical SILC for benign gallbladder diseases. This study retrospectively analyzed and compared the efficacy of transumbilical SILC with that of conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). Methods: We analyzed data from 358 cases of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed at Shanghai East Hospital of Tongji University between January 2021 and October 2023. Of these, 186 cases underwent SILC (observation group), while 172 cases underwent CLC (control group). We compared patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, and satisfaction with incision scars. Primary outcomes included surgical efficacy and safety, whereas secondary outcomes encompassed postoperative hospitalization duration, pain levels, hospital costs, and scar satisfaction. Results: No significant differences were observed in patient demographics between the two groups. Both the SILC and CLC groups exhibited similar operative times (39.56 ± 14.55 minutes versus 41.82 ± 16.13 minutes, P = .164) and intraoperative blood loss (11.34 ± 3.90 mL versus 11.28 ± 3.87 mL, P = .885). The single-incision approach led to earlier postoperative bowel function recovery (22.03 ± 3.60 hours versus 24.17 ± 3.22 hours, P < .01), lower 24-hour postoperative pain scores (2.06 ± 0.84 versus 2.35 ± 0.72, P < .01), shorter postoperative hospital stays (2.88 ± 0.86 days versus 3.33 ± 0.96 days, P < .01), comparable hospitalization costs (3411.67 ± 790.86$ versus 3494.50 ± 558.76$, P = .257), and better Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating scores (1.78 ± 0.70 versus 2.17 ± 0.89, P < .01). Patient satisfaction was higher with the single-incision technique (8.52 ± 0.79 versus 7.80 ± 0.75, P < .01). Both groups experienced one case of incision infection (SILC 0.54%, CLC 0.58%), and there was one case of postoperative bile leakage in the CLC group (0.58%). However, the difference in complications was not statistically significant (P > .05). Conclusion: Transumbilical SILC demonstrates safe and effective near-term efficacy, offering benefits such as reduced postoperative pain and improved cosmetic outcomes, which support its clinical adoption.

Risk Factors for Difficult Three-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background Standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a four-port technique in which a camera port and three additional ports are used. The advantages of minimally invasive surgery with reduced-port surgery have been reported. However, evidence on the indications for minimally invasive surgery in patients with severe acute cholecystitis or previous upper abdominal surgery in whom laparoscopic surgery is considered challenging is limited. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the factors that complicate reduced-port LC. Methods Data from 47 consecutive patients who underwent three-port LC using two 5 mm ports and 12 mm umbilical ports for symptomatic cholecystolithiasis, chronic cholecystitis, and acute cholecystitis between November 2021 and November 2023 by a single surgeon were retrospectively collected. Noncomplete LC was defined as a change of 5 mm to 12 mm port, the addition of ports, a change to subtotal cholecystectomy, or open conversion cholecystectomy. The patients were divided into two groups according to complete or noncomplete LC, and the risk factors that might have contributed to noncomplete LC were explored. Results Among the 47 patients, the median (range) age was 74 (25-97) years, 21 were men and 26 were women, 30 (63.8%) had acute cholecystitis, and 21 (44.7%) underwent emergency LC. No conversion to open cholecystectomy was performed. Six of the 47 patients had noncomplete LC, three of whom were converted to subtotal cholecystectomy, one had the midepigastric port changed from 5 mm to 12 mm to use an automatic anastomosis device, and two were converted to subtotal cholecystectomy with a 12 mm midepigastric port. In the univariate analysis, the noncomplete LC group had significantly more cases of preoperative gallbladder drainage and a smaller body mass index than the complete group. No significant differences were found in previous epigastric surgeries or in the presence of acute cholecystitis. Postoperative outcomes showed a significantly longer operative time, more intraoperative blood loss, longer postoperative hospital stay, and higher Estimation of Physiologic Ability and Surgical Stress and surgical stress score in the noncomplete LC group than in the complete group. Conclusions Three-port LC may be difficult to perform in patients with preoperative gallbladder drainage and severe scarring of the gallbladder neck. For patients with risk factors for three-port LC, adequate manpower and early conversion to subtotal or open cholecystectomy are necessary to avoid intraoperative complications. Further studies are required to determine significant risk factors for noncomplete LC.

Magnetic device in reduced port and single port bariatric surgery: First 170 cases experience

INTRODUCTION

Magnetic devices have been successfully used in bariatric surgery. To the date, the only reported use of the magnet was for liver retraction. Our purpose in this study is to demonstrate the safety and viability of using a magnetic system in different steps in single port and reduced port bariatric surgery.

METHODS

Prospective and observational study was performed. Patients older than 18 years, undergoing primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or revisional surgery by single-port or reduced-port approach between July 2020 and June 2021 were included.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients (mean BMI, 41.47kg/m²; mean age 36.92 yrs) completed laparoscopic bariatric surgery (54 single-port sleeve gastrectomy [SPSG], 16 reduced-port SG, 83 RYGB, 4 OAGB and 14 revision surgeries), using the magnetic surgical system in different steps of the surgery. Mean surgical time for SPSG and reduced-port SG was 65.52min and 59.36min respectively; and for RYGB 74.19min, OAGB 70.98min, and revisional surgeries 88.38min. As for intraoperative complications, 2.94% mild liver laceration without significant bleeding was reported. There were no 30-day mortalities and no major complications.

CONCLUSION

Magnetic assistance in single-port and reduced-port bariatric surgery is an innovative technique. With this prospective study we attempt to demonstrate the safety profile and potential uses that may improve the implementation of new surgical approaches in bariatric surgery.

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.

Physical Bases, Indications, and Results of the Use of Magnets in Digestive Surgery: A Narrative Review

Background: The use of magnetic devices in digestive surgery has been a matter of debate in recent years. The aim of this review was to describe the physical bases, indications, and results of the use of magnets in digestive surgery. Methods: A review of the literature was performed using Scopus, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and SciELO databases considering as inclusion criteria all articles published since 2007 to date, describing the physical basis of magnetic assisted surgery and those that describe the surgical procedure, including case reports, as well as, articles on humans and experimental animals. Results: Sixty-four studies were included, 15 detailing aspects on the physical basis and 49 about indications and results. Magnets are currently used to perform fixed traction, mobilizing structures, and anastomosis in humans and experimental animals. Conclusions: The use of magnets in digestive surgery has shown good results, and no complications arising from their use have been reported. However, more prospective and randomized studies that compare magnetic surgery and conventional techniques are needed.

Magnetic device in reduced port and single port bariatric surgery: First 170 cases experience

INTRODUCTION

Magnetic devices have been successfully used in bariatric surgery. To the date, the only reported use of the magnet was for liver retraction. Our purpose in this study is to demonstrate the safety and viability of using a magnetic system in different steps in single port and reduced port bariatric surgery.

METHODS

Prospective and observational study was performed. Patients older than 18 years, undergoing primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or revisional surgery by single-port or reduced-port approach between July 2020 and June 2021 were included.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients (mean BMI, 41.47kg/m2; mean age 36.92 yrs) completed laparoscopic bariatric surgery (54 single-port sleeve gastrectomy [SPSG], 16 reduced-port SG, 83 RYGB, 4 OAGB and 14 revision surgeries), using the magnetic surgical system in different steps of the surgery. Mean surgical time for SPSG and reduced-port SG was 65.52min and 59.36min respectively; and for RYGB 74.19min, OAGB 70.98min, and revisional surgeries 88.38min. As for intraoperative complications, 2.94% mild liver laceration without significant bleeding was reported. There were no 30-day mortalities and no major complications.

CONCLUSION

Magnetic assistance in single-port and reduced-port bariatric surgery is an innovative technique. With this prospective study we attempt to demonstrate the safety profile and potential uses that may improve the implementation of new surgical approaches in bariatric surgery.