Single-incision laparoscopic-assisted right colon resection for cancer

Single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer: State of art

A number of clinical trials have demonstrated that the laparoscopic approach for colorectal cancer resection provides the same oncologic results as open surgery along with all clinical benefits of minimally invasive surgery. During the last years, a great effort has been made to research for minimizing parietal trauma, yet for cosmetic reasons and in order to further reduce surgery-related pain and morbidity. New techniques, such as natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) have been developed in order to reach the goal of “scarless” surgery. Although NOTES may seem not fully suitable or safe for advanced procedures, such as colectomies, SIL is currently regarded as the next major advance in the progress of minimally invasive surgical approaches to colorectal disease that is more feasible in generalized use. The small incision through the umbilicus allows surgeons to use familiar standard laparoscopic instruments and thus, perform even complex procedures which require extraction of large surgical specimens or intestinal anastomosis. The cosmetic result from SIL is also better because the only incision is made through the umbilicus which can hide the wound effectively after operation. However, SIL raises a number of specific new challenges compared with the laparoscopic conventional approach. A reduced capacity for triangulation, the repeated conflicts between the shafts of the instruments and the difficulties to achieve a correct exposure of the operative field are the most claimed issues. The use therefore of this new approach for complex colorectal procedures might understandingly be viewed as difficult to implement, especially for oncologic cases.

Single-site laparoscopic colorectal surgery provides similar lengths of hospital stay and similar costs compared with standard laparoscopy: results of a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The present study sought to compare the length of stay (LOS) and hospital costs for elective single-site (SSL) and standard laparoscopic (SDL) colorectal resections performed at a tertiary referral center.

METHODS

An IRB-approved, retrospective cohort study of all elective SDL and SSL colorectal resections performed from 2008 to 2012 was undertaken. Patient charges and inflation adjusted hospital costs (US dollars) were compared with costs subcategorized by operating room expense, room and board, and pharmacy and radiology utilization.

RESULTS

A total of 149 SDL and 111 SSL cases were identified. Compared with SSL, SDL surgeries were associated with longer median operative times (SSL: 153 min vs. SDL: 189 min, p = 0.001); however, median operating room costs were similar (p > 0.05). Median postoperative LOS was similar for both groups (SSL: 3 days; SDL: 4 days; p > 0.05). There was no difference between SSL and SDL with respect to either total patient charges (SSL: $34,847 vs. SDL: $38,306; p > 0.05) or hospital costs (SSL: $13,051 vs. SDL: $12,703; p > 0.05). Median costs during readmission were lower for SSL patients (SSL: $3,625 vs. SDL: $6,203, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

SSL provides similar LOS as well as similar costs to both patients and hospitals compared with SDL, making it a cost-feasible alternative.

Single incision vs conventional laparoscopic anterior resection for sigmoid colon cancer: a case-matched study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the safety and effects of single-incision laparoscopic anterior resection (SILAR) for sigmoid colon cancer by comparing it with conventional laparoscopic anterior resection (CLAR).

METHODS

Twenty-four patients who underwent SILAR between April 2010 and July 2011 were case matched 1:2 with patients who underwent CLAR, with respect to age, sex, body mass index, tumor location, and history of abdominal surgery.

RESULTS

Two patients in the SILAR group and 1 patient in the CLAR group experienced anastomotic leakage. The operative time was longer in the SILAR group than in the CLAR group (251 ± 50 vs 237 ± 49 minutes; P = .253). The number of harvested lymph nodes (19.6 ± 10.7 vs 20.8 ± 7.7; P = .630) was not different. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the SILAR group (7.1 ± 3.4 days) than in the CLAR group (8.1 ± 3.5 days) (P = .234).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the early outcomes, we conclude that SILAR is feasible and safe. Moreover, the adequate lymph node harvest and free margins support the use of this procedure.

Suprapubic single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) has gained significance recently. The umbilicus has been the preferred access site for SIL. Suprapubic access site (SAS) can be an alternative, especially for a right hemicolectomy (RH).

METHODS

Between November 2011 and July 2012, 7 consecutive patients underwent suprapubic SIL RH (SSILRH). The median age was 53 years, and the median body mass index was 23.9 kg/m2. Indications for surgery included appendicular tumor (1) and adenocarcinoma of the right colon (6). Three reusable trocars were used, and the resection was performed through the SAS. An intracorporeal linear stapled anastomosis was performed, the mesenteric defect was closed, and the access site was used for specimen extraction.

RESULTS

No patient required additional trocars or conversion to an open surgery. The median laparoscopic time was 222 minutes, and the median final incision length was 50 mm. The median Visual Analogue Scale score (0-10) at 6, 18, 30, 42, 54, 66, and 78 postoperative hours was 6, 6, 2, 2, 2, 2, and 2, respectively. The median hospital stay was 4 days.

CONCLUSIONS

SSILRH is useful because the SAS can be enlarged for extraction of the specimen without compromising the cosmetic outcome. The mesocolic and mesenteric dissections are on the same axis as the access site. The intracorporeal anastomosis can be performed without traction. Finally, positioning of the operative table improves exposure of the operative field and allows the surgeon to maneuver the colon and small bowel intracorporeally.

Systematic review of single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery

BACKGROUND

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have shown multiport laparoscopic surgery to be safe compared with open surgery in elective colonic disease. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) represents the latest advance in laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this systematic review was to establish the safety and complication profile of colonic SILS.

METHODS

The search was performed in October 2011 using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Search terms were 'colorectal', 'colon', 'colectomy', 'rectal' and single incision/port/trocar/site/scar. Only pure single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery for benign and malignant colonic disease was included. Primary outcomes were the early postoperative complication profiles of colonic SILS. Secondary outcomes were duration of operation, lymph node yields, conversion rate and duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Colonic SILS data were compared with data from a Cochrane review on the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic colonic surgery and four main RCTs on laparoscopic colonic surgery. Median operating times and time to first bowel motion for colonic SILS were comparable with those for laparoscopic colonic surgery. The median lymph node retrieval for malignant disease achieved with SILS was acceptable. Evidence for a reduction in postoperative pain with SILS was conflicting. There was no significant reduction in length of hospital stay with SILS. Most patients selected for colonic SILS had a low body mass index, non-bulky tumours and were operated on by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. There was significant heterogeneity in study group characteristics, indications for surgery, research methodology, operative techniques and follow-up time.

CONCLUSION

Colonic SILS should be restricted to highly selected patients; operations should be performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, with critical appraisal of clinical outcomes.

Single-incision right hemicolectomy for malignancy: a feasible technique with standard laparoscopic instrumentation

AIM

Single-incision laparoscopy is a rapidly evolving technique in the spectrum 'standard laparoscopy-natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)'. From a commercial perspective, purchase of articulating instruments is advised. However, here we present our early experience with single-incision laparoscopy for right hemicolectomy with standard laparoscopic instrumentation.

METHOD

Between June 2010 and December 2011, 25 patients presenting with malignant disease underwent single-incision laparoscopy for right hemicolectomy. Four different ports (SILS™ port, Covidien; SSL(®) Access system, Ethicon; X-Cone/S-Portal(®) , Storz; and OCTO™ port, AFS Medical) were used. Patients were recruited prospectively and all data were processed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were included in our study (and their characteristics, described later in this paragraph, are expressed as median (range)). Four conversions to standard laparoscopy were performed. The age of patients was 69 (36-89) years, and they had a body mass index (BMI) of 24.5 (19.1-34.2). The duration of surgery was 110 (70-148) min with a healed skin incision length of 35 (20-60) mm. Hospital stay was 5 (2-15) days. In four patients discharge was delayed because of comorbidity. One patient suffered an overwhelming pneumonia.

CONCLUSION

Single-incision laparoscopy using standard laparoscopic instruments appears to be a safe and feasible technique for malignant disease requiring right hemicolectomy. Randomized, prospective trials are ongoing to prove the benefits of this technique and to compare its oncological outcome measures with those of conventional laparoscopy. In our experience, a low-profile port with a wide intra-abdominal range of motion is most preferable.

Single-incision laparoscopic total colectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To present our experience with a single-incision laparoscopic total colectomy, along with a literature review of all published cases on single-incision laparoscopic total colectomy.

METHODS

A total of 22 cases were published between 2010 and 2011, with our patient being case 23. These procedures were performed in the United States and United Kingdom. Surgical procedures included total colectomy with end ileostomy, proctocolectomy with ileorectal anastomosis, and total proctocolectomy with ileopouch-anal anastomosis. Intraoperative and postoperative data are analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two of the 23 cases were performed for benign cases including Crohns, ulcerative colitis, and familial adenomatous polyposis. One case was performed for adenocarcinoma of the cecum. The mean age was 35.3 years (range, 13 to 64), the mean body mass index was 20.1 (range, 19 to 25), mean operative time was 175.9 minutes (range, 139 to 216), mean blood loss was 95.3mL (range, 59 to 200), mean incision length was 2.61cm (range, 2 to 3). Average follow-up was 4.6 months with 2 reported complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-incision laparoscopic total colectomy is feasible and safe in the hands of an experienced surgeon. It has been performed for both benign and malignant cases. It is comparable to the conventional multi-port laparoscopic total colectomy.

Pearls and pitfalls in SILS colectomy

Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy has developed into a viable option for the treatment of benign and malignant colorectal diseases with the innovation of new access devices, instrumentation, and surgical techniques. Although cosmesis has been highly touted as the most apparent advantage of the approach, the single-incision platform also affords the potential for enhanced recovery, early hospital discharge, and reduction in postoperative wound complications. Despite increasing evidence demonstrating the safety and efficacy of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy, wide-ranging adaptation has been tempered in part as a result of the technical demands of the approach. We aim to describe our surgical pearls for overcoming various pitfalls and technical challenges experienced during single-incision laparoscopic colectomy to facilitate successful application of this technique.

Single-incision Laparoscopic Surgery for Appendiceal Mucoceles: Safety and Feasibility in a Series of 16 Consecutive Cases

Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, and oncological outcomes of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic surgery in patients with an uncomplicated appendiceal mucocele.

Methods

A review of a prospectively collected database at the Kyungpook National University Hospital from January 2006 to September 2010 revealed that a series of 16 consecutive patients underwent single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for an appendiceal mucocele. Data regarding patient demographics, operating time, conversion, surgical morbidity, lateral lymph node status, and mid-term oncologic result were analyzed.

Results

The reported series consisted of 7 women (50%) and 9 men with a mean age of 61.6 years (range, 41 to 88 years). The mean operative time was 66.8 minutes (range, 33 to 150 minutes). Perioperative mortality and morbidity were 0% and 6.2%, respectively. Recovery after the procedure was rapid, and the mean hospital stay was 6.8 days (range, 3 to 22 days). Pathology revealed 12 lesions compatible with a mucinous cystadenoma and four others compatible with benign cystic tumors. All surgical margins were clear. In one case, an extra port had to be placed, and another case required conversion from SILS to a standard open laparotomy immediately after identification of the tumor because of a micro-perforation with focal mucin collection. With a median follow-up of 28.7 months, no re-admission or tumor recurrence, such as pseudomyxoma peritonei, was noted in 14 patients.

Conclusion

A single-port laparoscopic mucocelectomy should be safe and feasible and has the advantage of being a minimally invasive approach. Prospective controlled studies comparing SILS and conventional open surgery, with long-term follow-up evaluation, are needed to confirm the author's initial experience.