scholarly journals The Feasibility and Effects in Full Staging Surgery of Endometrial Cancer by Combination of Transumbilical Single-port Laparoscopy and ERAS

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhifu Cai ◽  
Mengjie Chen ◽  
He Wang ◽  
Li Li
Keyword(s):  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Single Port ◽  
Laparoscopic Group ◽  
Stage I ◽  
Type I ◽  
Abdominal Incision ◽  
Single Port Laparoscopy ◽  
Staging Surgery

Abstract BackgroundsTo study the safety, feasibility and aesthetics of transumbilical single port laparoscopic technology combined with accelerated rehabilitation surgery in stage I endometrial cancer staging surgery, and whether the laparoscopic surgery is a factor affecting the prognosis of endometrial cancer. MethodsA total of 93 patients with type I endometrial cancer stage I were enrolled in this study, including 31 cases and 62 cases in the single port and multi-port laparoscopic groups, respectively. Both groups received ERAS technology to compare the intraoperative and postoperative conditions. Subsequently, the medical records of 62 patients who had undergone open surgery were collected, and the survival, recurrence and death of the single port laparoscopic group, the multi-port laparoscopic group and the open surgery group were compared through survival analysis. ResultsThe time of surgery, intraoperative blood loss and fluid infusion volume in the single port group and the multi-port group were significantly less than those of the multi-port group (P<0.05). The single-hole group was better than the open group in terms of rapid postoperative recovery, hospitalization days, incision abdominal incision cometic effect, physical function, physical pain, vitality, and mental health (P<0.05). And there is no significant differences of mortality and recurrence among single port, multi-port and open surgery (P>0.05). Laparoscopic surgery is not a risk factor affecting OS and DFS in patients with endometrial cancer. ConclusionsTransumbilical single port laparoscopy combined with ERAS was safe and feasible for the treatment of stage I endometrial cancer with good cosmetic results and more advantages than multi-port laparoscopy.

FACTORS INFLUENCING THE OPERATION TECHNIQUE OF PEFORATED DUODENAL ULCER REPAIR BY SINGLEPORT LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY

2016 ◽  
pp. 99-105
Author(s):  
Huu Tri Nguyen ◽  
Loc Le ◽  
Doàn Van Phu Nguyen ◽  
Nhu Thanh Dang ◽  
Thanh Phuc Nguyen
Keyword(s):  
Duodenal Ulcer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Single Port ◽  
Time Correlation ◽  
Patch Repair ◽  
Perforated Duodenal Ulcer ◽  
Conversion To Open Surgery

Background: Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) is increasingly used in surgery and in the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer. The aim of this study was to evaluate technical factors for perforated duodenal ulcer repair by SPLS. Methods: A prospective study on 42 consecutive patients diagnosed with perforated duodenal ulcer and treated with SPLS at Hue university of medicine and pharmacy hospital and Hue central hospital from January 2012 to February 2015. Results: The mean age was 48.1 ± 14.2 (17 - 79) years. 40 patients were treated with suture of the perforation by pure SPLS. There was one case (2.4%) in which one additional trocar was required. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in one patient (2.4%) in which the perforation was situated on the posterior duodenal wall. Two patients (4.8%) with history of abdominal surgery were successfully treated by pure SPLS. The size of perforation was correlated with suturing time (correlation coefficient r = 0.459) and operative time (correlation coefficient r = 0.528). Considering suture type, X stitches were used in 95.5% cases, simple stitches were used in one case (2.4%) while Graham patch repair technique was utilized in one case (2.4%) with large perforation. Most cases (95.1%) required only simple suture without omental patch. Peritoneal drainage was spared in most cases (90.2%). Conclusions: SPLS is a safe method for the treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer. Posterior duodenal location is the main cause of conversion to open surgery. Factor related to operative time is perforation size. Key words: perforated duodenal ulcer, single port laparoscopic repair, single port laparoscopy

Assessment of Circumferential Resection Margins (CRM) clearance in Conventional open Versus Laparoscopic Cancer Rectum Resection

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ibrahim H Bayan ◽  
Ahmed Abdelaziz ◽  
Tarek Youssef Ahmed ◽  
Mohamed Magdy
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Abdominal Surgery ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Laparoscopic Group ◽  
Resection Margins ◽  
Laparoscopy Group ◽  
Surgery Group ◽  
Colon And Rectal Cancer ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Background Colon and rectal cancer represent the fourth commonest malignancy worldwide. Globally, colon and rectal cancer make up 9.4% and 10.1% in men and women of all cancers, respectively. Colon and rectal tumors are the third most common malignancy after breast and lung cancer, respectively. The main management of rectal cancer involves a multi-disciplinary team approach and an individually tailored treatment routine. Operative surgery remains the primary and definitive treatment for locally confined rectal adenocarcinoma and is the only historical and current treatment which allows for cure. Resection of the colon and rectal cancer can be done either by open surgical excision or laparoscopically. Aim of the work The objective is to compare the radicality of total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer in both open and laparoscopic surgery through the pathology report. Methods In this multicentric, prospective, comparative study, we included the pathologically established rectal cancer patients from 2 hospitals in Cairo, Egypt, Ain Shams University Hospitals and Maadi Military Hospital, Egypt between 2013 and 2016. The sample size was 40 patients divided into two groups; 20 patients for laparoscopic arm and 20 patients for the open trans-abdominal surgery. Inclusion criteria: histopathology confirmed rectal cancer, patients fit for operative resection, and with T1- T3 grades according to the preoperative evaluation. The exclusion criteria: Patients with T4 stage tumor, patients present as emergency cases and patients present with recurrence of the tumor and synchronous colonic tumors. Results The circumferential resection margins (CRM) of the mesorectum when examined pathologically after resection showed no difference between the two arms of the study with laparoscopic group specimens 3.18±1.16 mm mean, (SD) compared to 3.50±0.45 mm mean, (SD) in the open surgery group with no statistically significant difference. The longitudinal resection margins (LRM) was (5.50±1.98 mean, SD) in the laparoscopic group compared to (5.20±2.28 mean, SD) in the open conventional surgery group with no significant difference found between the two groups. Total operative time was significantly shorter in the trans-abdominal surgery group, while the hospital stay period was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group. Laparoscopy group also showed significantly time before flatus passage, and the patients in the laparoscopy group started oral intake faster than open surgery group. Conclusion In our study, the radicality of the rectal cancer excision in both laparoscopic and traditional open surgery, showed non inferiority of the laparoscopic technique over open surgery Long-term clinical outcomes of overall survival and recurrence is the foremost parameters which should be taken in consideration for decision for laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Additional follow-up results from the current trial are presently being developed, beside with records on other secondary end points, like cost effectiveness and quality of life.

scholarly journals Role of Minimally Invasive Surgery in Gynecologic Oncology: An Updated Survey of Members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology

2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 1121-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley B. Conrad ◽  
Pedro T. Ramirez ◽  
William Burke ◽  
R. Wendel Naumann ◽  
Kari L. Ring ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Cancer ◽  
Endometrial Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Single Port ◽  
Gynecologic Oncology ◽  
Pelvic Lymphadenectomy ◽  
Single Port Laparoscopy

ObjectivesTo evaluate the current patterns of use of minimally invasive surgical procedures, including traditional, robotic-assisted, and single-port laparoscopy, by Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) members and to compare the results to those of our 2004 and 2007 surveys.MethodsThe Society of Gynecologic Oncology members were surveyed through an online or mailed-paper survey. Data were analyzed and compared with results of our prior surveys.ResultsFour hundred six (32%) of 1279 SGO members responded. Eighty-three percent of respondents (n = 337) performed traditional laparoscopic surgery (compared with 84% in 2004 and 91% in 2007). Ninety-seven percent of respondents performed robotic surgery (compared with 27% in 2007). When respondents were asked to indicate procedures that they performed with the robot but not with traditional laparoscopy, 75% indicated radical hysterectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical cancer. Overall, 70% of respondents indicated that hysterectomy and staging for uterine cancer was the procedure they most commonly performed with a minimally invasive approach. Only 17% of respondents who performed minimally invasive surgery performed single-port laparoscopy, and only 5% of respondents indicated that single-port laparoscopy has an important or very important role in the field.ConclusionsSince our prior surveys, we found a significant increase in the overall use and indications for robotic surgery. Radical hysterectomy or trachelectomy and pelvic lymphadenectomy for cervical cancer and total hysterectomy and staging for endometrial cancer were procedures found to be significantly more appropriate for the robotic platform in comparison to traditional laparoscopy. The indications for laparoscopy have expanded beyond endometrial cancer staging to include surgical management of early-stage cervical and ovarian cancers, but the use of single-port laparoscopy remains limited.

scholarly journals P336 Minimally invasive surgery is safe and feasible for luminal Crohn’s disease

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S323-S324
Author(s):  
M Nnaji ◽  
Y F Chin ◽  
O Pujji ◽  
B Wilkinson ◽  
S Mohan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Surgical Intervention ◽  
Laparoscopic Group ◽  
Readmission Rates ◽  
Inflammatory Bowel ◽  
Reoperation Rates

Abstract Background Crohn’s disease (CD) is an inflammatory bowel condition that still requires surgical intervention in about 70% of cases with laparoscopic surgery increasingly becoming the preferred approach. We present our experience in laparoscopic and open surgery for luminal CD in a DGH setting. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively between 2008 and 2018. All patients with the diagnosis of CD who underwent a surgical intervention for luminal CD were selected and their demographic, clinical and surgical outcomes data analysed. Results 183 patients were identified. 162 (87%) underwent open and 21 (13%) laparoscopic surgery (p &lt; 0.0001). The median age was 48 years (16–82 years) in the open group and 42 years (16–64 years) in the laparoscopic group(p = 0.05). Male:female ratio was 1:1.2 in the open and 1:1 in the laparoscopic groups. Anastomotic leak rates were lower in the laparoscopic group (0% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.3520). Statistically significant lower readmission rates (9.5% in the laparoscopic, 18% in the open groups, p = 0.0255) and reoperation rates (14% in the laparoscopic and 18% in the open groups, p = 0.0108) were noted in the laparoscopic group. Conclusion Laparoscopic surgery is safe in patients requiring surgical intervention for Crohn’s disease with a notable trend towards improved clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers without omental patch versus conventional open surgery

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 927
Author(s):  
Vaibhav Srivastava ◽  
Gyanendra Singh ◽  
Santosh K. Singh
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Open Repair ◽  
Laparoscopic Group ◽  
Peptic Ulcers ◽  
Omental Patch ◽  
Operative Complications ◽  
Repair Group

Background: Perforation of peptic ulcer usually presents as an acute abdomen. Nearly one third of the patients have no history of the disease. Laparoscopic surgery, a minimally invasive technique, has recently begun to be used on perforated peptic ulcers effectively and frequently. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety and outcome of laparoscopic surgery without omental patch for perforated ulcers in comparison with conventional open surgery.Methods: All patients diagnosed clinically with perforated peptic ulcers presenting within 24 hours of symptoms and undergoing surgery under a single surgeon during 1-year interval were included in this study and randomly assigned to laparoscopic and open repair group. Patients who had to be converted from laparoscopic surgery to open surgery, were excluded.Results: A total of 69 patients were included in this study. Number of doses of analgesics required in laparoscopic group was 9.48 ± 1.82, while those required in conventional open group was 18.16±2.24. In laparoscopic duodenal perforation repair group, duration of hospital stay (in days) was 8.42±1.44 as compared to 12.08±4.82 in open repair group. Laparoscopic group had significantly fewer post-operative complications but had longer mean operative time (101.90 minutes compared to 60.32 minutes in open repair group).Conclusions: Laparoscopic closure of perforated duodenal ulcer is a simple and safe procedure in experienced hands. It maintains the benefits of the minimally invasive approach. It is associated with longer operating time, less postoperative pain, less post-operative complications, a shorter postoperative hospital stay, and earlier returns to normal daily activities.

scholarly journals Survival outcomes following laparoscopic vs open surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer: a two-center cohort study with propensity score matching

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-325
Author(s):  
Kang-Lian Tan ◽  
Hai-Jun Deng ◽  
Zhi-Qiang Chen ◽  
Ting-Yu Mou ◽  
Hao Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Survival Rate ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Propensity Score Matching ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Laparoscopic Group ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Free Survival

Abstract Background:?&gt; Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is commonly performed in China. However, compared with open surgery, the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery, especially the long-term survival, has not been sufficiently proved. Methods:?&gt; Data of eligible patients with non-metastatic rectal cancer at Nanfang Hospital of Southern Medical University and Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine between 2012 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Long-term survival outcomes and short-term surgical safety were analysed with propensity score matching between groups. Results Of 430 cases collated from two institutes, 103 matched pairs were analysed after propensity score matching. The estimated blood loss during laparoscopic surgery was significantly less than that during open surgery (P = 0.019) and the operative time and hospital stay were shorter in the laparoscopic group (both P &lt; 0.001). The post-operative complications rate was 9.7% in the laparoscopic group and 10.7% in the open group (P = 0.818). No significant difference was observed between the laparoscopic group and the open group in the 5-year overall survival rate (75.7% vs 80.6%, P = 0.346), 5-year relapse-free survival rate (74.8% vs 76.7%, P = 0.527), or 5-year cancer-specific survival rate (79.6% vs 87.4%, P = 0.219). An elevated carcinoembryonic antigen, &lt;12 harvested lymph nodes, and perineural invasion were independent prognostic factors affecting overall survival and relapse-free survival. Conclusions:?&gt; Our findings suggest that open surgery should still be the priority recommendation, but laparoscopic surgery is also an acceptable treatment for non-metastatic rectal cancer.

scholarly journals Single-site laparoscopy in gynecology: preliminary study of a series of 50 cases

2014 ◽  
Vol 60 (6) ◽  
pp. 548-554
Author(s):  
Admário Silva Santos Filho ◽  
Maurício Bechara Noviello ◽  
Rachel Cruz Fraga Damasceno ◽  
Evilane do Carmo Patrício ◽  
Lara Rodrigues Félix ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Laparoscopic Surgery ◽  
Single Port ◽  
Perioperative Complications ◽  
Care Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
Surgical Morbidity ◽  
Single Port Laparoscopy ◽  
The Mean

Objective: to describe the initial experience of a gynecology team, at a tertiary care center, when performing single-port laparoscopic surgery. Methods: this is a retrospective study reviewing the medical records of 50 patients treated at the outpatient gynecology clinic of our institution between June 2012 and July 2013 who underwent single-port laparoscopic surgery. This study was approved by the institution’s Ethics in Research Committee. Results: the mean age of patients is 37.8 years, ranging from 18 to 70 years, and the most frequent surgical indications were adnexal mass (72%) and chronic pelvic pain (24%). The mean operative time was 94.4 minutes with a mean hospital stay of 25.8 hours. There were no perioperative complications. We recorded two conversions to laparotomy due to technical difficulties during the procedure. All cases of conversion had pelvic adhesions. All operative complications were successfully treated and none were considered severe. Conclusion: this is one of the largest case series in the literature regarding surgical treatment by single-port laparoscopy in gynecology and presents evidence on reduction of surgical morbidity and satisfactory cosmetic results. We conclude that single-port laparoscopy is a viable minimally invasive technique, and that it contributes to the construction of a new scenario in modern gynecological surgery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document