Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2018

21.07.2017

Magnetic surgery: first U.S. experience with a novel device

verfasst von: Ivy N. Haskins, Andrew T. Strong, Matthew T. Allemang, Kalman P. Bencsath, John H. Rodriguez, Matthew D. Kroh

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 2/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

Magnet-assisted surgery is a new platform within minimally invasive surgery. The Levita™ Magnetic Surgical System, the first magnetic surgical system to receive Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, includes a deployable, magnetic grasper and an external magnet that is used to manipulate the grasper within the peritoneal cavity. This system is currently approved for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a body mass index (BMI) between 21 and 34 kg/m2. Herein, we detail the first United States experience with the Levita™ Magnetic Surgical System during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

The Levita™ Magnetic Surgical System was used on consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy at our institution from June 2016 through November 2016. Only patients undergoing elective surgery and those with a body mass index (BMI) between 21 and 34 kg/m2 were included. Baseline patient characteristics, operative time, and perioperative details were collected.

Results

A total of ten patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with the Levita™ Magnetic Surgical System during the defined study period. The mean age at the time of surgery was 49.0 years and the average BMI of the cohort was 27.6 kg/m2. The average operative time was 64.4 min. There were no perioperative complications. Seven (70.0%) patients were discharged to home on the day of surgery, while the remaining three (30.0%) patients were discharged to home on postoperative day number one. Surgeons reported that the magnetic grasper was easy to use and provided adequate tissue retraction and exposure.

Conclusions

The Levita™ Magnetic Surgical System is safe and feasible to use in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Routine use of this system may facilitate a reduction in the total number of laparoscopic trocars used, leading to less tissue trauma and improved cosmesis. Additional studies are needed to determine the applicability and utility of this system for other general surgery cases.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Alloria AC, Lietman IM, Heitman E (2010) Delayed assessment and eager adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: implications for developing surgical techniques. World J Gastroenterol 16(33):4115–4122CrossRef Alloria AC, Lietman IM, Heitman E (2010) Delayed assessment and eager adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: implications for developing surgical techniques. World J Gastroenterol 16(33):4115–4122CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Mintz Y, Talamini MA, Cullen J (2008) Evolution of laparoscopic surgery: lesson for NOTES. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 18:225–234CrossRefPubMed Mintz Y, Talamini MA, Cullen J (2008) Evolution of laparoscopic surgery: lesson for NOTES. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 18:225–234CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Kudsi OY, Catellano A, Kaza S et al (2017) Cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and quality of life after da vinci single-site cholecystectomy and multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: short-term results from a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-016.5353-4 Kudsi OY, Catellano A, Kaza S et al (2017) Cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and quality of life after da vinci single-site cholecystectomy and multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: short-term results from a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Surg Endosc. doi:10.​1007/​s00464-016.​5353-4
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Keus F, de Jong JA, Gooszen HG et al (2006) Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18(4):CD006231 Keus F, de Jong JA, Gooszen HG et al (2006) Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18(4):CD006231
6.
Zurück zum Zitat van der Linden YT, Brenkman HJ, van der Horst S et al (2016) Robotic single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe but faces technical challenges. J Laproendeosc Adv Surg Tech A. 26(11):857–861CrossRef van der Linden YT, Brenkman HJ, van der Horst S et al (2016) Robotic single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe but faces technical challenges. J Laproendeosc Adv Surg Tech A. 26(11):857–861CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Vidal O, Valentini M, Espert JJ et al (2009) Laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy: a safe and reproducible alternative. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 19(5):599–602CrossRefPubMed Vidal O, Valentini M, Espert JJ et al (2009) Laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy: a safe and reproducible alternative. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 19(5):599–602CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Marks JM, Phillips MS, Tacchino R et al (2013) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1-year results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am College Surg 216(6):1037–1047CrossRef Marks JM, Phillips MS, Tacchino R et al (2013) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1-year results of a prospective, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am College Surg 216(6):1037–1047CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Peng C, Ling Y, Ma X et al (2013) Safety outcomes of NOTES cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 26(5):347–353CrossRef Peng C, Ling Y, Ma X et al (2013) Safety outcomes of NOTES cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 26(5):347–353CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat SCARLESS Study Group, Ahmed I, Cook JA et al (2015) Single port/incision laparoscopic surgery compared with standard three-port laparoscopic surgery for appendicectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 29(1):77–85CrossRef SCARLESS Study Group, Ahmed I, Cook JA et al (2015) Single port/incision laparoscopic surgery compared with standard three-port laparoscopic surgery for appendicectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 29(1):77–85CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Eisenberg D, Vidocszky TJ, Lau J et al (2013) Comparison of robotic and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery systems in a suturing and knot tying task. Surg Endosc 27(9):3182–3186CrossRefPubMed Eisenberg D, Vidocszky TJ, Lau J et al (2013) Comparison of robotic and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery systems in a suturing and knot tying task. Surg Endosc 27(9):3182–3186CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Carter JT, Kaplan JA, Nguyen JN et al (2014) A prospective, randomized controlled trial of single-incision laparoscopic vs conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for treatment of acute appendicitis. J Am College Surg 218(5):950–959CrossRef Carter JT, Kaplan JA, Nguyen JN et al (2014) A prospective, randomized controlled trial of single-incision laparoscopic vs conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for treatment of acute appendicitis. J Am College Surg 218(5):950–959CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Park S, Bergs RA, Eberhart R et al (2007) Trocar-less instrumentation for laparoscopy: magnetic positioning of intra-abdominal camera and retractor. Ann Surg 245(3):379–384CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Park S, Bergs RA, Eberhart R et al (2007) Trocar-less instrumentation for laparoscopy: magnetic positioning of intra-abdominal camera and retractor. Ann Surg 245(3):379–384CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Cadeddu J, Ferndandez R, Desai M et al (2009) Novel magnetically guided intra-abdominal camera to facilitate laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: initial human experience. Surg Endosc 23(8):1894–1899CrossRefPubMed Cadeddu J, Ferndandez R, Desai M et al (2009) Novel magnetically guided intra-abdominal camera to facilitate laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: initial human experience. Surg Endosc 23(8):1894–1899CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Best SL, Bergs R, Scott DJ et al (2012) Solo surgeon laparo-endoscopic single site nephrectomy facilitated by new generation magnetically anchored and guided systems camera. J Endourol 26(3):214–218CrossRefPubMed Best SL, Bergs R, Scott DJ et al (2012) Solo surgeon laparo-endoscopic single site nephrectomy facilitated by new generation magnetically anchored and guided systems camera. J Endourol 26(3):214–218CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Fuller J, Ashar B, Carey-Corrado J (2005) Trocar-associated injuries and fatalities: an analysis of 1399 reports to the FDA. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12(4):302–307CrossRefPubMed Fuller J, Ashar B, Carey-Corrado J (2005) Trocar-associated injuries and fatalities: an analysis of 1399 reports to the FDA. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 12(4):302–307CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Haskins IN, Corcelles R, Froylich D et al (2017) Primary inadequate weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is not associated with poor cardiovascular or metabolic outcomes: experience from a single institution. Obes Surg. doi:10.1007/s11695-016-2328-4 Haskins IN, Corcelles R, Froylich D et al (2017) Primary inadequate weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is not associated with poor cardiovascular or metabolic outcomes: experience from a single institution. Obes Surg. doi:10.​1007/​s11695-016-2328-4
Metadaten
Titel
Magnetic surgery: first U.S. experience with a novel device
verfasst von
Ivy N. Haskins
Andrew T. Strong
Matthew T. Allemang
Kalman P. Bencsath
John H. Rodriguez
Matthew D. Kroh
Publikationsdatum
21.07.2017
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 2/2018
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5762-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2018

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2018 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.