Mini Two-port Laparoscopic Appendicectomy with Novel Knotting Technique

Ajay H. Bhandarwar, M. Tayade, Jitendra Sankpal, Priyanka Saha, Soumya Chatnalkar, Sushrut Sankpal, Ameya Gadkari
{"title":"Mini Two-port Laparoscopic Appendicectomy with Novel Knotting Technique","authors":"Ajay H. Bhandarwar, M. Tayade, Jitendra Sankpal, Priyanka Saha, Soumya Chatnalkar, Sushrut Sankpal, Ameya Gadkari","doi":"10.5005/jp-journals-10033-1398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In pursuit of minimizing surgical trauma and achieving better esthetics by reducing the size and number of ports, this mini two-port technique was devised to offer an easier and safe alternative in comparison to conventional three-port technique. An easy and cost-effective mini two-port appendicectomy is made possible with a unique intracorporeal surgical knotting through a single 5-mm port with a single instrument, thus reducing number and size of ports and with a better cosmetic result. Materials and methods: Total 200 patients underwent laparoscopic appendicectomy out of which, mini two-port appendicectomy (TPA) with novel knotting technique could be successfully performed on 168 patients (84%) and remaining 32 patients (16%) required conventional three-port technique (CLA). None of the cases were converted to open. Results: Patient undergoing two-port laparoscopic appendicectomy had shorter operative time with better cosmetic result with no incidence of port-site hernia. There was no difficulty in adhesiolysis and intraoperative bleeding control. Infection rate was 0.59% and 3.12% for TPA and CLA, respectively. Incidence of intraoperative bleeding and intraoperative rupture of appendix was less in TPA (1.19% and 0%) as compared to CLA (6.25% and 3.125%). Mean hospital stay was less in TPA (1.7 days) compared to CLA (2.1 days). Conclusion: This mini two-port technique with novel knotting technique is easy to learn and helps to overcome the challenges and limitations faced during two laparoscopic appendicectomies; however conversion to conventional approach in complicated cases is still advisable. It is safe and effective intermediate option from conventional three-port to SILS/NOTES/Endo GIA staplers.","PeriodicalId":38741,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Laparoscopic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10033-1398","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In pursuit of minimizing surgical trauma and achieving better esthetics by reducing the size and number of ports, this mini two-port technique was devised to offer an easier and safe alternative in comparison to conventional three-port technique. An easy and cost-effective mini two-port appendicectomy is made possible with a unique intracorporeal surgical knotting through a single 5-mm port with a single instrument, thus reducing number and size of ports and with a better cosmetic result. Materials and methods: Total 200 patients underwent laparoscopic appendicectomy out of which, mini two-port appendicectomy (TPA) with novel knotting technique could be successfully performed on 168 patients (84%) and remaining 32 patients (16%) required conventional three-port technique (CLA). None of the cases were converted to open. Results: Patient undergoing two-port laparoscopic appendicectomy had shorter operative time with better cosmetic result with no incidence of port-site hernia. There was no difficulty in adhesiolysis and intraoperative bleeding control. Infection rate was 0.59% and 3.12% for TPA and CLA, respectively. Incidence of intraoperative bleeding and intraoperative rupture of appendix was less in TPA (1.19% and 0%) as compared to CLA (6.25% and 3.125%). Mean hospital stay was less in TPA (1.7 days) compared to CLA (2.1 days). Conclusion: This mini two-port technique with novel knotting technique is easy to learn and helps to overcome the challenges and limitations faced during two laparoscopic appendicectomies; however conversion to conventional approach in complicated cases is still advisable. It is safe and effective intermediate option from conventional three-port to SILS/NOTES/Endo GIA staplers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新型打结技术的微型双口腹腔镜阑尾切除术
背景:为了最大限度地减少手术创伤,并通过减少端口的大小和数量来获得更好的美学效果,与传统的三端口技术相比,这种迷你双端口技术提供了一种更容易、更安全的替代方案。一种简单且具有成本效益的小型双端口阑尾切除术是可能的,通过一种独特的体内手术打结,用一种单一的器械通过一个5毫米的端口,从而减少端口的数量和尺寸,并获得更好的美容效果。材料和方法:共有200例患者接受了腹腔镜阑尾切除术,其中168例(84%)患者采用新型打结技术成功地进行了小型两口阑尾切除术(TPA),其余32例(16%)患者需要常规三口技术(CLA)。没有一个案件被转为未决案件。结果:患者行两口腹腔镜阑尾切除术,手术时间短,美容效果好,无疝口发生率。粘连松解和术中出血控制没有困难。TPA和CLA的感染率分别为0.59%和3.12%。TPA的术中出血和术中阑尾破裂的发生率(1.19%和0%)低于CLA(6.25%和3.125%)。TPA(1.7天)的平均住院时间少于CLA(2.1天)。结论:这种具有新颖打结技术的微型双端口技术易于学习,有助于克服两次腹腔镜阑尾切除术中面临的挑战和局限性;然而,在复杂情况下转换为传统方法仍然是可取的。它是从传统的三端口到SILS/NOTES/Endo-GIA缝合器的安全有效的中间选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Surgical Aspects of the Possover LION Procedure: An Emerging Procedure for Recovery of Visceral Functions and Locomotion in Paraplegics Avoiding the Falciform Ligament Sign during the Intraoperative Cholangiogram A Study on Effects of Leaking Carbon Dioxide Gas on Surgeons during Laparoscopic Surgeries Comparison between Laparoscopic Ultrasound and Intraoperative Cholangiogram in Detection of Common Bile Duct Stones during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Cholelithiasis: A Prospective Study Short-term Outcome of Laparoscopic vs Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1