BACKGROUND: Only limited data in the literature about single-incision laparoscopic rectal surgery, because the laparoscopic stapler does not allow low rectal transection without sufficient distal margins from the umbilicus port. We have developed single-incision plus one port laparoscopic anterior resection of the rectum (SILS+1-AR) as a reduced port surgery in which we can utilize the incision for drainage as an additional access route for laparoscopic procedures including the transection the lower rectum. METHODS: A Lap protector (LP) mini was inserted through a 2.5 cm transumbilical incision, and an EZ-access was mounted to LP and three 5-mm ports were placed in EZ-access. A 12 mm port was inserted in right lower quadrant. Almost all the procedures were performed with usual laparoscopic instruments, and the operative procedures were much the same as in usual laparoscopic low anterior resection of the rectum using a flexible 5mm scope. The rectum was transected normally using only one endoscopic linear stapler inserted from the right lower quadrant port. RESULTS: We underwent modified SILS+1-AR in 16 patients with advanced rectal cancer. In all cases, there was no need to extend the skin incision. We transected the lower rectum with one laparoscopic stapler in all six cases. Postoperative follow-up did not reveal any umbilical wound complications or recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and feasibility of SILS+1-AR for advanced rectal cancer was established in this study. However, further studies are needed to prove the advantages of this procedure to conventional laparoscopic law anterior resection.
BACKGROUND: Only limited data in the literature about single-incision laparoscopic rectal surgery, because the laparoscopic stapler does not allow low rectal transection without sufficient distal margins from the umbilicus port. We have developed single-incision plus one port laparoscopic anterior resection of the rectum (SILS+1-AR) as a reduced port surgery in which we can utilize the incision for drainage as an additional access route for laparoscopic procedures including the transection the lower rectum. METHODS: A Lap protector (LP) mini was inserted through a 2.5 cm transumbilical incision, and an EZ-access was mounted to LP and three 5-mm ports were placed in EZ-access. A 12 mm port was inserted in right lower quadrant. Almost all the procedures were performed with usual laparoscopic instruments, and the operative procedures were much the same as in usual laparoscopic low anterior resection of the rectum using a flexible 5mm scope. The rectum was transected normally using only one endoscopic linear stapler inserted from the right lower quadrant port. RESULTS: We underwent modified SILS+1-AR in 16 patients with advanced rectal cancer. In all cases, there was no need to extend the skin incision. We transected the lower rectum with one laparoscopic stapler in all six cases. Postoperative follow-up did not reveal any umbilical wound complications or recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and feasibility of SILS+1-AR for advanced rectal cancer was established in this study. However, further studies are needed to prove the advantages of this procedure to conventional laparoscopic law anterior resection.
Authors: Deborah S Keller; Juan R Flores-Gonzalez; Jaideep Sandhu; Sergio Ibarra; Nisreen Madhoun; Eric M Haas Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2015-08-18 Impact factor: 3.452