Multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy: results of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (MUSIC trial).

BACKGROUND: Single-port laparoscopic surgery as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign disease has not yet been accepted as a standard procedure. The aim of the multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy trial was to compare morbidity rates after single-access (SPC) and standard laparoscopy (MPC). METHODS: This non-inferiority phase 3 trial was conducted at 20 hospital surgical departments in six countries. At each centre, patients were randomly assigned to undergo either SPC or MPC. The primary outcome was overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01104727). RESULTS: The study was conducted between April 2011 and May 2015. A total of 600 patients were randomly assigned to receive either SPC (n = 297) or MPC (n = 303) and were eligible for data analysis. Postsurgical complications within 60 days were recorded in 13 patients (4.7 %) in the SPC group and in 16 (6.1 %) in the MPC group (P = 0.468); however, single-access procedures took longer [70 min (range 25-265) vs. 55 min (range 22-185); P < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in hospital length of stay or pain VAS scores between the two groups. An incisional hernia developed within 1 year in six patients in the SPC group and in three in the MPC group (P = 0.331). Patients were more satisfied with aesthetic results after SPC, whereas surgeons rated the aesthetic results higher after MPC. No difference in quality of life scores, as measured by the gastrointestinal quality of life index at 60 days after surgery, was observed between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients undergoing cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease, SPC is non-inferior to MPC in terms of safety but it entails a longer operative time. Possible concerns about a higher risk of incisional hernia following SPC do not appear to be justified. Patient satisfaction with aesthetic results was greater after SPC than after MPC.

The EURO-NOTES clinical registry for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: a 2-year activity report.

BACKGROUND: The EURO-NOTES Clinical Registry (ECR) was established as a European database to allow the monitoring and safe introduction of Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES). The aim of this study was to analyze different techniques applied and relative results during the first 2 years of the ECR. METHODS: The ECR was designed as a voluntary database with online access. All members of the European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery were requested to participate in the registry. Demographic and therapy data as well as data on the postoperative course are recorded in the ECR in an anonymous way. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients who underwent NOTES procedures were included in the study. Four different hybrid techniques for 435 cholecystectomies were described, registering postoperative complications in 2.8% of patients, addition of a single trocar in 5.3%, and conversions to laparoscopy in 0.5%. Both flexible endoscopic and rigid laparoscopic cholecystectomy techniques proved to be safe and effective with minor differences. There was a shorter operative time in the rigid laparoscopic group. Thirty-three appendectomies were reported by transgastric and transvaginal techniques, with transvaginal techniques scoring shorter operative time and hospital stay, but with a frequent need to add more trocars. Overall complications occurred in 14.7% of patients but they did not differ significantly among the different techniques. One transvaginal and 31 transanal sigmoidectomies were included for prolapse and diverticulitis, with four postoperative complications (12.5%), but none needing further treatment. Twenty peroral esophageal myotomies were included with three postoperative complications (15.0%), but none needing further treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Five years since the introduction of NOTES into clinical practice, hybrid techniques have gained considerable clinical application. Several NOTES hybrid cholecystectomy and appendectomy techniques are practicable and safe alternatives to laparoscopic procedures. Also, sigmoidectomies and peroral esophageal myotomies were described, proving feasibility and safety. Nevertheless, the real benefit of NOTES for patients still needs to be assessed.