OBJECTIVES: To present perioperative outcomes in an observational cohort of patients who underwent LaparoEndoscopic Single Site (LESS) surgery at a single academic center. METHODS: A prospective study was performed to evaluate patient outcomes after LESS urologic surgery. Demographic data including age, body mass index, operative time, estimated blood loss, operative indications, complications, and postoperative Visual Analog Pain Scale scores were accrued. Patients were followed postoperatively for evidence of adverse events. RESULTS: Between September 2007 and February 2009, 100 patients underwent LESS urologic surgery. Specifically, 74 patients underwent LESS renal surgery (cryoablation, 8; partial nephrectomy, 15; metastectomy, 1; renal biopsy, 1; simple nephrectomy, 7; radical nephrectomy, 6; cyst decortication, 2; nephroureterectomy, 7; donor nephrectomy, 19; and dismembered pyeloplasty, 8) and 26 patients underwent LESS pelvic surgery (varicocelectomy, 3; radical prostatectomy, 6; radical cystectomy, 3; sacral colpopexy, 13; and ureteral reimplant, 1). Mean patient age was 54 years. Mean body mass index was 26.2 kg/m(2). Mean operative time was 199 minutes. Mean estimated blood loss was 136 mL. No intraoperative complications occurred. Six patients required conversion to standard laparoscopy. Mean length of hospitalization was 3 days. Mean Visual Analog Pain Scale score at discharge was 1.5/10. At a mean follow-up of 11 months, 9 Clavien Grade II (transfusion, 7; urinary tract infection, 1; deep vein thrombosis, 1) and 2 Clavien Grade IIIb (recto-urethral fistula, 1; angioembolization, 1) surgical complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, LESS urologic surgery is feasible, offers improved cosmesis, and may offer decreased pain. Complications are consistent with the published data. Whether LESS urologic surgery is superior in comparison with standard laparoscopy is currently speculative.
OBJECTIVES: To present perioperative outcomes in an observational cohort of patients who underwent LaparoEndoscopic Single Site (LESS) surgery at a single academic center. METHODS: A prospective study was performed to evaluate patient outcomes after LESS urologic surgery. Demographic data including age, body mass index, operative time, estimated blood loss, operative indications, complications, and postoperative Visual Analog Pain Scale scores were accrued. Patients were followed postoperatively for evidence of adverse events. RESULTS: Between September 2007 and February 2009, 100 patients underwent LESS urologic surgery. Specifically, 74 patients underwent LESS renal surgery (cryoablation, 8; partial nephrectomy, 15; metastectomy, 1; renal biopsy, 1; simple nephrectomy, 7; radical nephrectomy, 6; cyst decortication, 2; nephroureterectomy, 7; donor nephrectomy, 19; and dismembered pyeloplasty, 8) and 26 patients underwent LESS pelvic surgery (varicocelectomy, 3; radical prostatectomy, 6; radical cystectomy, 3; sacral colpopexy, 13; and ureteral reimplant, 1). Mean patient age was 54 years. Mean body mass index was 26.2 kg/m(2). Mean operative time was 199 minutes. Mean estimated blood loss was 136 mL. No intraoperative complications occurred. Six patients required conversion to standard laparoscopy. Mean length of hospitalization was 3 days. Mean Visual Analog Pain Scale score at discharge was 1.5/10. At a mean follow-up of 11 months, 9 Clavien Grade II (transfusion, 7; urinary tract infection, 1; deep vein thrombosis, 1) and 2 Clavien Grade IIIb (recto-urethral fistula, 1; angioembolization, 1) surgical complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, LESS urologic surgery is feasible, offers improved cosmesis, and may offer decreased pain. Complications are consistent with the published data. Whether LESS urologic surgery is superior in comparison with standard laparoscopy is currently speculative.
Authors: Mathias Wolters; Florian Imkamp; Lucy Wohlatz; Stephan Jutzi; Christoph A von Klot; Markus A Kuczyk; Axel S Merseburger; Ute Walcher; Udo Nagele; Thomas R W Herrmann Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-05-24 Impact factor: 4.226