Search

This study aimed at reporting our first experience with robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy (R-LESS-RP) with single-site VesPa platform (Intuitive Surgical Inc.). A 68-year-old-man presenting with a cT1c adenocarcinoma Gleason Score 3 + 4 = 7 in 4/12 bilateral cores underwent a transperitoneal robotic LESS-RP with a single-site Vespa platform. Initial PSA, prostate weight, and body mass index (BMI) were 4.4 ng/ml, 45 g, and 25, respectively. Instruments and camera cross within the Single-Site port; the da Vinci System software detects and reassigns the user's hands with the instruments position. The single-site port is inserted through a 2-cm intraumbilical incision. The robotic 8.5 mm scope and two surgical curved instruments (fenestrated bipolar forceps and cautery hook) are introduced through the ports and used for most of the procedure, whereas a wristed needle driver on the right hand is used for the reconstructive steps. An additional 12 mm port (Air Seal, SurgiQuest) is placed in a midline between the umbilicus and the right iliac spine in order to facilitate table assistance during surgery and to place a drain at the end of the procedure.Operative time and blood loss were 300 min and 400 mL, respectively. The postoperative course was uneventful. The drain and the catheter were removed on days 1 and 6, respectively. The patient experienced a temporary mild stress incontinence (one pad at sixth month) and erectile dysfunction.Our first robotic laparoendoscopic single-site radical prostatectomy (R-LESS-RP) with the single-site VesPa platform was associated with acceptable operative times and perioperative outcome. This procedure is feasible without complications, provided that a proper patient selection has occurred. Limited movements together with the lack of the fourth robotic arm require a considerable expertise in robotic surgery. Some tricks can help overcome technical limitations. The Robotic LESS-RP reduces in some measure the limitations of conventional LESS RP, although further refinement of the robotic instruments is necessary.

The objective of this is to compare the surgical outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN), performed via three different approaches: robot-assisted (RAPN), laparoscopic (LPN), and open (OPN), in a single non-academic regional center. The data of patients undergoing PN at our Department from 2005 to 2016 were prospectively collected. A logistic regression model adjusted for preoperative variables (age, tumor size, creatinine and hemoglobin, ASA and Padua scores) was performed to evaluate whether transfusion, conversion, and postoperative complication rate were influenced by the surgical approach. Overall 270 patients underwent PN: analysis included 253 cases (RAPN = 110, LPN = 70, OPN = 73). Preoperative variables did not differ significantly among the three groups. Shorter operative (130 vs 180 and 200') and ischaemia (12 vs 23 and 22') times and longer hospital stay (8 vs 7 and 6 days) were found in the OPN group as compared to LPN and RAPN, respectively. The RAPN group included a higher rate of pT1b (31.8 vs 14.2 and 15%) and malignant histotype (90 vs 82.9 and 68.5%) as compared to LPN and OPN, respectively. Clavien Grade III-IV complications were lower in the RAPN (7.2%) as compared to OPN (12.3%) and LPN (17.1%) groups. Multivariate analysis showed a lower risk for conversion, transfusion and overall complications in the RAPN group versus LPN and OPN. The surgical approach affects the perioperative outcomes in a regional setting. The advantages of RAPN over OPN (lower risk of conversion, transfusion, and overall complications) are extended over LPN as well, although OPN offered faster operative and ischemia times at the expense of greater blood loss and hospital stay.

Objective: To evaluate the safety of laparoscopic radical nephrectomy (LRN) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) >7 cm, addressing the issue of modality and risk factors for complications and open conversion, and to assess the oncologic outcome., Methods: The data of 222 patients undergoing LRN for RCC >7 cm prospectively enrolled from 2002 to 2010 at 5 urologic centers were reviewed. Transperitoneal LRN was performed by 5 experienced laparoscopic surgeons. The Clavien-Dindo classification was used to assess complications. Multivariable analysis of factors predictive of conversions was performed. Oncologic outcomes for survival were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method., Results: Median tumor size was 8.5 cm, operative time was 180 minutes, and blood loss was 280 mL. Forty-two patients (19%) received a blood transfusion. Six (2.7%) patients had grade III-IV complications: 2 with postoperative bleeding requiring abdominal re-exploration and 1 each with adrenal injury, splenic injury, wound diastasis, and respiratory insufficiency. Twelve patients (5.4%) were converted to open surgery. The diameter was 11.9 in converted groups and 8.5 cm in nonconverted groups (P = .001). Multivariable analysis revealed that pathologic stage was the only independent predictor of conversion (P = .002). The 5-year overall (OS), cancer-specific (CSS), and progression-free (PFS) survival was 74%, 78%, and 66%, respectively. The 5-year stage-adjusted CSS was 89% in pT2 and 40% in pT3 patients (P <.0001). Limitations of this study were its retrospective nature and the relatively short follow-up period for oncologic outcome., Conclusion: LRN for large RCC is a safe operation. Stage pT3 is a risk factor for open conversion and is associated to significantly lower cancer-specific survival compared with pT2 stage., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The authors present the rationale of the laparoscopic approach to liver surgery, showing the technique of fully endoscopic and endoscopic-assisted formal and wedge hepatic resections and the early results of their experience. From 1993 to 1997, 38 liver resections have been attempted through the laparoscopic or the laparoscopic assisted approach. Out of these 38 resections, 5 were wedge resections, 11 were segmentectomies, 10 were left formal hepatectomies, 1 was an extended left hepatectomy, 5 were bisegmentectomies, 5 were right formal hepatectomies, and 1 was an extended right hepatectomy. In two cases, one segmentectomy and one bisegmentectomy, the procedures were converted to open surgery. Wedge, segmental, and left liver resections were usually performed through a fully endoscopic approach, whereas right liver resections were accomplished by a video-assisted approach. In all but six cases, the resections were attempted for malignancy. There were no intra-operative deaths. One patient died on postoperative day-1 because of liver failure and severe coagulopathy. The early results are comparable to those of conventional surgery, with the benefits derived from minimal access surgery. Laparoscopic liver resections are technically feasible with an acceptable morbidity and mortality rate, but extensive experience in conventional liver surgery, advanced laparoscopic surgery, and the availability of all requested technology are indispensable prerequisites.

Hepatic surgery has been undergoing progressive modifications in surgical approach to liver, passing through tohraco-phrenolaparotomy to bilateral subcostal incision and current Makuuchi's. Laparoscopic liver surgery should not be considered a new surgery, but simply a new surgical approach, with difficulties but advantages too. Laparoscopic hepatic resections are feasible with low morbidity and mortality; the short and medium term results are comparable to those obtained with open surgery provided that the surgeon has a significant experience in open hepatic surgery, advanced laparoscopic surgery and the availability of all and pertinent instrumentation. The aim of this paper is to show the rationales formal of hepatic resections through the laparoscopic approach, focusing on the necessary instrumentation, the surgical technique and results.

With the improvement of laparoscopic techniques and the development of new and dedicated technologies, endoscopic liver surgery has become feasible. While wedge liver resections are performed more and more frequently, laparoscopic anatomical liver resections are still at an early stage of development and are somewhat controversial. In 1993 we initiated formal laparoscopic liver resections in selected patients. From 1993 to December 1995 20 patients underwent endoscopic formal resections: the procedures comprised six left hepatectomies, five right hepatectomies, one of which extended to the segment IV, three mesohepatectomy, five segmentectomies and one bisegmentectomy. The operation time ranged from 120 to 270 min (average 193 min). In 17 out of 20 cases a Pringle manoeuvre was performed (mean occlusion time 45 min). No intra-operative complications occurred and there were no conversions in the whole series. Average intra-operative blood loss was 397.5 mL and 35% of patients required intro-operative blood transfusions. Post-operative mortality rate was 5% and post-operative morbidity rate was 45% (one coagulopathy with severe trombocytopaenia, six pleural effusions, one bile collection and four hematomas of the trocar sites). Such preliminary data are comparable with those of a group of 65 patients who underwent open anatomical liver resections from 1992 and 1995. Far from being a routine technique in liver surgery, the laparoscopic approach to forma liver resections may be a promising procedure in selected patients.