Laparoscopic retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy using an ergonomic chair: demonstration of technique and matched-pair analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To present the technique and long-term results of retroperitoneal laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), focusing on the impact of an ergonomic platform. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2000 and May 2016, 287 patients (193 men, 94 women) underwent LPN performed by four surgeons. The median (range) patient age was 59 (19-85) years, tumour size 3.1 (1-9) cm and PADUA score 7.3 (6-12). Access was retroperitoneal in 235 cases (82%). Since October 2010, we have used the ETHOS™ chair (ETHOS™ , Seattle, WA, USA) during excision of the tumour in 130 patients (45.3%). A total of 51 tumours (17.7%) were excised without ischaemia and 226 (78.7%) under warm ischaemia, with clamping of the renal artery using an enucleo-resection technique. We suture the resection bed and perform renorrhaphy using a barbed-suture pre-loaded with absorbable LAPRA-TY™ clips (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA). The impact of the ETHOS chair was examined using a matched-pair analysis (66 with ETHOS chair vs 67 without ETHOS chair). RESULTS: The median (range) operating time was 146 (60-325) min, the median (range) estimated blood loss was 99 (10-3 000) mL and the mean (range) warm ischaemia time (WIT) was 17.1 (7-47) min. Histology showed 240 (83.6%) renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) and 46 (15.9%) benign tumours. The cumulative overall disease-free survival rate after a median (range) follow-up of 84 (3-155) months was 100% for 203 pT1 RCCs and local recurrence was observed in one patient (0.4%), who was managed by radical nephrectomy. There were two conversions (0.7%) to open surgery, both to hand-assisted laparoscopy. Perirenal haematoma was observed in 13 patients (4.5%). A total of 20 patients (6.9%) required transfusions (2-11 units). We observed five urine leaks (1.7%) requiring prolonged drainage. The median (range) length of hospital stay was 5 (3-24) days. Three patients developed arteriovenous fistulas, which were successfully occluded by superselective embolization (1.0%). Use of the ETHOS chair resulted in shorter operating time (134.7 vs 168.5 min; P = 0.04), including WIT (13.1 vs 15.9 min; P = 0.01), and a lower complication rate (15 vs 29.8%; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is technically difficult but oncologically effective. Standardization and simplification of endoscopic suturing using the ETHOS chair significantly improved the outcomes of the surgical procedure.

Combining of ETHOS Operating Ergonomic Platform, Three-dimensional Laparoscopic Camera, and Radius Surgical System Manipulators Improves Ergonomy in Urologic Laparoscopy: Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopy and da Vinci in a Pelvi Trainer.

BACKGROUND: Posture, vision, and instrumentation limitations are the main predicaments of conventional laparoscopy. OBJECTIVE: To combine the ETHOS surgical chair, the three-dimensional laparoscope, and the Radius Surgical System manipulators, and compare the system with conventional laparoscopy and da Vinci in terms of task completion times and discomfort. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen trainees performed the three main laparoscopic suturing tasks of the Heilbronn training program (IV: simulation of dorsal venous complex suturing; V: circular suturing of tubular structure; and VI: urethrovesical anastomosis) in a pelvi trainer. The tasks were performed conventionally, utilizing the three devices, and robotically. Task completion times were recorded and the surgeon discomfort was evaluated using questionnaires. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Task completion times were compared using nonparametric Wilcoxon signed rank test and ergonomic scores were compared using Pearson chi-square test. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The use of the full laparoscopic set (ETHOS chair, three-dimensional laparoscopic camera, Radius Surgical System needle holders), resulted in a significant improvement of the completion time of the three tested tasks compared with conventional laparoscopy (p<0.001) and similar to da Vinci surgery. After completing Tasks IV, V, and VI conventionally, 12 (80%), 13 (86.7%), and 13 (86.7%) of the 15 trainees, respectively, reported heavy total discomfort. The full laparoscopic system nullified heavy discomfort for Tasks IV and V and minimized it (6.7%) for the most demanding Task VI. Especially for Task VI, all trainees gained benefit, by using the system, in terms of task completion times and discomfort. The limited trainee robotic experience and the questionnaire subjectivity could be a potential limitation. CONCLUSIONS: The ergonomic laparoscopic system offers significantly improved task completion times and ergonomy than conventional laparoscopy. Furthermore, it demonstrates comparable results to robotic surgery. PATIENT SUMMARY: The study was conducted in a pelvi trainer and no patients were recruited.

Direct comparison of the different conventional laparoscopic positions with the ethos surgical platform in a laparoscopic pelvic surgery simulation setting.

OBJECTIVE: Laparoscopic surgery can be harmful to surgeons requiring a prolonged learning curve due to significant ergonomic drawbacks. Based on preliminary clinical experience, we present an experimental evaluation of the second-generation ETHOS™ operating chair by comparing it with two different operating positions of conventional laparoscopic pelvic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ETHOS operation platform consists of a seat like a saddle and five more parts that can be adjusted individually to support the surgeon's trunk and extremities. This operation platform was tested in 30 trainees who performed three standard suturing exercises in a pelvitrainer, approximating a linear and a U-shaped incision, made on the skin of a chicken leg, and completing an urethrovesical anastomosis, on a pig bladder specimen model, using interrupted sutures. The trainees performed each exercise in standing laterally to pelvitrainer (torero position) vs standing behind pelvi-trainer and sitting on ETHOS. The mean values, from all times and for each exercise and position, were documented, and the participants filled out a validated questionnaire focusing on ergonomic issues. RESULTS: There were no significant differences among the different training modalities, in step 1 and step 2. However, in step 3, which mimics the urethrovesical anastomosis, the mean times were statistically significant significantly less by using ETHOS (p<0.0001). The mean times of training in step 3 were 41.2 minutes in the behind the camera position, 49 minutes in torero position, and 39.7 minutes by using ETHOS. The position that was maintained, during the exercises, was mainly responsible for the improvement noted in the ergonomic scores. CONCLUSIONS: The new operating platform (ETHOS chair) can significantly improve ergonomics in laparoscopy particularly concerning difficult steps like intracorporeal suturing. This may also improve the urethrovesical anastomosis times in a clinical setting.