Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy Using a Wound Retractor and Surgical Glove

Videoscopy ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Dean Potter
2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jong Won Kim ◽  
Jun Seok Park ◽  
In Taik Chang ◽  
Yoo Shin Choi ◽  
Hyung Jun Song ◽  
...  

Surgery Today ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 542-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siwo Ernest Amos ◽  
Wu Shuo-Dong ◽  
Ying Fan ◽  
Yu Tian ◽  
Chun-Chih Chen

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. e160-e161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erkinbek Orozakunov ◽  
Cihangir Akyol ◽  
Utku Tantoglu ◽  
Salim I. Basceken ◽  
Ilgaz S. Kayilioglu ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 183 (2) ◽  
pp. e49-e59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adolfo Pisanu ◽  
Giulia Porceddu ◽  
Isabella Reccia ◽  
Alessandra Saba ◽  
Alessandro Uccheddu

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (10) ◽  
pp. 1306-1310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Esparaz ◽  
Paul M. Jeziorczak ◽  
Alyssa R. Mowrer ◽  
Shawn R. Chakraborty ◽  
Ryan T. Nierstedt ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 536-544
Author(s):  
Beom-Jin Kim ◽  
Jong Won Kim ◽  
Yoo Shin Choi ◽  
Yong Gum Park ◽  
Beom Gyu Kim ◽  
...  

Background. Technical difficulties and pain from large wounds have prevented the widespread use of single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy (SILA). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of our newly developed needle grasper (Endo Relief)-assisted SILA (NASILA). Methods. For NASILA, about a 12-mm umbilical incision was made, and a glove port was introduced. A needle grasper was then introduced through a 2.5-mm wound on the suprapubic area. For SILA, a 2.5-cm transumbilical wound was made. The medical records of patients who underwent SILA or NASILA from June 2017 to September 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Operative and short-term postoperative outcomes and results of telephone interviews for scars were compared. Results. A total of 49 patients in the SILA group (male: 40.8%) and 12 in the NASILA group (male: 50.0%) were included. Appendicitis status (not perforated:perforated without abscess:perforated with abscess) was significantly different between the 2 groups (SILA vs NASILA, 30:18:1 vs 4:6:2, P = .027). Additional trocars were inserted in 9 patients (18.4%) of the SILA group. The operative time was significantly shorter (43.3 ± 33.6 vs 54.1 ± 15.6 minutes, P = .012), and the highest numerical pain intensity score during the first 24 hours after surgery was significantly lower (2.4 ± 0.7 vs 3.0 ± 0.9, P = .038) in the NASILA group than in the SILA group. Hospital stay, postoperative complications, and complaint of scar were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Conclusions. NASILA was not inferior to SILA regarding cosmetic results. Operative convenience is higher in NASILA than in SILA, and the smaller surgical wound in NASILA minimizes postoperative pain.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document