Comparison of Midline and Off-midline specimen extraction following laparoscopic left-sided colorectal resections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

This study aims to evaluate comparative outcomes following midline versus off-midline specimen extractions following laparoscopic left-sided colorectal resections.

Methods

A systematic search of electronic information sources was conducted. Studies comparing 'midline' versus 'off midline' specimen extraction following laparoscopic left-sided colorectal resections performed for malignancies were included. The rate of incisional hernia formation, surgical site infection (SSI), total operative time and blood loss, anastomotic leak (AL) and length of hospital stay (LOS) was the evaluated outcome parameters.

Results

Five comparative observational studies reporting a total of 1187 patients comparing midline (n = 701) and off-midline (n = 486) approaches for specimen extraction were identified. Specimen extraction performed through an off-midline incision was not associated with a significantly reduced rate of SSI (odds ratio [OR]: 0.71; P = 0.68), the occurrence of AL (OR: 0.76; P = 0.66) and future development of incisional hernias (OR: 0.65; P = 0.64) compared to the conventional midline approach. No statistically significant difference was observed in total operative time (mean difference [MD]: 0.13; P = 0.99), intraoperative blood loss (MD: 2.31; P = 0.91) and LOS (MD: 0.78; P = 0.18) between the two groups.

Conclusions

Off-midline specimen extraction following minimally invasive left-sided colorectal cancer surgery is associated with similar rates of SSI and incisional hernia formation compared to the vertical midline incision. Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences observed between the two groups for evaluated outcomes such as total operative time, intra-operative blood loss, AL rate and LOS. As such, we did not find any advantage of one approach over the other. Future high-quality well-designed trials are required to make robust conclusions.

Extraction Site in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery

The widespread adoption of minimally invasive colorectal surgery has led to improved patient recovery and outcomes. Specimen extraction sites remain a major source of pain and potential postoperative morbidity. Careful selection of the extraction site incision may allow surgeons to decrease postoperative pain, infectious complications, or rates of hernia formation. Options include midline, paramedian, transverse, Pfannenstiel, and natural orifice sites. Patient, disease, and surgeon-related factors should all be considered when choosing a site. This article will review different options for specimen extraction sites.

The incidence of extraction site incisional hernia after minimally invasive colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Minimally invasive colorectal surgery reduces surgical trauma with better preservation of abdominal wall integrity, but the extraction site is still at risk of incisional hernia (IH). The aim of this study was to determine pooled incidence of IH for each type of extraction site and to compare rates of IH after midline, nonmidline and Pfannenstiel extraction.

METHOD

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. Single-armed and multiple-armed cohort studies and randomized controlled trials regarding minimally invasive colorectal surgery were searched from five databases. Outcomes were pooled and compared with random-effects, inverse-variance models. Risk of bias within the studies was assessed using the Cochrane ROBINS-I and RoB 2 tool.

RESULTS

Thirty six studies were included, with a total 11,788 patients. The pooled extraction site IH rate was 16.0% for midline (n = 4081), 9.3% for umbilical (n = 2425), 5.2% for transverse (n = 3213), 9.4% for paramedian (n = 134) and 2.1% for Pfannenstiel (n = 1449). Nonmidline extraction (transverse and paramedian) showed significantly lower odds ratios (ORs) for IH when compared with midline extraction (including umbilical). Pfannenstiel extraction resulted in a significantly lower OR for IH compared with midline [OR 0.12 (0.50-0.30)], transverse [OR 0.25 (0.13-0.50)] and umbilical (OR 0.072 [0.033-0.16]) extraction sites. The risks of surgical site infection, seroma/haematoma or wound dehiscence were not significantly different in any of the analyses.

CONCLUSION

Pfannenstiel extraction is the preferred method in minimally invasive colorectal surgery. In cases where Pfannenstiel extraction is not possible, surgeons should avoid specimen extraction in the midline.

Comparison of extraction sites versus artificial defects with xenogenic bone substitute in minipigs

Objectives

The preclinical evaluation of bone substitutes is frequently performed in artificially created defects. However, such defects do not reflect the predominant clinical application of bone substitutes for socket preservation. Hence, the goal of this animal study was to compare the performance of a xenogenic bone substitute in extraction sites versus artificial defects.

Material and Methods

Four study sites each were created in the mandibles of four minipigs in the region of the third premolars and first molars, respectively. On one side, fresh extraction sockets were established while contralaterally trephine defects were created in healed alveolar bone. All sites were augmented using a particulate xenogenic bone substitute, covered by resorbable membranes and allowed to heal for 12 weeks. The amounts of new bone, non‐bone tissue and remaining bone substitute granules were quantified through histological and micro‐CT analysis. Comparative statistics were based on t‐tests for two samples and ANOVA with the level of significance set at α = 0.05.

Results

Histomorphometric data from only two animals could be quantitatively analyzed due to difficulty with identifying the surgical sites. The percentage of newly formed bone ranged between 53.2% ± 5.6% for artificial defects and 54.9% ± 12.4% for extraction sites. With the exception of ANOVA indicating a greater amount of non‐bone tissue in extraction sites as compared to artificial sites (p = 0.047), no statistically significant differences were observed. Micro‐CT scans showed patterns similar to the ones observed in histomorphometry. As extraction sites could be identified only in two micro‐CT reconstructions, quantitative assessment was not undertaken.

Conclusions

Despite the comparable performance of bone substitute material in artificial defects and extraction sites found here, the data gathered with this experiment was insufficient for showing equivalence of both approaches.

Pfannenstiel incision for intact specimen extraction in laparoscopic transperitoneal radical nephrectomy: a longitudinal prospective outcome study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the intra- and postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic radical nephrectomy with intact specimen extraction through a Pfannenstiel transverse suprapubic incision.

METHODS

Prospective follow-up of 26 laparoscopic transperitoneal radical nephrectomies for suspected renal tumors in which the kidneys were extracted via a Pfannenstiel lower abdominal transverse incision.

RESULTS

The mean operating time was 152.3 (80-255) minutes, and the mean blood loss was 90 (20-300) ml. The mean extraction time was 20.4 (12-35) minutes. The mean weight of the removed specimen was 631.5 (190-1505) grams, and the mean longest diameter of the extracted specimen was 17.4 (9-25) cm. The mean extraction incision size was 10.7 (7-16) cm. No open surgical conversions were necessary. Pain control was excellent, with minimal intravenous morphine equivalent narcotic use by patients: 15.7 (0-31) mg in the recovery room, 33.8 (0-127) mg on the first postoperative day and 8.7 (0-60) mg in the first week after discharge. The patients experienced a short duration to full ambulation and normal dietary intake. Postoperative follow-up visits were recorded for at least six months. The patients reported a high cosmetic satisfaction rate of 97.7% (60-100). No late postoperative complications were observed related to the extraction site.

CONCLUSIONS

The operative specimen can be extracted via a low transverse Pfannenstiel incision during radical laparoscopic nephrectomy. This incision ensures the extraction of large specimens while preserving the aesthetic and functional advantages of laparoscopy without increasing the cancer risk. The absence of muscle cutting maintains the integrity of the abdominal wall and elicits minimal pain. No postoperative incisional hernias or keloid formations were observed.

Incisional hernia rate after laparoscopic colorectal resection is reduced with standardisation of specimen extraction

INTRODUCTION

Incisional hernia is a common complication of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Extraction site may influence the rate of incisional hernias. Major risk factors for the development of incisional hernias include age, diabetes, obesity and smoking status. In this study, we investigated the effect of specimen extraction site on incisional hernia rate.

METHODS

Two cohorts of patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal resections in a single centre in 2005 (n=85) and 2009 (n=139) were studied retrospectively. In 2005 all specimens were extracted through transverse muscle cutting incisions. In 2009 all specimens were extracted through midline incisions. Demographic variables, rate of incisional hernias and risk factors for hernia development were compared between the year groups. All patients had been followed up clinically for two years.

RESULTS

A total of 224 patients (mean age: 67.5 years, standard deviation: 16.35 years) were included in this study. Of these, 85 patients were in the 2005 transverse group and 139 were in the 2009 midline group. The total incisional hernia rate for the series was 8.0% at the two-year follow-up visit. For the 2005 group, the incisional hernia rate was 15.3% (n=13) and for the 2009 group, it was 3.6% (n=5) (p<0.01). The body mass index was higher in patients who developed incisional hernias than in those who did not (p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2005 group had a significantly higher incisional hernia rate than the 2009 group. This is due to the differences in the incision technique and extraction site between the two groups.

Specimen processing during laparoscopic renal surgery: a review of techniques and technologies

Laparoscopic surgery has well-defined benefits for patients and has become accepted over time as a standard access strategy for the management of benign and malignant urologic diseases. Unlike in open surgery, the surgeon is often faced with the additional challenges of specimen retrieval and extraction at the end of laparoscopic extirpative procedures. This final step often requires significant laparoscopic skill to entrap and safely extract the laparoscopic specimens. Failure to apply safe exit steps at the end of a laparoscopic procedure may lead to significant morbidity. The aim of this review is to explore the different techniques and technologies available for laparoscopic kidney retrieval, entrapment and safe extraction.