Surgical endoscopy
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Peri-incisional and intraperitoneal ropivacaine administration: a new effective tool in pain control after laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
A proportion of patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery experiences excessive post-operative pain, which results in high rescue analgesic treatment and prolonged hospitalization. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of intraoperative topical ropivacaine in the control of post-operative pain in the first 48 h after operative laparoscopy for benign adnexal or uterine pathologies . ⋯ Combined topical analgesia with ropivacaine could represent a new safe and effective tool in the control of post-operative pain in gynecological laparoscopic surgery. Given the greater benefits for adnexal surgery, this strategy may be more suitable for this class of patients.
-
Root cause analyses show that up to 70 % of adverse events are caused by human error. Strong non-technical skills (NTS) can prevent or reduce these errors, considerable numbers of which occur in the operating theatre. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) requires manipulation of more complex equipment than open procedures, likely requiring a different set of NTS for each kind of team. The aims of this study were to identify the MIS teams' key NTS and investigate the effect of training and assessment of NTS on MIS teams. ⋯ MIS teams' NTS are important for workflow and prevention of errors and can be enhanced by working in fixed teams. In the technological complex sphere of MIS, communication revolves around equipment- and patient-related topics, much more so than in open surgery. In all, only a few heterogeneous-design studies have examined this. In the future, the focus should shift to systematically identifying key NTS and developing effective, evidence-based team training programmes in MIS.
-
Comparative Study
Clinical outcomes and cost-benefit analysis comparing laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.
The introduction of minimally invasive platforms for colorectal surgery-laparoscopy and more recently robotics-allows for smaller incisions, shortened hospital stay, less postoperative pain, and quicker return to normal activity. There exists a lack of evidence-based knowledge comparing the clinical outcomes and cost-benefit analysis of the different types of minimally invasive surgery. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the short-term clinical outcomes and overall hospital costs between laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgery. ⋯ Robotic colectomies were comparable to laparoscopic colectomies in terms of overall hospital charges and short-term clinical outcomes, including length of stay and conversion rates. Robotic surgery was favored for left-sided colectomy. With shorter learning curves and wider availability, robotic approach offers a safe and economically feasible minimally invasive platform for complex colorectal resections.
-
Case Reports
Robot-assisted hepatectomy and complete excision of the extrahepatic bile duct for type IV-A choledochal cysts.
Complete removal of the dilated biliary tree is regarded as inevitable in choledochal cysts due to its malignant potential. However, technical difficulty and the high risk of postoperative complications as well as the various presentations of the disease make the surgical options for type IV-A cysts challenging and controversial. We report the first case of a type IV-A choledochal cyst treated using a robot-assisted approach. ⋯ Hepatectomy and complete excision of the extrahepatic bile duct for type IV-A choledochal cysts requires fine and delicate surgical techniques. The wrist-like movement of the working instruments and the firefly imaging of the robot surgical system allowed this advanced minimally invasive surgery to be successfully performed on this patient.
-
Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic colectomy and multiport laparoscopic colectomy.
There is currently a paucity of research comparing the clinical outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) with those obtained with multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC). This meta-analysis aimed to examine whether SILC shows real benefits over MLC, especially in terms of feasibility, safety, and oncological adequacy. ⋯ SILC could be considered as a safe and feasible alternative to MLC in experienced hands. Further evidence for this surgical procedure should be assessed in the form of high-quality RCTs, with additional focus on its use in low rectal cancer resection.