Magnetically anchored camera and percutaneous instruments maintain triangulation and improve cosmesis compared with single-site and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated operative outcomes and ergonomics for a magnetic camera (MAGS) used in conjunction with percutaneous instruments [percutaneous surgical set (PSS)] compared with single-site laparoscopic (SSL) and conventional laparoscopic (LAP) cholecystectomy techniques. METHODS: Four surgical trainees each performed three porcine cholecystectomies using three randomized techniques including MAGS/PSS, SSL, and LAP. The operative outcomes, procedure-specific ratings (1-5 scale; 1 = superior), workload (1-10 scale; 1 = superior), and global impressions (1-10 scale; 10 = superior) were recorded. Comparisons used analysis of variance (ANOVA) on ranks (Kruskal-Wallis), and p values lower than 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: The operative outcomes were similar except for significantly higher blood loss with SSL (16.3 ± 10.3) versus LAP (2.8 ± 1.5; p < 0.05) but not with MAGS/PSS (4.8 ± 3.8). Several inadvertent tissue-damaging events occurred with SSL but not with MAGS/PSS or LAP. The incision was significantly shorter with MAGS/PSS (29.3 ± 2.8 mm) and SSL (29.3 ± 2.5 mm) than with LAP (48.0 ± 3.6 mm; p < 0.05). Compared with SSL (3.6 ± 0.5), the procedure-specific ratings significantly favored MAGS/PSS (2.8 ± 0.4) and LAP (1.7 ± 0.2; p < 0.05). Ergonomics and technical challenges both were rated significantly inferior with SSL (4.3 ± 1.0 and 3.8 ± 0.5, respectively) versus LAP (1.5 ± 0.6 and 2.0 ± 0.8, respectively; p < 0.05) but not with MAGS/PSS (2.5 ± 1.0 and 3.0 ± 0.8, respectively). Both MAGS/PSS (4.5 ± 0.5) and SSL (4.8 ± 1.0) were associated with a significantly greater workload than LAP (2.5 ± 0.6; p < 0.05). Global impression ratings were significantly higher for LAP (8.7 ± 1.3) versus SSL (5.8 ± 2.0; p < 0.05) but not for MAGS/PSS (7.1 ± 1.8). Cosmesis was significantly better with MAGS/PSS (9.5 ± 0.6) versus LAP (6.5 ± 2.4; p < 0.05) but not with SSL (8.8 ± 1.3). CONCLUSION: The MAGS/PSS technique allows better triangulation and fewer technical difficulties than SSL and better cosmesis than LAP. Further development of these devices is warranted.

Laparoscopic resection of the pancreatic tail with splenic preservation.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluation of feasibility and efficacy of left resection of the pancreas with preservation of the splenic vessels and spleen as a laparoscopic procedure. BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic technique is used less often on the pancreas than on other organs. The most common indications are enucleation of endocrine-active tumors and distal resections for benign primary pancreatic lesions. An important premise of these operations is atraumatic removal of as little of the pancreas as possible and the preservation of the spleen and its main vessels. METHODS: Five patients aged 16 to 56 years, all female, underwent laparoscopic left resection of the pancreas with preservation of the splenic vessels and the spleen. There were 4 cases of benign epithelial tumors of the pancreas and 1 case of a left-sided adrenal cyst, which pre- and intraoperatively gave the impression of a pancreatic cystadenoma. RESULTS: In all 5 cases, the laparoscopic procedure was completed with preservation of the splenic vessels and the spleen itself. No patient required blood transfusion, and there was only 1 postoperative fluid collection at the site of the tumor resection, which was drained percutaneously on the fourth postoperative day. CONCLUSION: Distal pancreas resection can be performed as a laparoscopic procedure, with the usual advantages that this techniques has for the patient. Optimal closure of the cut edge of the pancreas and the preservation of the spleen and its main vessels are the most important aspects of this operation.