PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11301893

[Hand port-assisted laparoscopic surgery].

Abstract

The dramatic benefits of laparoscopic cholecystectomy or appendectomy for patients encouraged surgeons to use minimal access operative technique in the treatment of other more complex surgical procedures [2, 3]. The authors report on their experiences with 14 patients operated by hand-port assisted laparoscopic technique for benign colorectal diseases. The mortality rate was zero. The operation times compared to the laparoscopically operated previous 14 patients with equal diagnosis did not differ significantly (hand-port: 124-186 min; lap.: 121-176 min). The begin of bowel movements and the postoperative hospital stay were comparable to those of laparoscopic surgery. There were no major complications. No conversion to an open procedure was necessary. As the hand-port device allows the surgeon to insert his (usually non-dominant) hand into the abdominal cavity during the procedure, the hand-port device seems to combine the laparoscopic benefits with the advantages of a conventional open approach (manual exploration, blunt dissection, control of hemostasis) without loss of pneumoperitoneum [10]. Even though hand-assisted operations have not gained widespread acceptance, they recently demonstrated their value especially in more complex laparoscopic procedures like splenic and gastric resections, nephrectomy and colorectal surgery [6, 10, 18, 21, 23-24]. The regaining of tactile sensation which is an essential surgical tool may encourage less experienced colleagues to perform more complex operations. The authors suggest that the hand-port device could be a useful tool in the armentarium for colorectal surgery. Further randomized trials are needed to evaluate the benefits of this technique.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T H Schiedeck, U J Roblick, H J Düpree, H P Bruch. 2001. [Hand port-assisted laparoscopic surgery].. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2001-12502

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Evolution of the technique in the transanal pull-through for Hirschsprung's disease: effect on outcome.

BACKGROUND: The transanal pull-through has become the standard operation for Hirschsprung's disease in many pediatric surgical centers. Over the past 8 years, we have modified our technique by leaving a short-rather than a long-rectal cuff and by doing routine intraabdominal colonic biopsies through an umbilical incision before beginning the anal dissection. The aim of this study was to determine if these modifications have changed the outcome for children undergoing this operation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent transanal pull-through by a single surgeon between 1997 and 2005 was conducted. RESULTS: There were 23 children who had a long cuff (10-15 cm) and 22 who had a short cuff (<2 cm). The short cuff group tended to be younger (25 +/- 23 vs 139 +/- 67 days; P < .05) and smaller (3.5 +/- 0.7 vs 6.0 +/- 2.7 kg; P < .05) at the time of surgery. The operating time was shorter (167 vs 186 minutes; P = .05) in the short cuff group. Outcomes were improved in the short cuff group, as evidenced by decreased hospital stay (1.9 +/- 0.6 vs 2.7 +/- 0.9; P < .05), decreased incidence of enterocolitis (9% vs 30%; P = .1), and lower incidence of narrowing requiring daily dilatations (5% vs 30%; P < .05). Preliminary colonic biopsy was performed on 18 of the 45 patients. This had no significant effect on narcotic use (66% vs 70%; P = .8) and did not increase operating time (174 +/- 31 vs 179 +/- 34 minutes; P = .6). Hospital stay was shorter in the umbilical biopsy group (1.9 +/- 0.6 vs 2.6 +/- 0.9 days; P = .006). CONCLUSION: Results of the transanal pull-through have improved likely as a result of a combination of experience and use of a shorter rectal muscular cuff. The use of a preliminary colonic biopsy through an umbilical incision has not increased postoperative pain, prolonged operative time, or lengthened hospital stay.

Colectomy↗

Intestinal surgery in advanced ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review examines the current role of intestinal surgery in advanced ovarian cancer. Institutions differ considerably in surgical procedures and therapeutic outcomes for this disease. Moreover, therapeutic outcomes are influenced by the inclusion criteria for surgical procedures and the degree of surgical completion. We discuss the role of intestinal surgery and suggest surgical indications for intestinal surgery in advanced ovarian cancer. RECENT FINDINGS: Prognosis in advanced ovarian cancer is better when there is a smaller postoperative tumor mass. However, it is necessary to investigate the effects of intestinal surgery on residual tumor mass and its prognostic benefits. Here, recent reports were reviewed to ascertain the usefulness and safety of intestinal surgery for advanced ovarian cancer and examine surgical indications and institutional requirements. SUMMARY: By performing aggressive intestinal surgery such as combined bowel resection, optimal cytoreductive surgery can be performed in 70-98% of cases. The morbidity associated with intestinal surgery is acceptably low. Prognostic benefits for intestinal surgery are clear in patients with operable ovarian cancer with no residual disease. Women with suspected ovarian cancer should therefore be referred to centers with experienced tumor surgeons.

Colectomy↗