Minh Do

Technique of Laparoscopic-Endoscopic Single-Site Surgery Radical Nephrectomy

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic-endoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) represents the closest surgical technique to scar-free surgery. OBJECTIVE To assess the feasibility of LESS radical nephrectomy (LESS-RN). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Ten patients with body mass index (BMI) < or = 30 underwent LESS-RN for renal tumour by two experienced laparoscopists. SURGICAL PROCEDURE TriPort (Olympus Winter & Ibe, Hamburg, Germany) was inserted through a transumbilical incision. A combination of standard laparoscopic instruments and flexible grasper and scissors was used. A 5-mm 30 degrees camera was also used. The standard laparoscopic transperitoneal nephrectomy technique was performed. MEASUREMENTS Patient demographics, operative details, and final pathology were prospectively recorded. Postoperative evaluation of pain and use of analgesic medication were recorded. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Ten cases were successfully accomplished (two right-sided tumours and eight left-sided tumours; tumour diameter ranges: 4-8 cm). The mean patient age was 63.5 yr (22-77 yr), and median BMI was 23.56 (18.2-26.6). The mean operative time was 146.4 min (120-180 min), and the mean blood loss was 202 ml (50-900 ml). Pathological examination observed organ-confined T1 renal cell carcinoma in nine cases and pT3b tumour in one case. One bleeding complication occurred. Limitations regarding the intraoperative instrument ergonomics and the requirement for ambidexterity of the surgeon were noted. CONCLUSIONS LESS-RN proved to be safe and feasible. Further clinical investigation in comparison to the established techniques should take place to evaluate the outcome of LESS-RN.

Evolution of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE)—technical improvements and development of a nerve-sparing, potency-preserving approach

During the last decade, laparoscopy has become a standard technique in the armoury of the urologist due to constant technological advances and refinements. Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRPE), although technically demanding and associated with a considerable learning curve, has become the surgical procedure of choice in selected and specialized urological centers around the globe for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. However, a major drawback of LRPE is the transperitoneal route of access to the extraperitoneal prostate. The principal disadvantages of LRPE are potential intraperitoneal complications, such as bowel injury, ileus, intraperitoneal bleeding, intraperitoneal urinary leakage, intraperitoneal adhesion formation and concomitant small bowel obstruction. Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) is a further advancement of minimal invasive surgery as it overcomes the limitations of LRPE by the strictly extraperitoneal route of access combining the advantages of minimal invasive surgery with those of an extraperitoneal procedure. Based on our growing experience with this procedure, we have introduced several technical modifications, improvements and refinements including a nerve-sparing, potency-preserving approach (nEERPE) in an effort to further improve this minimally invasive procedure.

Modular surgical training for endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy

To develop a modular training scheme which enabled the use of individual steps of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RP) for teaching and training surgeons with varied experience, including residents with no experience in open RP, as in extending laparoscopic surgery to more complex operations like RP, the proper training of urologists is crucial.

Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: the University of Leipzig experience of 2000 cases.

INTRODUCTION Review of experience with endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) for localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS 2000 patients underwent EERPE. Mean age of the patients was 63.2 (41-77) years. Mean preoperative PSA was 10.2 ng/ml (0.64-82 ng/ml). 601 patients had undergone previous surgery. The functional and oncological outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS Mean operation time was 156 (50-320) min. Complication rate according to Clavien system was: 0.45% intraoperatively, 8.6% in the early and 0.3% in the late postoperative period. Positive surgical margins were found in 127 patients with pT2 stage (9.7%) and in 237 patients with pT3 stage (34.4%). 44/937 lymphadenectomies (4.7%) had positive lymph nodes. Mean catheterization time was 6.3 days. After 12 months, 92% of the patients were completely continent, 7% needed 1-2 pads/day and 1% used more than 2 pads daily.730 patients underwent nerve sparing procedure. The 12 month potency rates with or without administration of PDE 5 inhibitors were 34.1% in the unilateral nerve sparing group and 67.7% in the bilateral group. In the intrafascial nsEERPE group, after 12 months, 93.2% of the patients were completely continent, 7.1% required 1-2 pads per day and 0.6% more than 2 pads per day. Twelve months potency rate for unilateral and bilateral nerve sparing intrafascial procedure was 33.3% and 78.5 % respectively. The rate of positive surgical margins was 6.3% in pT2 and 21.2% in pT3 specimens. DISCUSSION Functional and oncological results of this large series are promising. The recently introduced intrafascial nsEERPE further improves the outcome of the procedure.

Comparative assessment of laparoscopic single-site surgery instruments to conventional laparoscopic in laboratory setting.

INTRODUCTION Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) represents the latest innovation in laparoscopic surgery. We compare in dry and animal laboratory the efficacy of recently introduced pre-bent instruments with conventional laparoscopic and flexible instruments in terms of time requirement, maneuverability, and ease of handling. MATERIALS AND METHODS Participants of varying laparoscopic experience were included in the study and divided in groups according to their experience. The participants performed predetermined tasks in dry laboratory using all sets of instruments. An experienced laparoscopic surgeon performed 24 nephrectomies in 12 pigs using all sets of instruments. Single port was used for all instrument sets except for the conventional instruments, which were inserted through three ports. The time required for the performance of dry laboratory tasks and the porcine nephrectomies was recorded. Errors in the performance of dry laboratory tasks of each instrument type were also recorded. RESULTS Pre-bent instruments had a significant advantage over flexible instruments in terms of time requirement to accomplish tasks and procedures as well as maneuverability. Flexible instruments were more time consuming in comparison to the conventional laparoscopic instruments during the performance of the tasks. There were no significant differences in the time required for the accomplishment of dry laboratory tasks or steps of nephrectomy using conventional instruments through appropriate number of ports in comparison to pre-bent instruments through single port. DISCUSSION Pre-bent instruments were less time consuming and with better maneuverability in comparison to flexible instruments in experimental single-port access surgery. Further clinical investigations would elucidate the efficacy of pre-bent instruments.

Complications of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): prevention and management

Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) is a further advancement of minimal invasive surgery as it overcomes the limitations of laparoscopic (transperitoneal) RPE by the strictly extraperitoneal route of access combining the advantages of minimal invasive surgery with the advantages of an extraperitoneal procedure. Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy has many advantages but is not without complications. The aim of this review article is to describe the most common complications of this procedure. Complications associated with endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy are: vascular injury—bleeding—haematoma, bowel injury, lymphocele, injury to the bladder—ureter, port site hernia, anastomotic leakage—stricture, obturator nerve injury—paralysis, gas embolism, catheter blockage, and miscellaneous like perineal pain, pubic osteitis, infection- urosepsis. The present review paper focuses on the identification and management of these complications The incidence of most complications directly correlates with the surgeons’ experience, and the various complications are related to technical errors rather than to the technique itself. The laparoscopist performing endoscopic/ laparoscopic radical prostatectomy should be aware of all these complications. He should be able to recognise promptly, treat efficiently, and ideally prevent these complications.

Categorisation of complications of endoscopic extraperitoneal and laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomy

The aim of the present review is to focus on the various attempts of categorisation of complications after endoscopic extraperitoneal and laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomy. Several classifications of complications and adverse events have been proposed in the literature but none is widely accepted or applied so far. We thus present a review of the existing literature and the complications of our series of 900 patients treated with endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE). We applied the recently revised Clavien classification system to grade EERPE complications.

Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery: Early Experience with Tumor Nephrectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) represents the closest surgical technique to scar-free surgery. We performed LESS for renal tumor nephrectomy in eight patients to assess feasibility and perioperative outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eight patients with a body mass index (BMI) <or=30 underwent single-port nephrectomy for renal tumor by an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Tri-Ports were used through a transumbilical incision in all cases. A flexible grasper and a 5-mm 30-degree high-definition camera were used in addition to standard laparoscopic equipment. Patient demographics; operative details, including procedure duration, blood loss, and complications; and final pathology results were prospectively recorded. Postoperative evaluation of pain and use of analgesic medication were recorded. RESULTS All LESS nephrectomy operations were successfully accomplished without the need to convert to conventional laparoscopy. The median patient age was 60.75 years (range 22-76 years) and median BMI was 22.95 (range 18.2-26.1). The median operative duration was 141 minutes (range 120-180 min), and the median blood loss was 103 mL (range 50-150 mL). Histologic evaluation confirmed complete excision of an intact specimen. All cases revealed organ-confined T(1) renal-cell carcinoma (two right-sided and six left-sided, tumor diameter range 4-8 cm). A tumor with an adjacent simple renal cyst was excised in one patient. No intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS LESS was a feasible and safe approach in a selected group of patients (low BMI and stage tumor). LESS nephrectomy was made possible with the use of multi-instrument port and flexible instruments. The oncologic outcome was not compromised. Further evaluation of LESS surgery needs prospective, randomized studies.

Pure single-port laparoscopic surgery or mix of techniques?

PurposeLaparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) has emerged in the recent years as an alternative approach to conventional laparoscopic surgery which is accompanied by additional advantages over laparoscopy. In this work we attempt to review the current literature and to investigate the possible combination of LESS to other currently available approaches such as natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), needlescopic and robotic laparoscopic surgery.MethodsExtensive literature search on the topics of LESS, hybrid and pure NOTES, Needlescopic-assisted LESS and “Robot-assisted LESS” took place. Additionally, the accumulated experience from 118 LESSs performed in our departments is presented in an attempt to provide evidence regarding the mix of technique in LESS in urology.ResultsThe challenging nature of LESS limits the broader application and acceptance. Expanding experience in single-site surgery has currently provided tools such as transvaginal access, needlescopic instruments and robot assistance that can aid LESS and enhance its efficiency without compromising any of its advantages. A mix of these techniques with LESS could ease the stiff learning curve of the second and benefit not only its performance but also the adaptation of LESS as a standard practice.ConclusionPure LESS although feasible, remains a technical challenge for the surgeon, preventing the widespread application of the technique. The goal of urologists on LESS surgery should not be the purity of LESS approach, but the superiority against already established techniques. A mix of techniques could be a key for the documentation of the advantages of LESS over conventional laparoscopy.

Hernia repair during endoscopic (laparoscopic) radical prostatectomy.

We retrospectively reviewed our experience in performing endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair in one procedure to evaluate its feasibility and safety. Based on our experience of 70 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies, a total of 60 patients underwent EERPE. Eight of these had 10 hernias repaired with Prolene mesh. The median total operating time for EERPE was 165 minutes. Mesh placement required an additional 15 minutes for a unilateral hernia and 25 minutes for bilateral hernias. The conversion rate and the reoperation rate were 0%. The median duration of vesical catheterization was 8.3 days. One patient required a blood transfusion. The most common minor complications, occurring in eight patients, were edema and hematoma of the penis. No wound infection occurred. The only major complication was a deep venous thrombosis in one patient. No additional complications developed in the hernioplasty group. We conclude that the extraperitoneal approach for radical prostatectomy allows concomitant inguinal hernia repair with a low morbidity rate and within an acceptable operating time.