Initial experience of a single surgeon for safety and feasibility of the Versius Robotic System in robot-assisted cholecystectomy and hernia repair.

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and perioperative outcomes of cholecystectomy and hernia repair performed with the Versius Robotic System by a surgeon with no prior robotic surgery experience. A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult patients who underwent cholecystectomy, inguinal, or umbilical hernia repair using the Versius Robotic System between August 2021 and June 2023 et al. Zahra Hospital, Dubai, UAE. A total of 105 patients (mean age 38.9 ± 9.2 years) were included. Significant correlations existed between the number of robot-assisted cholecystectomies and the operative metrics. As the number increased, the duration of the total operative (r = - 0.755, p < 0.001), docking (r = - 0.683, p < 0.001), and console (r = - 0.711, p < 0.001) times decreased, indicating improved efficiency with experience. This study demonstrates the safety and feasibility of the Versius Robotic System for cholecystectomy and hernia repair, even for surgeons lacking prior robotic surgery experience.

Laparoscopic cecectomy for diseases of the appendix and cecum

Introduction: The cecum is the first part of the large bowel. Cecectomy is a sufficient treatment for some patients, avoiding overtreatment by ileocolic resection. Purpose:The goal of this study was to review a surgeon's experience with laparoscopic cecectomy and provide a technical video demonstration of this uncommon operation. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted of all consecutive patients treated with laparoscopic cecectomy over a 16-year period. All operations were performed using a 3-trocar technique. The cecum was transected with 1 to 2 firings of a 60 millimeters linear stapler, preserving the ileocecal valve and ascending colon. Results: 19 patients were identified including 12 females (63.2%). Median age was 42 years (range 16-84). Indication for surgery included appendiceal pathology in 12 patients (63.2%) and cecal abnormality in 7 (38.9%). There was no conversion to open surgery. Median intraoperative blood loss was 25 ml (range 0-150 ml) and no patient received a blood transfusion. No intraoperative or postoperative complication was noted. The median length stay was 1 day (range 0-6). Readmission rate was 0%. Final appendiceal histopathology revealed acute/chronic appendicitis in 5 patients, mucinous cystadenoma in 4 patients. Cecal histopathology revealed adenoma in 4 patients. Median follow-up was 16 months (range 4-53). Conclusions: Laparoscopic cecectomy is a sufficient treatment for some patients with benign conditions of the appendix and cecum. It carries minimal morbidity. It should be considered as an alternative to segmental bowel resection in a select group of patients. (AU)

Colonic interposition vs. gastric pull-up after total esophagectomy.

Gastric pull-up is the most frequent reconstruction after esophagectomy. In this report we aimed to compare gastric pull-up with colonic interposition in terms of graft function and patient satisfaction. Of 62 patients undergoing esophagectomy, reconstruction was performed by colonic interposition in 11 and gastric pull-up in 51 (without pyloric drainage in 44 and with pyloric drainage in 7). All esophagectomies were performed transhiatally. Patient follow-up ranged from 6 to 132 months (median 14 months). Follow-up examinations were performed 1, 9, 15, and 24 months postoperatively. The following factors were evaluated: time to the start of oral liquid and solid nutrients without vomiting, frequency of regurgitation, presence of pillow staining (night regurgitation), postprandial fullness, and degree of satisfaction during and after eating compared between groups undergoing colonic interposition and gastric pull-up with or without pyloric drainage. Among patients undergoing gastric pull-up, regurgitation was observed in 22% to 27% during follow-up. None of the patients with colonic interposition had reflux or regurgitation. Twenty-five percent of patients with gastric pull-up without drainage and 66% of patients with gastric pull-up plus drainage had reflux esophagitis at 15 months. No esophagitis was observed in patients with colonic interposition during the same period. Overall satisfaction was superior in patients undergoing colonic interposition followed by gastric pull-up with no drainage. Colonic interposition after esophageal resection is a viable option. Our study suggests that function of the replacement is better in this group of patients.