Saeed Shoar1, Shereen Aboutaleb2, Mohsen Karem2, Moataz M Bashah2, Mohamed AlKuwari2, Davit Sargsyan2, Alan A Saber3. 1. Department of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, Weight Loss Center, The Brooklyn Hospital Center, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 121 DeKalb Ave, Brooklyn, NY, 11201, USA. 2. Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery Department, Hamad Medical Corporation, Weill Cornell Medical College, Doha, Qatar. 3. Department of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, Weight Loss Center, The Brooklyn Hospital Center, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 121 DeKalb Ave, Brooklyn, NY, 11201, USA. saber6231@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular stand-alone treatment for morbid obesity. However, removal of the gastric specimen could be a challenging step due to its large size relative to the width of the trocar site. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare a simplified retrieval technique for extraction of the gastric specimen without an endobag with conventionally performed specimen retrieval using an endobag. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted recruiting patients undergoing LSG. Patient's demographics, preoperative characteristics, intra-operative, and postoperative variables were compared between the two groups according to the technique of gastric specimen removal. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients (60.6% female) were enrolled into case (n = 100) and control groups (n = 93). Mean ± SD age and BMI of patients were 35.64 ± 11.84 years and 47.28 ± 8.22 Kg/m2, respectively with no significant difference between groups. Median (25th, 75th inter-quartile), extraction time was significantly reduced in the non-endobag group compared to the endobag group (3.5 [2.5-4.5] min vs. 6.5 [3.4-8.2] min, p = 0.03).Patients of both groups had similar intra-operative and trocar site complications (hernia and wound infection) (3% for endobag group and 3.3 % for non-endobag group). The median (25-75% [IQR]) LOS was also comparable between endobag and non-endobag patients (3[2-3] vs. 3[2-4] days, p = 0.84). No difference was observed between the two groups for weight loss and comorbidity resolution. CONCLUSION: Non-endobag technique for gastric specimen retrieval is safe and feasible with substantial saving in operative time and comparable intra-operative and postoperative outcomes to the conventional retrieval technique.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular stand-alone treatment for morbid obesity. However, removal of the gastric specimen could be a challenging step due to its large size relative to the width of the trocar site. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare a simplified retrieval technique for extraction of the gastric specimen without an endobag with conventionally performed specimen retrieval using an endobag. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted recruiting patients undergoing LSG. Patient's demographics, preoperative characteristics, intra-operative, and postoperative variables were compared between the two groups according to the technique of gastric specimen removal. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients (60.6% female) were enrolled into case (n = 100) and control groups (n = 93). Mean ± SD age and BMI of patients were 35.64 ± 11.84 years and 47.28 ± 8.22 Kg/m2, respectively with no significant difference between groups. Median (25th, 75th inter-quartile), extraction time was significantly reduced in the non-endobag group compared to the endobag group (3.5 [2.5-4.5] min vs. 6.5 [3.4-8.2] min, p = 0.03).Patients of both groups had similar intra-operative and trocar site complications (hernia and wound infection) (3% for endobag group and 3.3 % for non-endobag group). The median (25-75% [IQR]) LOS was also comparable between endobag and non-endobag patients (3[2-3] vs. 3[2-4] days, p = 0.84). No difference was observed between the two groups for weight loss and comorbidity resolution. CONCLUSION: Non-endobag technique for gastric specimen retrieval is safe and feasible with substantial saving in operative time and comparable intra-operative and postoperative outcomes to the conventional retrieval technique.
Authors: Raul J Rosenthal; Alberto Aceves Diaz; Dag Arvidsson; Randal S Baker; Nicola Basso; Drake Bellanger; Camilo Boza; Haicam El Mourad; Michael France; Michel Gagner; Manoel Galvao-Neto; Kelvin D Higa; Jacques Himpens; Colleen M Hutchinson; Moises Jacobs; John O Jorgensen; Gregg Jossart; Muffazal Lakdawala; Ninh T Nguyen; David Nocca; Gerhard Prager; Alfons Pomp; Almino Cardoso Ramos; Raul J Rosenthal; Shashank Shah; Michel Vix; Alan Wittgrove; Natan Zundel Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2011-11-10 Impact factor: 4.734