Journal of minimally invasive surgery最新文献

Morgagni hernia (MH) is a rare congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) that accounts for less than 2% of surgically repaired CDH in adulthood. Even if this condition is often asymptomatic, surgery is advised due to the risk of life-threatening complications such as volvulus or bowel strangulation. Surgery for MH repair can be performed by transthoracic, transabdominal, laparoscopic, or thoracoscopic approaches. Though laparoscopy has recently improved surgical outcomes, the use of prosthetic meshes and the need for reduction of the hernia sac are still the most debated issues. We present the video of a laparoscopic repair of a large MH with the use of a double mesh technique and no resection of the hernia sac.

Most familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients undergo total colectomy, but duodenal polyposis develops in up to 90% of patients with FAP and a 4% to 18% risk of duodenal and ampullary cancer remains. Laparoscopic pancreas-preserving near total duodenectomy is thought to be a potential option and can be an effective approach to preserve the pancreas. A 48-year-old male patient, who underwent laparoscopic total colectomy with end ileostomy because of FAP with colorectal cancer, was diagnosed with a 20 mm-sized duodenal adenoma in the second to the third portion. The operation was performed on December 27, 2021. Near total duodenectomy was done and type II Billroth gastrojejunostomy was done. Laparoscopic pancreas-sparing duodenectomy is shown to be safe, with favorable short-term oncologic outcome compared to laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy in terms of less blood loss, faster recovery time, and much less total cost.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes and patient-surveyed scar assessments of single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (SPLA) with the outcomes of multiport laparoscopic appendectomy (MPLA).

Methods: Between August 2014 and November 2017, the prospective randomized study comprised 98 patients diagnosed with acute appendicitis and indicated for surgery. Fifty-one patients had MPLA and 47 patients received SPLA. The primary endpoint was the total score of Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ) administered to patients 6 weeks after surgery.

Results: SPLA involved a shorter median operative time than MPLA (47.5 minutes vs. 60.0 minutes, p = 0.02). There were no apparent differences in the time before diet tolerance, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complication. SPLA patients had shorter total incision length (2.0 cm vs. 2.5 cm, p < 0.01) and required fewer analgesics on the day of surgery than MPLA patients (p = 0.011). The PSAQ favored the SPLA approach, revealing significant differences in total score (48 vs. 55, p = 0.026), appearance (15 vs. 18, p = 0.002), and consciousness (8 vs. 10, p = 0.005), while satisfaction with appearance and symptoms scale did not (p = 0.162 and p = 0.690, respectively).

Conclusion: The postoperative scar evaluated by the patient was better with SPLA than with MPLA, and patient satisfaction with the scar was comparable between the two techniques.

Purpose: In minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), it is important to reduce the rate of anastomotic leakage to ensure its safety. At our institute, the double-ligation method (DLM) has been introduced to insert and fix the anvil of the circular stapler for intracorporeal circular esophagojejunostomy in gastric surgery. We adopted this method for intrathoracic anastomosis (IA) in MIE. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of IA with DLM in MIE.

Methods: In this study, 48 patients diagnosed with primary middle or lower third segment thoracic esophageal carcinoma with clinical stage I, II, III or IV disease were retrospectively evaluated. Postoperative outcomes were assessed.

Results: Among the 48 patients, 42 patients underwent laparo-thoracoscopic esophagectomy and IA using a circular stapler with the DLM. The average total operation time and thoracoscopic operation time were 433 and 229 minutes, respectively. The average purse-string suturing time was 4.7 minutes. The rates of anastomotic leakage and stenosis were 2.4% and 14.3%, respectively. The overall incidence of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade of ≥III) was 16.7%. The average postoperative stay was 16 days.

Conclusion: The procedure of IA using a circular stapler with the DLM in MIE was safe and provided a low rate of anastomotic leakage.

Purpose: Despite the increasing number of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomies, laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD) and LPD with robotic reconstruction (LPD-RR) are still valuable surgical options for minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD). This study introduces the surgical techniques, tips, and outcomes of our experience with LPD and LPD-RR.

Methods: Between March 2014 and July 2021, 122 and 48 patients underwent LPD and LPD-RR respectively, at CHA Bundang Medical Center in Korea. The operative settings, procedures, and trocar placements were identical in both approaches; however, different trocars were used. We introduced our techniques of retraction methods for Kocherization and uncinate process dissection, pancreatic reconstruction, pancreatic division, and protection using the round ligament. The perioperative surgical outcomes of LPD and LPD-RR were compared.

Results: Baseline demographics of patients in the LPD and LPD-RR groups were comparable, but the LPD group had older age (65.5 ± 11.6 years vs. 60.0 ± 14.1 years, p = 0.009) and lesser preoperative chemotherapy (15.6% vs. 35.4%, p = 0.008). The proportion of malignant disease was similar (LPD group, 86.1% vs. LPD-RR group, 83.3%; p = 0.759). Perioperative outcomes were also comparable, including operative time, estimated blood loss, clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (LPD group, 9.0% vs. LPD-RR group, 10.4%; p = 0.684), and major postoperative complication rates (LPD group, 14.8% vs. LPD-RR group, 6.2%; p = 0.082).

Conclusion: Both LPD and LPR-RR can be safely performed by experienced surgeons with acceptable surgical outcomes. Further investigations are required to evaluate the objective benefits of robotic surgical systems in MIPD and establish widely acceptable standardized MIPD techniques.

[This corrects the article on p. 145 in vol. 25, PMID: 36601487.].

Purpose: Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) is a critical procedure to establish a source of enteral nutrition for upper gastrointestinal disorders. Minimally invasive surgery has the inherent benefit of better patient outcomes, less postoperative pain, and early discharge. This study aims to describe our total laparoscopic technique of Witzel FJ and to compare its outcome with its open counterpart.

Methods: A retrospective database analysis was performed in patients who underwent laparoscopic (n = 20) and open (n = 21) FJ as a stand-alone procedure from July 2018 to July 2022. A readily available nasogastric tube (Ryles tube) and routine laparoscopic instruments were used to perform laparoscopic FJ. Perioperative data and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

Results: Baseline preoperative variables were comparable in both groups. The median operative duration in the laparoscopic FJ group was 180 minutes vs. 60 minutes in the open FJ group (p = 0.01). Postoperative length of hospital stay was 3 days vs. 4 days in the laparoscopic and open FJ groups, respectively (p = 0.08). Four patients in the open FJ group suffered from an immediate postoperative complication (none in the laparoscopic FJ group). After a median follow-up of 10 months, fewer patients in the laparoscopic FJ group had complications such as tube clogging, tube dislodgement, surgical-site infection, and small bowel obstruction.

Conclusion: Laparoscopic FJ with the Witzel technique is a safe and feasible procedure with a comparable outcome to the open technique. Patient selection is vital to overcome the initial learning curve.