Single-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: 5-Year Follow-up of Weight Loss, Comorbidity Resolution, and Cost.

Background. The Single-Port Instrument Delivery Extended Reach (SPIDER) surgical system is a safe revolutionary technology that defeated difficulties of single-incision surgery. We assessed the long-term outcomes of SPIDER sleeve gastrectomy (SPIDER SG) versus conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in morbidly obese patients. Methods. Retrospective review of patients who underwent SPIDER SG or LSG in our center matched by the date of surgery (2012-2013). We reviewed weight loss results up to 5 years, complication rates, procedure and hospitalization durations, financial cost, and effect on comorbidities. Results. Patients underwent 200 SPIDER SG and 220 LSG. At baseline, SPIDER SG versus LSG patients had a mean body mass index of 43.8 ± 5.6 and 48.6 ± 8.1 kg/m2, respectively. At 1 year, both groups had comparable percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL). At 5 years, SPIDER SG had %EWL of 54.6 ± 24.8 compared with 57.8 ± 29.9 in LSG (P = .4). Nine SPIDER SG (4.5%) required conversion to LSG. Complications occurred in both groups: 4% versus 4.1% (P = .95). At 2-year follow-up, diabetes mellitus was reversed in 43% of SPIDER SG and 62% LSG. Despite a shorter hospital stay in SPIDER SG, the total cost was significantly higher ($2 041 477) compared with LSG ($1 773 834). The mean score of scar satisfaction was significantly more in SPIDER SG. Conclusions. SPIDER SG was safe with long-term effects on weight loss comparable to LSG. Despite the higher cost of SPIDER SG, a shorter hospital stay and better cosmesis were observed.

Blunt splenic trauma: Assessment, management and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The approach for diagnosis and management of blunt splenic injury (BSI) has been considerably shifted towards non-operative management (NOM). We aimed to review the current practice for the evaluation, diagnosis and management of BSI. METHODS: A traditional narrative literature review was carried out using PubMed, MEDLINE and Google scholar search engines. We used the keywords "Traumatic Splenic injury", "Blunt splenic trauma", "management" between December 1954 and November 2014. RESULTS: Most of the current guidelines support the NOM or minimally approaches in hemodynamically stable patients. Improvement in the diagnostic modalities guide the surgeons to decide the timely management pathway Though, there is an increasing shift from operative management (OM) to NOM of BSI; NOM of high grade injury is associated with a greater rate of failure, prolonged hospital stay, risk of delayed hemorrhage and transfusion-associated infections. Some cases with high grade BSI could be successfully treated conservatively, if clinically feasible, while some patients with lower grade injury might end-up with delayed splenic rupture. Therefore, the selection of treatment modalities for BSI should be governed by patient clinical presentation, surgeon's experience in addition to radiographic findings. CONCLUSION: About one-fourth of the blunt abdominal trauma accounted for BSI. A high index of clinical suspicion along with radiological diagnosis helps to identify and characterize splenic injuries with high accuracy and is useful for timely decision-making to choose between OM or NOM. Careful selection of NOM is associated with high success rate with a lower rate of morbidity and mortality.