Robotic Single-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Is Safe but Faces Technical Challenges

被引:20
作者
van der Linden, Yoen T. K. [1 ]
Brenkman, Hylke J. F. [1 ]
van der Horst, Sylvia [1 ]
van Grevenstein, Wilhelmina M. U. [1 ]
van Hillegersberg, Richard [1 ]
Ruurda, Jelle P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Surg, Heidelberglaan 100, NL-3584 CX Utrecht, Netherlands
来源
JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES | 2016年 / 26卷 / 11期
关键词
robotics; single-port laparoscopy; cholecystectomy; SITE CHOLECYSTECTOMY; INCISION; SURGERY; TRIAL; METAANALYSIS; OUTCOMES; HERNIA;
D O I
10.1089/lap.2016.0183
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: For cholecystectomy, multiport laparoscopy is the recommended surgical approach. Single-port laparoscopy (SPL) was introduced to reduce postoperative pain and provide better cosmetic results, but has technical disadvantages. Robotic SPL (RSPL) was developed to overcome these disadvantages. In this prospective study, we aim to describe intraoperative results and postoperative outcomes of RSPL cholecystectomies and evaluate technical aspects of the technique. Methods: A prospective database of all patients who underwent a RSPL cholecystectomy between January 2012 and December 2014 was analyzed. Intraoperative results and postoperative complications were evaluated. Results: A total of 27 patients underwent RSPL cholecystectomy. Median age was 59 (20-78) years and median body mass index was 25 (19-35) kg/m(2). The majority of patients had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) II classification (67%) and 89% underwent surgery for cholecystolithiasis or cholecystitis. The median operating time was 81 (41-115) minutes. Conversion to a multiport procedure occurred in 2; one due to insufficient length of the robotic instruments. In the second and third patients, conversion to an open procedure was necessary due to inadequate exposure caused by liver cirrhosis and purulent ascites, respectively. In seven procedures, spill occurred due to rupture of the gallbladder. Postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients, including 1 bleeding (no reintervention), 1 peritonitis, and 2 wound infections. After a median follow-up of 33 (10-44) months, 5 (19%) trocar-site hernias were seen. Conclusion: RSPL cholecystectomy is feasible, however, encountered by technical challenges due to inadequate length of the nonwristed robotic instruments. A high incidence of gallbladder rupture and trocar-site hernias may limit its application.
引用
收藏
页码:857 / 861
页数:5
相关论文
共 21 条
[11]   The end of robot-assisted laparoscopy? A critical appraisal of scientific evidence on the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery [J].
Heemskerk, Jeroen ;
Bouvy, Nicole D. ;
Baeten, Cor G. M. I. .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2014, 28 (04) :1388-1398
[12]   Open, small-incision, or laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. An overview of Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group reviews [J].
Keus, Frederik ;
Gooszen, Hein G. ;
van Laarhoven, Cornelis J. H. M. .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2010, (01)
[13]   Single incision versus standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Up-dated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials [J].
Milas, Mate ;
Devedija, Sabina ;
Trkulja, Vladimir .
SURGEON-JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL COLLEGES OF SURGEONS OF EDINBURGH AND IRELAND, 2014, 12 (05) :271-289
[14]   Robotic single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Philippe Morel ;
Francois Pugin ;
Pascal Bucher ;
Nicolas C. Buchs ;
Monika E. Hagen .
Journal of Robotic Surgery, 2012, 6 (3) :273-274
[15]   Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a case-control study comparing the long-term quality of life and body image [J].
Reibetanz, Joachim ;
Ickrath, Pascal ;
Hain, Johannes ;
Germer, Christoph-Thomas ;
Krajinovic, Katica .
SURGERY TODAY, 2013, 43 (09) :1025-1030
[16]  
Ruurda Jelle P, 2003, Comput Aided Surg, V8, P24, DOI 10.3109/10929080309146099
[17]   Randomized clinical trial of single-port, minilaparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Saad, S. ;
Strassel, V. ;
Sauerland, S. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2013, 100 (03) :339-349
[18]   Rationale and Use of the Critical View of Safety in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy [J].
Strasberg, Steven M. ;
Brunt, L. Michael .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2010, 211 (01) :132-138
[19]   Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Trastulli, S. ;
Cirocchi, R. ;
Desiderio, J. ;
Guarino, S. ;
Santoro, A. ;
Parisi, A. ;
Noya, G. ;
Boselli, C. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2013, 100 (02) :191-208
[20]   Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A non-randomized, age-matched single center trial [J].
van der Linden, Yoen T. K. ;
Bosscha, Koop ;
Prins, Hubert A. ;
Lips, Daniel J. .
WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2015, 7 (08) :145-151