Preliminary robotic abdominal wall reconstruction experience: single-centre outcomes of the first 150 cases.

PURPOSE: Robotic surgery offers new possibilities in repairing complex hernias with a minimally invasive approach. This study aimed to analyze our preliminary results. METHODS: Between November 2015 and February 2020, 150 patients underwent robotic reconstruction for abdominal wall defects (77 primary and 73 incisional). A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was conducted to evaluate the short-term outcomes. RESULTS: The mean operative time was 176.9 ± 72.1 min. No conversion to open or laparoscopic approach occurred. The mean hospital length of stay was 2.6 ± 1.6. According to Clavien-Dindo classification, two (grade III) complications following retromuscular mesh placement (1.3%) occurred. One patient (0.7%) required surgical revision due to small bowel occlusion following an intraparietal hernia. The 30-day readmission rate was 0.6%, and the mortality was nihil. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery is valuable for safely completing challenging surgical procedures like complex abdominal wall reconstruction, with low conversion and complication rates. A stepwise approach to the different surgical techniques is essential to optimize the outcomes and maximize the benefits of the robotic approach.

Esophageal foreign bodies in adults: systematic review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: Esophageal Foreign Body (FB) impaction represents a major challenge for healthcare providers. Aim of this systematic review was to analyse the current literature evidence on prevalence, presentation, treatment, and outcomes of impacted esophageal FB. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Literature search was conducted between 2000 and 30th June 2018 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. RESULTS: Sixty-one studies matched the inclusion criteria. The total number of included patients was 13,092. The cervical esophagus was the most frequent impaction site (67%) and sharp-pointed objects were the most common FB (38.1%). Retrosternal pain (78%), dysphagia (48%), and odynophagia (43.4%) were the most common symptoms. A flexible or rigid endoscopic approach was adopted in 65.1% and 16.8% of patients, respectively. Overall, 17.8% of patients had a complication related to the impacted esophageal FB or to the endoscopic manoeuvers. A surgical approach was required in 3.4% of patients. The overall mortality was 0.85%. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery is the upfront treatment in patients with esophageal perforation or endoscopically irretrievable esophageal FB. A minimally invasive approach can be adopted in selected patients. Effective prevention of FB impaction should focus on accurate diagnostic work-up to search for an underlying motility disorder after a first episode of esophageal impaction, even if transient and self-resolving.

Robotic Vascular Resection in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review.

(1) Background: This study comprehensively compared robotic pancreatic surgery with vascular resection (RPS-VR) to other surgical procedures in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). (2) Methods: A systematic review of relevant literature was conducted to assess a range of crucial surgical and oncological outcomes. (3) Results: Findings indicate that robotic surgery with vascular resections (VRs) significantly prolongs the duration of surgery compared to other surgical procedures, and they notably demonstrate an equal hospital stay. While some studies reported a lower conversion rate and a higher rate of blood loss and blood transfusion in the RPS-VR group, others found no significant disparity. Furthermore, RPS-VR consistently correlated with comparable recurrence rates, free margins R0, postoperative mortality, and complication rates. Concerning the last one, certain reviews reported a higher rate of major complications. Overall survival and disease-free survival remained comparable between the RPS-VR and other surgical techniques in treating PDAC. (4) Conclusions: The analysis emphasizes how RPS-VR is a resembling approach in terms of surgical outcomes and aligns with existing literature findings in this field.

Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for colorectal liver metastasis: an umbrella review.

Introduction: This study comprehensively compared laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) to open liver resection (OLR) in treating colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM). Methods: A systematic review of relevant literature was conducted to assess a range of crucial surgical and oncological outcomes. Results: Findings indicate that minimally invasive surgery (MIS) did not significantly prolong the duration of surgery compared to open liver resection and notably demonstrated lower blood transfusion rates and reduced intraoperative blood loss. While some studies favored MIS for its lower complication rates, others did not establish a statistically significant difference. One study identified a lower post-operative mortality rate in the MIS group. Furthermore, MIS consistently correlated with shorter hospital stays, indicative of expedited post-operative recovery. Concerning oncological outcomes, while certain meta-analyses reported a lower rate of cancer recurrence in the MIS group, others found no significant disparity. Overall survival and disease-free survival remained comparable between the MIS and open liver resection groups. Conclusion: The analysis emphasizes the potential advantages of LLR in terms of surgical outcomes and aligns with existing literature findings in this field. Systematic review registration: [website], identifier [registration number].

Robotic surgery: extending the minimally invasive approach in patients with splenomegaly. A case report.

Splenomegaly represents a challenge during splenectomy. Despite the laparoscopic approach becoming the gold standard for spleen removal, it remains controversial in this condition since the limited working space and increased risk of bleeding portray the leading causes of conversion, preventing patients from experiencing the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. The robotic platform was used to perform a splenectomy on a 55-year-old female with severe thrombocytopenia due to a relapsed large B cell lymphoma with splenomegaly. The advantages of this approach, favoring less blood loss and precise movements in a small surgical field, may allow MIS to become the first choice in this unfavorable setting, even in hematologic malignancies, which are associated with higher complication rates.

Update on Robotic Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer.

The minimally invasive treatment of rectal cancer with Total Mesorectal Excision is a complex and challenging procedure due to technical and anatomical issues which could impair postoperative, oncological and functional outcomes, especially in a defined subgroup of patients. The results from recent randomized controlled trials comparing laparoscopic versus open surgery are still conflicting and trans-anal bottom-up approaches have recently been developed. Robotic surgery represents the latest consistent innovation in the field of minimally invasive surgery that may potentially overcome the technical limitations of conventional laparoscopy thanks to an enhanced dexterity, especially in deep narrow operative fields such as the pelvis. Results from population-based multicenter studies have shown the potential advantages of robotic surgery when compared to its laparoscopic counterpart in terms of reduced conversions, complication rates and length of stay. Costs, often advocated as one of the main drawbacks of robotic surgery, should be thoroughly evaluated including both the direct and indirect costs, with the latter having the potential of counterbalancing the excess of expenditure directly related to the purchase and maintenance of robotic equipment. Further prospectively maintained or randomized data are still required to better delineate the advantages of the robotic platform, especially in the subset of most complex and technically challenging patients from both an anatomical and oncological standpoint.

Bottom-up suprapubic approach for robotic right colectomy: technical aspects and preliminary outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) for right colectomy increase the technical complexity of a laparoscopic approach especially when an intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) is associated. The robotic platform, with its intrinsic technical advantages, could potentially overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopy. This study aimed to describe the robotic bottom-up technique and to evaluate short-terms outcomes of robotic right colectomy (RRC) with CME and IA. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent RRC for cancer with bottom-up suprapubic approach from October 2016 to April 2020 were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Intraoperative outcomes and complications, conversion rate, 30-day postoperative outcomes, incisional hernia rate and pathological outcomes were the variables assessed. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were submitted to bottom-up suprapubic approach for RRC with CME and IA during the study period. Mean operative time was 179 min, no intraoperative complications were observed, and the conversion rate was 3.6%. Mean postoperative stay was 4.6 days and the overall 30-day complication rate was 15.6%. Thirteen patients (12%) had minor complications, while major postoperative complications occurred in 4 patients (3.6%). Anastomotic leak was recorded in 1 patient (0.9%) and the 30-day re-admission rate was 0.9%. Mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 22.6. Incisional hernia rate at the specimen extraction site was 0.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Bottom-up approach for RRC with CME and IA carries a low rate of conversions, intraoperative and short-term postoperative complications.

Unusual foreign body impacted in the upper oesophagus: original technique for transoral extraction.

Foreign body ingestion is a common event; in the adult population, most ingestions occur in patients with mental disability, psychiatric disorders, alcohol intoxication or in prisoners seeking secondary gain. Removal through flexible endoscopy is generally the first-line approach but rescue oesophagotomy may be necessary for foreign bodies impacted in the upper oesophagus. A 27-year-old man was admitted in the emergency room after intentional ingestion of a wooden spherical object with a central hole. A total body CT scan showed that the object was completely obstructing the upper oesophageal lumen but there were no signs of perforation. In the operating room, a Weerda diverticuloscope and a 5 mm 0° telescope were used to visualise the foreign body under general anaesthesia. A standard endoscopic biopsy forceps was passed through the hole of the sphere and was retracted with the jaws open allowing transoral extraction without complications.

Flexible versus rigid endoscopy in the management of esophageal foreign body impaction: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Foreign body (FB) impaction accounts for 4% of emergency endoscopies in clinical practice. Flexible endoscopy (FE) is recommended as the first-line therapeutic option because it can be performed under sedation, is cost-effective, and is well tolerated. Rigid endoscopy (RE) under general anesthesia is less used but may be advantageous in some circumstances. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of FE and RE in esophageal FB removal. Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were consulted matching the terms "Rigid endoscopy AND Flexible endoscopy AND foreign bod*". Pooled effect measures were calculated using an inverse-variance weighted or Mantel-Haenszel in random effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 index and Cochrane Q test. Results: Five observational cohort studies, published between 1993 and 2015, matched the inclusion criteria. One thousand four hundred and two patients were included; FE was performed in 736 patients and RE in 666. Overall, 101 (7.2%) complications occurred. The most frequent complications were mucosal erosion (26.7%), mucosal edema (18.8%), and iatrogenic esophageal perforations (10.9%). Compared to FE, the estimated RE pooled success OR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.48-2.06; p = 1.00). The pooled OR of iatrogenic perforation, other complications, and overall complications were 2.87 (95% CI 0.96-8.61; p = 0.06), 1.09 (95% CI 0.38-3.18; p = 0.87), and 1.50 (95% CI 0.53-4.25; p = 0.44), respectively. There was no mortality. Conclusions: FE and RE are equally safe and effective for the removal of esophageal FB. To provide a tailored or crossover approach, patients should be managed in multidisciplinary centers where expertise in RE is also available. Formal training and certification in RE should probably be re-evaluated.