Surgical endoscopy
-
Billroth I (B-I) gastroduodenostomy is an anastomotic procedure that is widely performed after gastric resection for distal gastric cancer. A circular stapler often is used for B-I gastroduodenostomy in open and laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy. Recently, totally laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (TLDG) has been considered less invasive than laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy, and many institutions performing laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy are trying to progress to TLDG without markedly changing the anastomosis method. The purpose of this report is to introduce the technical details of new methods of intracorporeal gastroduodenostomy using either a circular or linear stapler and to evaluate their technical feasibility and safety. ⋯ TLDG using a circular or linear stapler is feasible and safe to perform. DST will enable institutions performing laparoscopic-assisted distal gastrectomy with circular staplers to progress to TLDG without problems, and this progression may be more economical because fewer stapler cartridges are used during surgery. However, if an institution has already been performing δ anastomosis in TLDG but has been experiencing certain issues with δ anastomosis, converting from δ anastomosis to BBT should be beneficial.
-
Comparative Study
Outcomes of simultaneous laparoscopic cholecystectomy and ventral hernia repair compared to that of laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone.
Although incidental hernias frequently are found and repaired during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), the outcomes of simultaneous LC and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) have not been scrutinized. In this study we evaluated short-term outcome data comparing simultaneous LC and LVHR against LC alone. ⋯ Simultaneous LC/LVHR results in greater postoperative morbidity in terms of surgical site infections, sepsis, and pulmonary complications when compared to LC alone. In light of this increased short-term morbidity, consideration should be given toward performing LC and LVHR independently in patients requiring both procedures. Prospective studies with long-term follow-up are required to better understand the implications of simultaneous LC/LVHR.
-
Comparative Study
Laparoscopic versus open hernia repair: outcomes and sociodemographic utilization results from the nationwide inpatient sample.
The differences and advantages of laparoscopic (LVHR) and open ventral hernia repair (OVHR) have been debated since laparoscopic hernia repair was first described. The purpose of this study is to compare LVHR and OVHR with mesh in the United States using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). ⋯ Patients who have undergone LVHR with mesh had fewer complications, shorter length of stay, lower hospital charges, more frequent routine discharge, and decreased mortality compared with those who received open repair. Patient comorbidities, selection bias, and emergency operations may limit the number of patients who receive laparoscopic ventral hernia repair. Regionalization studies may better illuminate the low rates of laparoscopic surgery.
-
Comparative Study
Minimally invasive surgical approach for the treatment of gastroparesis.
Gastroparesis is a chronic disorder resulting in decreased quality of life. The gastric electrical stimulator (GES) is an alternative to gastrectomy in patients with medically refractory gastroparesis. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of patients treated with the gastric stimulator versus patients treated with laparoscopic subtotal or total gastrectomy. ⋯ The gastric electrical stimulator is an effective treatment for medically refractory gastroparesis. Laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy should also be considered as one of the primary surgical treatments for gastroparesis given the significantly higher rate of symptomatic improvement with acceptable morbidity and comparable mortality. Furthermore, the gastric stimulator patients who have no improvement of symptoms can be successfully treated by laparoscopic subtotal gastrectomy.
-
Comparative Study
Cost utility of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.
Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis is safe and effective. However, the potential cost savings of this management strategy have not been well studied in a North American context. This study aimed to estimate the cost effectiveness of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Canada. ⋯ Adoption of a policy in favor of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy will result in better patient quality of life and substantial savings to the Canadian health care system.