Surgical endoscopy
-
Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Hand-assisted or laparoscopic-assisted approach in colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Evidence of benefits of laparoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted colectomies (LAC) over open procedures in gastrointestinal surgery has continued to accumulate. With its wide implementation, technical difficulties and limitations of LAC have become clear. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) was introduced in an attempt to facilitate the transition from open techniques to minimally invasive procedures. Continuing debate exists about which approach is to be preferred, HALS or LAC. Several studies have compared these two techniques in colorectal surgery, but no single study provided evidence which procedure is superior. Therefore, a systematic review was carried out comparing HALS with LAC colorectal resection. ⋯ This systematic review indicates that HALS provides a more efficient segmental colectomy regarding operating time and conversion rate, particularly accounting for diverticulitis. A significant operating time advantage exists for HALS total (procto)colectomy. HALS must therefore be considered a valuable addition to the laparoscopic armamentarium to avoid conversion and speed up complicated colectomies.
-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Meta-analysis of laparoscopic and open distal gastrectomy for gastric carcinoma.
The aim was to conduct a meta-analysis of the randomized evidence to determine the relative merits of laparoscopic assisted (LADG) and open (ODG) distal gastrectomy for proven gastric cancer. ⋯ LADG was associated with a significantly reduced rate of intraoperative blood loss, at the expense of significantly longer operating time and significantly reduced lymph node retrieval compared to its open counterpart. Mortality and tumor recurrence rates were similar between the two groups. Furthermore, time to commencement of oral intake, postprocedural discharge from hospital, and perioperative complication rate, although not significantly different between the two groups, did suggest a positive trend toward LADG. Based on this meta-analysis, the authors cannot recommend the routine use of LADG over ODG for the treatment of distal gastric cancer. However, significant limitations exist in the interpretation of this data due to the limited number of published randomised control trials, the small sample sizes to date, and the limited duration of follow up. Further large multicentre randomized controlled trials are required to delineate significantly quantifiable differences between the two groups.
-
Review Comparative Study
Endoscopic sphincterotomy and interval cholecystectomy are reasonable alternatives to index cholecystectomy in severe acute gallstone pancreatitis (GSP).
UK guidelines for gallstone pancreatitis (GSP) advocate definitive treatment during the index admission, or within 2 weeks of discharge. However, this target may not always be achievable. This study reviewed current management of GSP in a university hospital and evaluated the risk associated with interval cholecystectomy. ⋯ This study demonstrates that overall 62% (22 endoscopic sphincterotomy and 40 index cholecystectomy) of patients with GSP have definitive therapy during the Index admission. However, surgery was deferred in the majority (n = 30) of patients with severe GSP, and 19/30 underwent ES prior to discharge. ES and interval cholecystectomy in severe GSP is associated with minimal morbidity and readmission rates, and is considered a reasonable alternative to an index cholecystectomy in patients with severe GSP.
-
Major lung resection by video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) has been proven to be both safe and technically feasible, but is not routinely performed in most hospitals. The aim of this paper is to show our technique for VATS lobectomy and our experience and outcomes obtained. ⋯ VATS lobectomy is a viable safe procedure that meets oncological criteria for lung cancer surgery. In our experience, VATS is currently to be considered ideally indicated for certain benign processes and for T1-T2 N0 M0 bronchogenic carcinomas.
-
Patients with major comorbidities often are denied laparoscopic colorectal resections because they are thought to be at too "high risk." Paradoxically, these patients generally have the most to gain from a minimally invasive surgical approach. This study aimed to examine the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic colorectal resection to determine whether it is contraindicated for "high-risk" patients. ⋯ In experienced hands, laparoscopic colorectal resection can be performed safely for "high-risk" surgical patients. The better than expected outcomes in this patient population reinforce the benefits of minimally invasive surgery for this patient group and argues against using parameters of increased age, morbid obesity, high ASA class, or preoperative radiation alone as contraindications to even complex laparoscopic colorectal procedures.