Lone Star Retractor for Pediatric Hand Surgery:

Lone-Star retractor perineal exposure method for laparoscopic abdominal perineal resection of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The abdominal perineal resection (APR), historically referred to as Mile's procedure, stands as a time-honored surgical intervention for rectal cancer management. Advancements in surgical techniques and the advent of neoadjuvant therapies have significantly improved the rate of sphincter preservation among patients afflicted with rectal cancer, including those with ultralow rectal cancer. Despite these improvements, APR maintains its irreplaceable role in the clinical landscape, particularly for cases involving low rectal cancer with encroachment on the external anal sphincter or levator ani muscles. Optimal perineal exposure stands as a pivotal phase in APR, given that the precision of this maneuver is directly correlated with both the safety of the surgery and the patient's subsequent long-term prognosis.

AIM

To evaluate the value of Lone-Star retractor (LSR) perineal exposure method in the treatment for laparoscopic APR of rectal cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of 38 patients with rectal cancer at Anqing Municipal Hospital from January 2020 to December 2023, including 20 patients who underwent the APR procedure with a LSR perineal exposure method (LSR group) and 18 patients who underwent the APR procedure with a conventional perineal exposure method (control group). In the LSR group, following incision of the skin and subcutaneous tissue, the LSR was placed and dynamically adjusted according to the surgical plane to fully expose the perineal operative field.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients underwent laparoscopic APR, none of whom were found to have distant metastasis upon intraoperative exploration. Perineal blood loss, the postoperative hospital stays and the wound pain scores in the LSR group were significantly lower than those in the control group. A single surgeon completed the perineal operation significantly more often in the LSR group than in the control group (P < 0.05). The incidence of infection via the perineal incision in the LSR group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). No cases of distant metastasis or local recurrence were found among the patients at the postoperative follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The application of the LSR technique might be helpful for performing perineal exposure during APR for rectal cancer and could reduce the incidence of perineal complications, shorten the postoperative hospital stay, improve postoperative pain, and allow one surgeon to perform the perineal operation.

A novel perineal exposure method in laparoscopic abdominal perineal resection of rectal cancer: a case series study

BACKGROUND

Abdominal perineal resection (APR) of rectal cancer, also known as Mile's procedure, is a classic procedure for the treatment of rectal cancer. Through the improvement of surgical skills and neoadjuvant therapy, the sphincter-preserving rate in rectal cancer patients has improved, even in patients with ultralow rectal cancer who underwent APR in the past. However, APR cannot be completely replaced by low anterior resection (LAR) in reality. APR still has its indications, when the tumor affects the external sphincter, etc. Good perineal exposure in APR is difficult and can seriously affect surgical safety and the long-term prognosis.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of 16 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent APR at Anqing Municipal Hospital from January 2022 to April 2023, including 11 males and 5 females, with an average age of 64.8 ± 10.3 years. The perineal operation was completed with the Lone-Star® retractor-assisted (LSRA) exposure method. After incising the skin and subcutaneous tissue, a Lone-Star® retractor was placed, and the incision was retracted in surrounding directions with 8 small retractors, which facilitated the freeing of deep tissues. We dynamically adjusted the retractor according to the plane to fully expose the surgical field.

RESULTS

All 16 patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted APR successfully. Thirteen procedures were performed independently by a single person, and the others were completed by two persons due to intraoperative arterial hemostasis. All specimens were free of perforation and had a negative circumferential resection margin (CRM). Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients, including urinary retention in 1 patient, pulmonary infection in 1 patient, intestinal adhesion in 1 patient and peristomal dermatitis in 1 patient, and were graded as ClavienDindo grade 3 or lower and cured. No distant metastasis or local recurrence was found for any of the patients in the postoperative follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of the LSRA exposure method might be helpful for perineal exposure during APR for rectal cancer, which could improve intraoperative safety and surgical efficiency, achieve one-person operation, and increase the comfort of operators.

The Lone Star Retractor System in Neurosurgery

BACKGROUND

We investigated the role of a self-retaining retractor system, commonly used in ear, abdominal, vascular, urologic and gynecologic surgeries: the Lone Star retractor system. We report our experience in using the Lone Star retractor in different brain surgeries, at a single neurosurgical department.

METHODS

In 2019, patients who underwent brain surgery and in which the Lone Star Retractor System was used were considered for inclusion. Clinical and surgical data of included patients were prospectively collected. Postoperative VAS for local pain, and a properly designed intraoperative retractor stability score, were collected.

RESULTS

Over 2019, the Lone Stare Retractor was used in 20 neurosurgical procedures: 9 high-grade glioma, 2 low-grade glioma, 4 cerebral metastases, and 5 meningiomas. Postoperative mean VAS score was 3.5 (range: 2-4). Intraoperative retractor stability score mean was 2 in frontal, 2 in pterional, 1.75 in subtemporal, 2 in interhemispheric, and 0.5 in suboccipital approaches. The Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale mean value was 4.4 (range: 3-5).

CONCLUSIONS

In our institutional experience, the Lone Star retractor showed many advantages in different brain procedures, when compared with standard fishhooks and other retractors.

Improved arterial exposure and ergonomics with use of elasticated retractors in vascular surgery

Traditional self-retaining retraction devices do not always provide adequate exposure and, on occasion, hamper economy of movement during vascular surgical procedures. We report the novel use of elasticated retractors to improve surgical exposure for vascular access procedures that may be transferable to other vascular surgical procedures.

Elasticated retractors in tracheostomy

We present a novel way of providing and improving retraction whilst performing tracheostomies, using elasticated retractors. The benefits of this method include an improved surgical field and the facility for use by a single surgeon. This type of retraction could potentially be used in a variety of other head and neck procedures.

Current and future practices in surgical retraction

Retraction of tissues and anatomical structures is an essential component of all forms of surgery. The means by which operative access is gained through retraction are many and diverse. In this article, the various forms of retraction methods currently available are reviewed, with special reference to hand held, self-retaining and compliant techniques. The special challenges posed by laparoscopic surgery are considered and future developments in new retraction techniques are anticipated.