Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 7/2012

01.07.2012

Pre-bent instruments used in single-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparative study of performance in a dry lab

verfasst von: Arkadiusz Miernik, Martin Schoenthaler, Kerstin Lilienthal, Alexander Frankenschmidt, Wojciech Konrad Karcz, Simon Kuesters

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 7/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Different types of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) have become increasingly popular. Although SILS is technically even more challenging than conventional laparoscopy, published data of first clinical series seem to demonstrate the feasibility of these approaches. Various attempts have been made to overcome restrictions due to loss of triangulation in SILS by specially designed SILS-specific instruments. This study involving novices in a dry lab compared task performances between conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) and single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) using newly designed pre-bent instruments.

Methods

In this study, 90 medical students without previous experience in laparoscopic techniques were randomly assigned to undergo one of three procedures: CLS, SPLS using two pre-bent instruments (SPLS-pp), or SPLS using one pre-bent and one straight laparoscopic instrument (SPLS-ps). In the dry lab, the participants performed four typical laparoscopic tasks of increasing difficulty. Evaluation included performance times or number of completed tasks within a given time frame. All performances were videotaped and evaluated for unsuccessful attempts and unwanted interactions of instruments. Using subjective questionnaires, the participants rated difficulties with two-dimensional vision and coordination of instruments.

Results

Task performances were significantly better in the CLS group than in either SPLS group. The SPLS-ps group showed a tendency toward better performances than the SPLS-pp group, but the difference was not significant. Video sequences and participants` questionnaires showed instrument interaction as the major problem in the single-incision surgery groups.

Conclusions

Although SILS is feasible, as shown in clinical series published by laparoscopically experienced experts, SILS techniques are demanding due to restrictions that come with the loss of triangulation. These can be compensated only partially by currently available SILS-designed instruments. The future of SILS depends on further improvements in the available equipment or the development of new approaches such as needlescopically assisted or robotically assisted procedures.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Rivas H, Varela E, Scott D (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial evaluation of a large series of patients. Surg Endosc 24:1403–1412PubMedCrossRef Rivas H, Varela E, Scott D (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial evaluation of a large series of patients. Surg Endosc 24:1403–1412PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Stolzenburg JU, Kallidonis P, Hellawell G, Do M, Haefner T, Dietel A, Liatsikos EN (2009) Technique of laparoscopic-endoscopic single-site surgery radical nephrectomy. Eur Urol 56:644–650PubMedCrossRef Stolzenburg JU, Kallidonis P, Hellawell G, Do M, Haefner T, Dietel A, Liatsikos EN (2009) Technique of laparoscopic-endoscopic single-site surgery radical nephrectomy. Eur Urol 56:644–650PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Marks J, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, Denoto G, Paraskeva P, Rivas H, Soper N, Rosemurgy A, Shah S (2011) Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data. Am J Surg 201:369–372 discussion 372–373PubMedCrossRef Marks J, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, Denoto G, Paraskeva P, Rivas H, Soper N, Rosemurgy A, Shah S (2011) Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data. Am J Surg 201:369–372 discussion 372–373PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaouk JH, Autorino R, Kim FJ, Han DH, Lee SW et al (2011) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urology: worldwide multi-institutional analysis of 1,076 cases. Eur Urol 60(5):998–1005PubMedCrossRef Kaouk JH, Autorino R, Kim FJ, Han DH, Lee SW et al (2011) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in urology: worldwide multi-institutional analysis of 1,076 cases. Eur Urol 60(5):998–1005PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Santos BF, Enter D, Soper NJ, Hungness ES (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS™) versus standard laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of performance using a surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25:483–490PubMedCrossRef Santos BF, Enter D, Soper NJ, Hungness ES (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS™) versus standard laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of performance using a surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25:483–490PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Santos BF, Reif TJ, Soper NJ, Hungness ES (2011) Effect of training and instrument type on performance in single-incision laparoscopy: results of a randomized comparison using a surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25:3798–3804PubMedCrossRef Santos BF, Reif TJ, Soper NJ, Hungness ES (2011) Effect of training and instrument type on performance in single-incision laparoscopy: results of a randomized comparison using a surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25:3798–3804PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Brown-Clerk B, de Laveaga AE, Lagrange CA, Wirth LM, Lowndes BR, Hallbeck MS (2011) Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparison of surgical-port performance in a surgical simulator with novices. Surg Endosc 25:2210–2218PubMedCrossRef Brown-Clerk B, de Laveaga AE, Lagrange CA, Wirth LM, Lowndes BR, Hallbeck MS (2011) Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparison of surgical-port performance in a surgical simulator with novices. Surg Endosc 25:2210–2218PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Islam A, Castellvi AO, Tesfay ST, Castellvi AD, Wright AS, Scott DJ (2011) Early surgeon impressions and technical difficulty associated with laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: a Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons learning center study. Surg Endosc Feb 27. Epub ahead of print Islam A, Castellvi AO, Tesfay ST, Castellvi AD, Wright AS, Scott DJ (2011) Early surgeon impressions and technical difficulty associated with laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: a Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons learning center study. Surg Endosc Feb 27. Epub ahead of print
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Nagele U, Walcher U, Herrmann TR (2011) Initial experience with laparoscopic single-incision triangulated umbilical surgery (SITUS) in simple and radical nephrectomy. World J Urol (in press) Nagele U, Walcher U, Herrmann TR (2011) Initial experience with laparoscopic single-incision triangulated umbilical surgery (SITUS) in simple and radical nephrectomy. World J Urol (in press)
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Nicolay LI, Bowman RJ, Heldt JP, Jellison FC, Mehr N, Tenggardjaja C, Millard W, Koning JL, Baldwin DD (2011) A prospective randomized comparison of traditional laparoendoscopic single-site surgery with needlescopic-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy in the porcine model. J Endourol 25:1187–1191PubMedCrossRef Nicolay LI, Bowman RJ, Heldt JP, Jellison FC, Mehr N, Tenggardjaja C, Millard W, Koning JL, Baldwin DD (2011) A prospective randomized comparison of traditional laparoendoscopic single-site surgery with needlescopic-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy in the porcine model. J Endourol 25:1187–1191PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Barret E, Sanchez-Salas R, Ercolani M, Forgues A, Rozet F, Galiano M, Cathelineau X (2011) Robotic-assisted laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (R-LESS) in urology: an evidence-based analysis. Minerva Urol Nefrol 63:115–122PubMed Barret E, Sanchez-Salas R, Ercolani M, Forgues A, Rozet F, Galiano M, Cathelineau X (2011) Robotic-assisted laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (R-LESS) in urology: an evidence-based analysis. Minerva Urol Nefrol 63:115–122PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Pre-bent instruments used in single-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparative study of performance in a dry lab
verfasst von
Arkadiusz Miernik
Martin Schoenthaler
Kerstin Lilienthal
Alexander Frankenschmidt
Wojciech Konrad Karcz
Simon Kuesters
Publikationsdatum
01.07.2012
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 7/2012
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2129-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2012

Surgical Endoscopy 7/2012 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.