Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a three-trocar 5-mm instrument approach.

The natural evolution of laparoscopy seems to be the use of miniature instruments and, where possible, a reduction of the number of trocars used. We report the results of our experience with all 5-mm instrument three-trocar cholecystectomy vs. the conventional laparoscopy approach. From July 2002 to July 2005 a total of 518 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy: 268 of them (51.7%) were operated on with a 5-mm three-trocar approach. The primary end point was the feasibility rate of the technique. Secondary end points were safety and the impact of the technique on the duration of laparoscopy. There were two conversions to laparotomy--one in each group--while a conversion to the classical approach for the three-trocar group was registered in 9.3% of the cases. Occurrence of minor complications was 3.6% (9 cases) with the conventional approach as against 3.7% (10 cases) with the three-trocar approach. The present experience shows that 5-mm three-trocar cholecystectomy is a safe, easy, effective and reproducible approach for gallbladder disease. Such features make the technique a challenging alternative to conventional laparoscopy in the treatment of cholecystopathy, in both the acute and elective setting.

Retroperitoneal leiomyosarcoma mimicking acute appendicitis: laparoscopic management.

BACKGROUND: Retroperitoneal leiomyosarcomas (RLMS) are a challenging clinical entity. The vast majority of patients are operated on when tumors are advanced. We report herein a case of RLMS, mimicking acute appendiceal disease and treated successfully via laparoscopy. METHODS: A 37-year-old woman, para 1, was admitted to our department for right lower quadrant abdominal pain, fever, and leukocytosis. She had no changes in gastrointestinal and urologic function. A physical examination revealed the presence of abdominal guarding, rebound, and a tender mass in the right lower quadrant. The abdominal ultrasound showed an inhomogeneous ovoid mass (6 cm in diameter) located below the cecum, with no definite margins, and consistent with an appendiceal abscess. The patient was referred for laparoscopy. The procedure was performed with the aid of 3 ports: a 12-mm trocar in the umbilicus (open technique), a 10-mm trocar in the left iliac fossa, and a 5-mm one in the supra-pubic space. On inspection of the abdominal cavity, a retroperitoneal 6-cm mass was immediately found below the cecum and the appendix. Neither intraperitoneal seeding nor suspected lymph nodes were present. After dissection of the parietal peritoneum, the mass appeared to be encapsulated and well demarcated from all surrounding structures. It was eventually dissected and removed via a plastic bag. A standard appendectomy was also performed. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient was discharged on the 3rd day. The histology analysis of the resected specimen showed a totally excised G2 leiomyosarcoma. The appendix had no signs of inflammation. Postoperatively, the patient underwent a total-body CT-scan, which had no signs of residual or distant disease. No adjuvant therapy was necessary. At an 18-month follow-up, the patient was doing well and was disease free. CONCLUSION: Surgery represents the main therapeutic option for resectable RLMS. Laparoscopy is a useful diagnostic tool that allows safe resection of incidentally discovered, small and well encapsulated RLMS.

Laparoscopic appendectomy: why it should be done.

OBJECTIVE: Notwithstanding its widely perceived advantages, laparoscopic appendectomy has not yet met with universal acceptance. The aim of the present work is to illustrate retrospectively the results of a case-control experience with laparoscopic versus open appendectomy carried out at our institution. METHODS: Between January 1993 and November 2000, 555 patients (M:F = 210:345; mean age 25.2 +/- 15 years) underwent emergency or urgent appendectomy, or both. Of them, 322 (52%) were operated on laparoscopically, and 233 (48%) were treated via conventional surgery, according to the presence of a well-trained surgical team. RESULTS: The laparoscopic group conversion rate was 3.1% (10/322) and was mainly due to the presence of dense intraabdominal adhesions. Major intraoperative complications ranged as high as 0.3% (1/322) and 0%, respectively, in the laparoscopic and conventional groups (P=ns). Major postoperative complications were 1.6% (5/312) vs 0.8% (2/243), respectively (P=ns). Postoperative mortality was 0.3% (1/312) and 0.4% (1/243) in the laparoscopic and conventional subsets of patients. Reinterventions were 0.9% (3/322) in the laparoscopic patients versus nil in the open group (P=ns). Minor postoperative complications were observed in 0.6% (2/312) and 6.5% (16/243) of patients, respectively, in the laparoscopy and open surgery groups, and consisted mainly of wound infections (P=0.001). Flatus passage and hospitalization were significantly more rapid among the laparoscopic patients. The greater diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopy allowed the diagnosis of concurrent diseases in 12% (30/254) versus 1.5% (3/199) of patients with histology proven appendicitis treated via laparoscopy versus laparotomy (P<0.01). Similarly, among those patients without gross or microscopic evidence of appendicitis, or both gross and microscopic evidence, concurrent diseases were detected in 57.3% (39/68) of laparoscopic patients versus 8.8% (3/34) in the conventional ones (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: Even if limited by its retrospective nature, the present experience shows that laparoscopic appendectomy is as safe and effective as conventional surgery, has a higher diagnostic yield, causes less trauma, and offers a more rapid postoperative recovery. Such features make laparoscopy a challenging alternative to laparotomy in premenopausal women referred for urgent abdominal or pelvic surgery, or both.

[Minilaparoscopic appendectomy: which indications?]. / L'appendicectomia minilaparoscopica: quale indicazione?

Laparoscopy has gained widespread acceptance in common surgical practice as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool. Suspected appendicitis is still a diagnostic challenge to the general surgeon. A correct diagnosis is crucial because of the various diseases that may be responsible for the same symptoms, in order to plan the appropriate procedure or avoid an unnecessary laparotomy. Laparoscopy is the only minimally invasive technique to allow at the same time for adequate diagnosis, appropriate treatment and the best abdominal approach. Minilaparoscopy would appear to be a natural further step in the development of this technique. The aim of the present work was to illustrate retrospectively the results of an initial case-control study of minilaparoscopy vs. laparoscopy carried out at our institution. Between January and December 2002 a total of 86 patients underwent emergency and/or urgent appendectomy. Among them, 68 (79%) were operated on laparoscopically (37 [54.4%] with a minilaparoscopic approach and 31 with conventional laparoscopy), while 18 (21%) were treated by laparotomy, as performed by a well-trained surgical team. In the minilaparoscop group we registered no conversions to laparotomy and only one major postoperative complication (intra-abdominal abscess treated laparoscopically). As regards the postoperative period, generally speaking, the patients' conditions (analgesic treatment, flatus, diet, hospital discharge) were broadly the same as in the laparoscopic group. Though limited by its initial retrospective character, the present study shows that minilaparoscopic appendectomy is as safe and effective as classical laparoscopic surgery, and seems to be associated with less trauma and a more rapid postoperative recovery. Such features make minilaparoscopy a challenging alternative to conventional laparoscopy (and, of course, laparotomy) in patients referred for urgent abdominal and/or pelvic surgery.

[Our experience in the treatment of hemorrhoids and circumferential mucosal rectal prolapse using Longo muco-prolapsectomy ]. / Nostra esperienza nel trattamento della malattia emorroidaria e del prolasso mucoso circonferenziale del retto mediante mucoprolassectomia secondo Longo.

The authors report their experience with the treatment of hemorrhoid disease and circumferential mucosal rectal prolapse with the use of a mechanical suturing device, according to the Longo technique. Over the period from March 98 to December 2000, 106 patients were treated with the above-mentioned procedure (100 patients for haemorrhoids and 6 for circumferential prolapse). Twenty-one patients had grade 4, 77 grade 3 and only 2 grade 2 disease. One hundred patients were followed up over a median period of 16.5 months (for the group with haemorrhoids) and 19 months (for the prolapse group). In 81% of cases the procedure was one-day surgery. Mucohaemorrhoidectomy with a stapler was well tolerated in terms of severity of postoperative symptomatology: in 42% of the patients operated on there was no need for any analgesic treatment. The time to return to work was 9.9 days for self-employed subjects and 15.6 days for the others. Refinement of the procedure and better patient selection may improve the results achieved with this technique. Stapled haemorrhoidectomy may be regarded as a sound technique that should be part of the surgeon's armamentarium. We suggest an "eclectic" approach whereby the stapling procedure may be included among the possible therapeutic options, with a view to optimising the choice of therapy for each individual patient.

Peritonitis: laparoscopic approach.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy has became as the preferred surgical approach to a number of different diseases because it allows a correct diagnosis and treatment at the same time. In abdominal emergencies, both components of treatment - exploration to identify the causative pathology and performance of an appropriate operation - can often be accomplished via laparoscopy. There is still a debate of peritonitis as a contraindication to this kind of approach. Aim of the present work is to illustrate retrospectively the results of a case-control experience of laparoscopic vs. open surgery for abdominal peritonitis emergencies carried out at our institution. METHODS: From January 1992 and January 2002 a total of 935 patients (mean age 42.3 +/- 17.2 years) underwent emergent and/or urgent surgery. Among them, 602 (64.3%) were operated on laparoscopically (of whom 112 -18.7% - with peritonitis), according to the presence of a surgical team trained in laparoscopy. Patients with a history of malignancy, more than two previous major abdominal surgeries or massive bowel distension were not treated Laparoscopically. Peritonitis was not considered contraindication to Laparoscopy. RESULTS: The conversion rate was 23.2% in patients with peritonitis and was mainly due to the presence of dense intra-abdominal adhesions. Major complications ranged as high as 5.3% with a postoperative mortality of 1.7%. A definitive diagnosis was accomplished in 85.7% (96 pat.) of cases, and 90.6% (87) of these patients were treated successfully by Laparoscopy. CONCLUSION: Even if limited by its retrospective feature, the present experience let us to consider the Laparoscopic approach to abdominal peritonitis emergencies a safe and effective as conventional surgery, with a higher diagnostic yield and allows for lesser trauma and a more rapid postoperative recovery. Such features make Laparoscopy a challenging alternative to open surgery in the management algorithm for abdominal peritonitis emergencies.