BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery produces virtually no scar but is technically challenging because of the loss of triangulation. The objective of this study is to compare classic transumbilical LESS nephrectomy with needlescopic-assisted laparoscopy (NAL) surgery. In doing so, we evaluated whether the addition of a single 2-mm subcostal port could restore triangulation while not jeopardizing recovery or cosmetic outcome in the porcine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten female farm pigs were randomized to laparoscopic nephrectomy with either LESS or NAL. In LESS, a TriPort was placed through a single 2.5-cm umbilical incision. In NAL, 5- and 10-mm ports were placed in the umbilicus and a 2-mm port was placed in the midclavicular line. Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative parameters were compared. Variables were analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and two-tailed Fisher exact test. Cosmesis was evaluated objectively using the Vancouver Scar Scale and subjectively by a blinded dermatologist. A cost analysis was performed. RESULTS: Estimated blood loss was minimal in both groups (28.8 mL in LESS and 9.4 mL in NAL). Operative time was significantly shorter in NAL (103 vs 150 min; P<0.001). There was no difference in complications (2 vs 1; P=0.500), objective cosmesis (3.9 vs 3.8; P>0.2), or subjective cosmesis (2 vs 3; P=0.500). The NAL protocol had significantly lower disposable equipment costs ($363 vs $1696). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a 2-mm subcostal port and the restoration of triangulation in the NAL protocol enable shorter operative times, increased surgeon comfort, improved technical ease, and lower costs while maintaining the scarless cosmesis of the traditional LESS protocol.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery produces virtually no scar but is technically challenging because of the loss of triangulation. The objective of this study is to compare classic transumbilical LESS nephrectomy with needlescopic-assisted laparoscopy (NAL) surgery. In doing so, we evaluated whether the addition of a single 2-mm subcostal port could restore triangulation while not jeopardizing recovery or cosmetic outcome in the porcine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten female farm pigs were randomized to laparoscopic nephrectomy with either LESS or NAL. In LESS, a TriPort was placed through a single 2.5-cm umbilical incision. In NAL, 5- and 10-mm ports were placed in the umbilicus and a 2-mm port was placed in the midclavicular line. Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative parameters were compared. Variables were analyzed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and two-tailed Fisher exact test. Cosmesis was evaluated objectively using the Vancouver Scar Scale and subjectively by a blinded dermatologist. A cost analysis was performed. RESULTS: Estimated blood loss was minimal in both groups (28.8 mL in LESS and 9.4 mL in NAL). Operative time was significantly shorter in NAL (103 vs 150 min; P<0.001). There was no difference in complications (2 vs 1; P=0.500), objective cosmesis (3.9 vs 3.8; P>0.2), or subjective cosmesis (2 vs 3; P=0.500). The NAL protocol had significantly lower disposable equipment costs ($363 vs $1696). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a 2-mm subcostal port and the restoration of triangulation in the NAL protocol enable shorter operative times, increased surgeon comfort, improved technical ease, and lower costs while maintaining the scarless cosmesis of the traditional LESS protocol.
Authors: C Schwentner; T Todenhöfer; J Seibold; S Alloussi; M Germann; S Aufderklamm; J Mischinger; A Stenzl; G Gakis Journal: Urologe A Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Arkadiusz Miernik; Martin Schoenthaler; Kerstin Lilienthal; Alexander Frankenschmidt; Wojciech Konrad Karcz; Simon Kuesters Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-01-05 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: C Schwentner; T Todenhöfer; J Seibold; S Alloussi; S Aufderklamm; J Mischinger; A Stenzl; G Gakis Journal: JSLS Date: 2013 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 2.172