Search

Aim: The aim of this study was to describe all the possible approaches for laparoscopic splenic flexure mobilization (SFM), each suitable for specific situations, and create an illustrated system to show SFM approaches in an easy and practical way to make it easy to learn and teach., Methods: Two different phases. First part: Cadaver-based study of the colonic splenic flexure anatomy. In order to demonstrate the different approaches, a balloon was placed through the colonic hepatic flexure in the lesser sac without sectioning any of the fixing ligaments of the splenic flexure. Second part: A real case series of laparoscopic SFM., Results: First part: 11 cadavers were dissected. Five potential approaches to SFM were found: anterior, trans-omentum, lateral, medial infra-mesocolic, and medial trans-mesocolic. The illustrative system developed was named: Splenic Flexure "Box"(SFBox). Second part: One of the types of SFM described in first part was used in five patients with colorectal cancer. Each laparoscopic approach to the splenic flexure was illustrated in a video accompanied by illustration aids delineating the access., Conclusion: With the cadaver dissection and subsequent demonstration in real-life laparoscopic surgery, we have shown five types of laparoscopic splenic flexure mobilization. The Splenic Flexure "Box" is a useful way to learn and teach this surgical maneuver.

Background: While guidelines for laparoscopic abdominal surgery advise using the lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure, commonly a standard pressure is used. We evaluated the feasibility of a predefined multifaceted individualized pneumoperitoneum strategy aiming at the lowest possible intra-abdominal pressure during laparoscopic colorectal surgery., Methods: Multicenter prospective study in patients scheduled for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The strategy consisted of ventilation with low tidal volume, a modified lithotomy position, deep neuromuscular blockade, pre-stretching of the abdominal wall, and individualized intra-abdominal pressure titration; the effect was blindly evaluated by the surgeon. The primary endpoint was the proportion of surgical procedures completed at each individualized intra-abdominal pressure level. Secondary endpoints were the respiratory system driving pressure, and the estimated volume of insufflated CO 2 gas needed to perform the surgical procedure., Results: Ninety-two patients were enrolled in the study. Fourteen cases were converted to open surgery for reasons not related to the strategy. The intervention was feasible in all patients and well-accepted by all surgeons. In 61 out of 78 patients (78%), surgery was performed and completed at the lowest possible IAP, 8 mmHg. In 17 patients, IAP was raised up to 12 mmHg. The relationship between IAP and driving pressure was almost linear. The mean estimated intra-abdominal CO 2 volume at which surgery was performed was 3.2 L., Conclusion: A multifaceted individualized pneumoperitoneum strategy during laparoscopic colorectal surgery was feasible and resulted in an adequate working space in most patients at lower intra-abdominal pressure and lower respiratory driving pressure. ClinicalTrials.gov (Trial Identifier: NCT03000465).

Background: Advantages of laparoscopic approach in colon cancer surgery have been previously demonstrated in controlled, randomized trials and in retrospective analysis of large administrative databases. Nevertheless, evidence of these advantages in prospective, observational studies from real-life settings is scarce., Methods: This is a prospective, observational study, including a consecutive series of patients that underwent elective colonic resection for cancer in 52 Spanish hospitals. Pre-/intraoperative data, related to patient, tumor, surgical procedure, and hospital, were recorded as well as 60-day post-operative outcomes, including wound infection, complications, anastomotic leak, length of stay, and mortality. A univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to determine the influence of laparoscopy on short-term post-operative outcome. A sub-analysis of the effect of laparoscopy according to patients' pre-operative risk (ASA Score I-II vs. III-IV) was also performed., Results: 2968 patients were included: 44.2% were initially operated by laparoscopy, with a 13.9% conversion rate to laparotomy. At univariate analysis, laparoscopy was associated with a decreased mortality (p = 0.015), morbidity (p < 0.0001), wound infection (p < 0.0001), and post-operative length of stay (p < 0.0001). At multivariate analysis, laparoscopy resulted as an independent protective factor for morbidity (OR 0.7; p = 0.004), wound infection (OR 0.6; p < 0.0001), and length of post-operative stay (Effect-2 days; p < 0.0001), compared to open approach. These advantages were more relevant in high-risk patients (ASA III-IV), even if the majority of them were operated by open approach (67.1%)., Conclusions: In a real-life setting, laparoscopy decreases wound infection rate, post-operative complications, and length of stay, especially in ASA III-IV patients.