“Trials comparing handsewn with stapled anastomoses in colon and rectal surgery have not found statistical differences. Despite this, authors have differed in their conclusions as to which technique is superior. To help determine whether differences in patient outcomes are present, a meta-analysis of all trials was performed.”
Continue reading“The anatomical position of the inferior epigastric artery (IEA) subjects it to risk of injury during abdominal procedures that are close to the artery, such as laparoscopic trocar insertion, insertion of intra-abdominal drains, Tenckhoffâ catheter (peritoneal dialysis catheter) and paracentesis. This article aims to raise the awareness of the anatomical variations of the course of the IEA in relation to abdominal landmarks in order to define a safer zone for laparoscopic ancillary trocar placement. Methods of managing the IEA injury as well as techniques to minimise the risk of injury to the IEA are reviewed and discussed.”
Continue readingNishimura M, et al. Complications Related to the Initial Trocar Insertion of 3 Different Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2019 Jan;26(1):63-70.
Emory users, request article via ILLiad.
This systematic review aimed to investigate complications related to initial trocar insertion among 3 different laparoscopic techniques: Veress needle (VN) entry, direct trocar entry (DTE), and open entry (OE). A literature search was completed, and complications were assessed. Major vessel injury, gastrointestinal injury, and solid organ injury were defined as major complications. Minor complications were defined as subcutaneous emphysema, extraperitoneal insufflation, omental emphysema, trocar site bleeding, and trocar site infection. Arm-based network meta-analyses were performed to identify the differences in complications among the 3 techniques. Seventeen studies were included in the quantitative analysis. DTE resulted in fewer major complications when compared with VN entry although the difference was not significant (p = .23) as well as significantly fewer minor complications (p < .001). There were no significant differences in minor complications when comparing OE and DTE (p = .74). Fewer major complications were observed with OE compared with VN entry although the difference was not significant (p = .31). There were significantly fewer minor complications for patients who underwent OE (p = .01). DTE patients experienced the least number of minor complications followed by VN entry and OE. In conclusion, major complications are extremely rare, and all 3 insertion methods can be performed without mortality.
Andersen P, et al. Iatrogenic ureteral injury in colorectal cancer surgery: a nationwide study comparing laparoscopic and open approaches. Surg Endosc. 2015 Jun;29(6): 1406-12.
Full-text for Emory users.
Results: A total of 18,474 patients had a resection for colorectal cancer. Eighty-two ureteral injuries were related to colorectal surgery. The rate of ureteral injuries in the entire cohort was 0.44 %, with 37 (0.59 %) injuries in the laparoscopic group (n = 6,291) and 45 (0.37 %) injuries in the open group (n = 12,183), (P = 0.03). No difference in ureteral injury was found in relation to surgical approach in colon cancer patients. In rectum cancer patients (n = 5,959), the laparoscopic approach was used in 1,899 patients, and 19 (1.00 %) had ureteral injuries, whereas 17 (0.42 %) of 4,060 patients who underwent an open resection had a ureteral injury. In multivariate analysis adjusted for age, gender, ASA score, BMI, tumor stage, preoperative chemo-radiation, calendar year, and specialty of the surgeon, the laparoscopic approach was associated with an increased risk of ureteral injury, OR = 2.67; 95 % CI 1.26-5.65.
Conclusion: In this nationwide study laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer with curative intent was associated with a significantly increased risk of iatrogenic ureteral injury compared to open surgery.
Zimmitti G, Vauthey JN, et al. Systematic use of an intraoperative air leak test
at the time of major liver resection reduces the rate of postoperative biliary
complications. J Am Coll Surg. 2013 Dec;217(6):1028-37.
STUDY DESIGN: Rates of postoperative biliary complications were compared among 103 patients who underwent ALT and 120 matched patients operated on before ALT was used. All study patients underwent major hepatectomy without bile duct resection at 3 high-volume hepatobiliary centers between 2008 and 2012. The ALT was performed by placement of a transcystic cholangiogram catheter to inject air into the biliary tree, the upper abdomen was filled with saline, and the distal common bile duct was manually occluded. Uncontrolled bile ducts were identified by localization of air bubbles at the transection surface and were directly repaired.
RESULTS: The 2 groups were similar in diagnosis, chemotherapy use, tumor number and size, resection extent, surgery duration, and blood loss (all, p > 0.05). Single or multiple uncontrolled bile ducts were intraoperatively detected and repaired in 62.1% of ALT vs 8.3% of non-ALT patients (p < 0.001). This resulted in a lower rate of postoperative bile leaks in ALT (1.9%) vs non-ALT patients (10.8%; p = 0.008). Independent risk factors for postoperative bile leaks included extended hepatectomy (p = 0.031), caudate resection (p = 0.02), and not performing ALT (p = 0.002) (odds ratio = 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3-11.8; odds ratio = 4.0; 95% CI, 1.1-14.3; and odds ratio = 11.8; 95% CI, 2.4-58.8, respectively).
More forthcoming…
One discussion this week included intraoperative cardiac arrest.
Reference: Moitra VK, et al. Cardiac arrest in the operating room: resuscitation and management for the anesthesiologist: part 1. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2018 Mar;126(3):876-888. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002596.
Summary: Cardiac arrest in the operating room and procedural areas has a different spectrum of causes (ie, hypovolemia, gas embolism, and hyperkalemia), and rapid and appropriate evaluation and management of these causes require modification of traditional cardiac arrest algorithms. There is a small but growing body of literature describing the incidence, causes, treatments, and outcomes of circulatory crisis and perioperative cardiac arrest. These events are almost always witnessed, frequently known, and involve rescuer providers with knowledge of the patient and their procedure.
One discussion involved the comparison of outcomes for TEP and TAPP for hernia repair.
Reference: Kockerling F, et al. TEP or TAPP for recurrent inguinal hernia repair-registered-based comparison of the outcome. Surgical Endoscopy. 2017 Oct;31(10):3872-3882. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5416-1
Summary: To date, no randomized trials have been conducted to compare the TEP vs TAPP outcome for recurrent inguinal hernia repair. Between September 1, 2009 and August 31, 2013 data were entered into the Herniamed Registry on a total of 2246 patients with recurrent inguinal hernia repair following previous open primary operation in either TAPP (n = 1,464) or TEP technique (n = 782).
No significant differences were found between the recurrent operations in TEP vs TAPP technique with regard to the intraoperative complications, complication-related reoperations, re-recurrence rates, rates of pain at rest, pain on exertion, or chronic pain requiring treatment. Unfavorable results were identified only with regard to the higher seroma rates associated with TAPP; these responded to conservative treatment.
In summary, both TEP and TAPP can be recommended as effective techniques for treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia following previous open primary operation. The decision to use one or the other technique should be based solely on the surgeon’s expertise. The registry study presented here thus confirms the recommendations in the guidelines on laparo-endoscopic treatment of recurrent inguinal hernia following previous open primary operation.
Surgical Focus 