Laparoscopic Mobilization of the Splenic Flexure as the First Step of Restorative Colorectal Resection.

Background: Mobilization of the colonic splenic flexure (SFM) is an essential surgical step of the restorative rectal resections. However, the surgical procedures are technically complex thereby overcoming the learning curve may not be an easy process. Looking for improved expertise and better outcomes, in 2016, we have decided to routinely perform SFM as a first step of all the laparoscopic or robotic sigmoid and rectal resections. The aim of this paper is to describe the technique of laparoscopic splenic flexure mobilization and to discuss the advantages of using it as the first surgical step in colorectal rectal resection analyzing our last 12 months experience (2018). Method: A detailed description of the laparoscopic surgical technique for SFM is performed. There are four routes for SFM: two from medial to lateral, one starting from the splenic vein the other one from the promontory, a superior to inferior approach and a lateral to medial approach. However, the combination of different maneuvers for an easier, safer approach decreases the morbidity and is saving surgical time. Results: Between January and December 2018, 47 patients had SPM as a first step of the performed colorectal procedure in our institution. There were 30 patients with rectal cancer, 10 with sigmoidal tumors, five with sigmoidal resection for diverticulitis and Hartmann reversal was indicated in two. The robotic approach has been used in 40% (16 patients). No intraoperative incidents were associated with the SFM. No colorectal fistula was encountered. No early cancer recurrence, deaths or major complication were encountered. The mean follow-up for these patients is 7 months (range, 4-12 months). Conclusions: In our perspective, the routine mobilization of the splenic flexure as a first step of the colorectal restorative resections associate many advantages and these strategies should be largely used. There is a learning curve involved in such procedure and it can easily be overcome in high volume centers.

Robotic Approach in Benign and Malignant Esophageal Tumors; A Preliminary Seven Case Series.

Esophageal surgery has been recognized as very challenging for surgeons and risky for patients. Thoracoscopic approach have proved its benefit in esophageal surgery but has some drawbacks as tremor and limited degrees of freedom, contra-intuitive movements and fulcrum effect of the surgical tools. Robotic technology has been developed with the intent to overcome these limitations of the standard laparoscopy or thoracoscopy. These benefits of robotic procedure are most advantageous when operating in remote areas difficult to reach as in esophageal surgery. AIM: The aim of this paper is to present our small experience related with robotic approach in benign and malignant esophageal tumors and critically revise the evidence available about the use of the robotic technology for the treatment of these pathology. Methods: From January 2008 to September 2016 robotic surgery interventions related with benign or malignant esophageal tumors were performed in "Dan Setlacec" Center for General Surgery and Liver Transplantation of Fundeni Clinical Institute in seven patients. This consisted of dissection of the entire esophagus as part of an abdomino-thoracic-cervical procedure for esophageal cancer in 3 patients and the extirpation of an esophageal leiomyoma in 3 cases and a foregut esophageal cyst in one case. Results: All procedures except one were completed entirely using the da Vinci robotic system. The exception was the first case - a 3 cm leiomyoma of the inferior esophagus with ulceration of the superjacent esophageal mucosa. Pathology reports revealed three esophageal leiomyoma, one foregut cyst and three squamous cell carcinomas with free of tumor resection margins. The mean number of retrieved mediastinal nodes was 24 (22 - 27). The postoperative course was uneventful in four cases, in the other three a esophageal fistula occurred in the converted leiomyoma case (closed in the 14th postoperative day), a prolonged drainage in one esophageal cancer case and a temporary right recurrent nerve palsy in an other one. One patient with esophageal cancer and all patients with benign lesions are alive with no signs of recurrence and no symptomatology. CONCLUSION: Our experience is limited and we cannot conclude for the long term benefits of robotic surgery for esophageal tumors. In our experience the early outcomes were better then using classic open approach, but similar with the cases performed by thoracoscopic approach. We have noticed significant advantages of robotic surgery in relation of lymph node retrieval, leiomyoma dissection safe from esophageal mucosa and suturing. Ergonomics for the surgeon was incomparable better then with the thoracoscopic approach.