Minimally Invasive Hepatic Surgery

Ileal pouch anal anastomosis is the treatment of choice for patients with chronic ulcerative colitis and familial adenomatous polyposis undergoing a proctocolectomy and desiring bowel continuity. It is a technically complex operation associated with significant morbidity and may be performed by an open, laparoscopic, or robotic approach. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the comparative perioperative outcomes between these 3 techniques outside of institutional studies.

The NSQIP targeted proctectomy data set was used to identify patients who underwent open, laparoscopic, and robotic ileal pouch anal anastomosis between 2016 and 2019. Thirty-day outcomes between different surgical approaches were compared using univariate and multivariable analysis.

During the study period, 1,067 open, 971 laparoscopic, and 341 robotic ileal pouch anal anastomosis were performed. The most frequent indications were inflammatory bowel disease (64%), malignancy (18%), and familial adenomatous polyposis (7%). Mean age of the cohort was 43 ± 15 years with 43% female and 76% with body mass index ≤ 30 kg/m². Overall morbidity was 26.8% for the entire cohort with 4% anastomotic leak, 6% reoperation, 21% ileus, and 21% readmission rate. After adjusting for available confounders, operative approach was not associated with better short-term outcomes, including length of stay, overall morbidity, anastomotic leak, reoperation, incidence of ileus, and 30-day readmissions.

Ileal pouch anal anastomosis continues to be associated with significant postoperative morbidity regardless of operative approach. Patient-related advantages in terms of perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic and robotic platforms compared to open surgery are less pronounced in complex operations such as ileal pouch anal anastomosis.

Since 2012, the AHPBA has hosted an annual HPB Fellows' Course at Carolinas Medical Center. All fellows training in an accredited HPB fellowship are eligible to attend. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of this conference and assess possible areas of improvement.

The Carolinas Fellows' Course (CFC) is a structured educational activity involving didactics, skills labs, and live case presentations. The course emphasizes minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) technique. This is a retrospective review of a survey emailed to 95 fellows who have attended the course over a 7-year period.

Fifty-two attendees completed the survey (54.7% response rate). Sixty-eight percent of respondents now practice primarily HPB surgery. Seventy-six percent agreed that the CFC encouraged them to incorporate IOUS into their practice, while 74% were encouraged to incorporate MIS HPB procedures into their practice. Eighty percent felt that the course laid groundwork for long term communication with peers.

The study demonstrates that a multisite instructional course can be an effective way to encourage the development of new skills, boost operational confidence, impact real world practices, and foster long term communication and networking among fellows after graduation.

Minimally invasive techniques are currently applied in many oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures, including orthognathic surgery. A systematic review on the application of potentially minimally invasive procedures in orthognathic surgery was performed to provide a clear overview of the relevant published data. Articles in English on minimally invasive orthognathic procedures, published in the scientific literature, were obtained from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, and an additional manual search (revised 31 December 2016). After screening the abstracts and applying the eligibility criteria, 403 articles were identified. All articles reporting the potential for minimally invasive orthognathic surgery were included (n = 44). The full papers were evaluated in detail and categorized as articles on a minimally invasive surgical approach (n = 4), endoscopically assisted orthognathic procedures (n = 17), or the use of a piezoelectric device in orthognathic surgery (n = 25); two articles were each included in two categories. Although a small incision and minimal dissection is the basic principle of a minimally invasive technique, most articles (90.9%) reported the endoscope and piezoelectric instrument as important tools in minimally invasive orthognathic surgery. Evidence from available studies suggests that patients undergoing minimally invasive orthognathic surgery have less morbidity and make a faster recovery. Further research should aim to obtain higher levels of evidence.

The benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for low-risk or minor liver resection are well established. There is growing interest in MIS for major hepatectomy (MH) and other challenging resections, but there remain unanswered questions of safety that prevent broad adoption of this technique.

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing hepatectomy at 65 hospitals participating in the NSQIP Hepatopancreatobiliary Collaborative in 2014. We assessed serious morbidity or mortality (SMM; including organ/space infection and organ failure). Secondary outcomes included transfusion, bile leak, liver failure, reoperation or intervention, and 30-day readmission. We also measured factors considered to make resection more challenging (ie large tumors, cirrhosis, ≥3 concurrent resections, previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and morbid obesity).

There were 2,819 patients who underwent hepatectomy (aged 58 ± 14 years; 53% female; 25% had MIS). After adjusting for clinical and operative factors, the odds of SMM (odds ratio [OR] = 0.57; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.96; p = 0.03) and reoperation or intervention (OR = 0.52; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.93; p = 0.03) were significantly lower for patients undergoing MIS compared with open. In the MH group (n = 1,015 [13% MIS]), there was no difference in the odds of SMM after MIS (OR = 0.37; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.11; p = 0.08); however, minimally invasive MH met criteria for noninferiority. There were no differences in liver-specific complications or readmission between the groups. Odds of SMM were significantly lower after MIS among patients who had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 0.33; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.70; p = 0.004).

In this large study of minimally invasive MH, we found safety outcomes that are equivalent or superior to conventional open surgery. Although the decision to offer MIS might be influenced by factors not included in this evaluation (eg surgeon experience and other patient factors), these findings support its current use in MH.

To review the current evidence on the impact of minimally invasive, robotic-assisted cancer surgery (thoracic, gastrointestinal, gynecologic, genitourinary) on surgical outcomes and quality of life.

Journal articles, research reports, state of the science papers, and clinical guidelines.

Minimally invasive cancer surgery is an important and integral component of the comprehensive care of cancer patients. Current evidence suggests that minimally invasive procedures confer equivalent and potentially superior advantage in select surgical outcomes without compromising oncologic outcomes. There is a paucity of evidence for the impact of minimally invasive procedures on functional outcomes and quality of life.

Perioperative nursing care in minimally invasive cancer surgery should focus on preparing patients and families for shorter hospital stay, with continued support for postoperative recovery following discharge.