Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 30, Issue 11, pp 4793–4799 | Cite as

Outcomes in laparoscopic cholecystectomy by single incision with SPIDER surgical system are comparable to conventional multiport technique: one surgeon’s experience

  • Jose E. Escobar-Dominguez
  • Pedro Garcia-Quintero
  • Christian Hernandez-Murcia
  • Juan-Carlos Verdeja
Article

Abstract

Background

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy has emerged as an alternative to conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Technical difficulty, prolonged surgical times and increased complication rates have been reported in single-incision laparoscopic surgery. One of the concerns is lack of triangulation of instruments. The SPIDER® surgical system is a single-incision laparoscopic device that utilizes flexible instruments with the purpose of achieving adequate triangulation. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of SPIDER versus LC.

Methods

A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent LC and SPIDER cholecystectomy by a single surgeon during a concurrent 44-month period at Baptist Health South Florida hospitals was performed focusing on demographics, indication for surgery, complications and incisional hernia rates. Exclusion criteria were concomitant surgery and hernia repair at the time of surgery.

Results

A total of 612 patients underwent minimally invasive cholecystectomy: 279 cases for SPIDER cholecystectomy and 333 for multiport LC. Baseline differences in patient characteristics between the SPIDER and LC groups were statistically significant. The SPIDER group had younger and healthier patients (lower ASA classification scores) with predominant diagnosis of cholelithiasis (69 %) compared to the LC group which had more complex cases. Total complications rate for both SPIDER and LC were 0.4 % (n = 1) and 3 % (n = 10), respectively. Conversion to open cholecystectomy occurred in one patient from the LC group (0.3 %). Conversion rate from SPIDER to additional ports or LC was performed in 5 cases (1.8 %) with no conversions to open surgery. Hemoperitoneum was reported in 2 cases, one for each approach, requiring reoperation.

Conclusion

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with SPIDER is a safe and feasible technique with similar outcomes to multiport LC. However, statistical significant difference was reported in baseline characteristics of both groups. No incisional hernias were reported in this case series for either technique.

Keywords

SPIDER cholecystectomy Flexible laparoscopy Single-port cholecystectomy Single-incision cholecystectomy Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosures

Jose E. Escobar-Dominguez, MD, Christian Hernandez-Murcia, MD, and Pedro Garcia, MD, have no conflicts of interests of financial ties to disclose. Juan-Carlos Verdeja, MD, is a consultant and has received honoraria from TransEnterix, Inc., Teleflex Inc. and Cardica Inc.

References

  1. 1.
    Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (2010) Guidelines for the clinical application of laparoscopic biliary tract surgery. Surg Endosc 14:771–772Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Souba Wiley W, Fink Mitchell P, Jurkovich Gregory J, Kaiser Larry P, Pearce William H, Pemberton John H, Soper Nathaniel J (2007) ACS surgery: principles and practice, 6th edn. WebMD Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hao L, Liu M, Zhu H, Li Z (2012) Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with uncomplicated gallbladder disease: a meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 22:487–497CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Davila FJ, Tsin DA, Gutierrez LS, Lemus J, Jesus R, Davila MR, Torres-Morales J (2011) Transvaginal single port cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 21:203–206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Seven R, Barbaros U (2009) Needloscopy-assisted transvaginal cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 19:e61–e63. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31819caa22 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Joseph M, Phillips MR, Farrell TM, Rupp CC (2012) Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy is associated with a higher bile duct injury rate: a review and a word of caution. Ann Surg 256:1–6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marks JM, Phillips MS, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, DeNoto G et al (2013) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1-year results of a prospective randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 216:1037–1047CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wernberg JA (2014) Biliary tract surgery. Surg Clin North Am. 94:xv–xvi. doi: 10.1016/j.suc.2014.02.002
  9. 9.
    Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S, Carcoforo P, Donini I (1997) One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84:695CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cusati D, Swain JM, Kendrick M, Bingener J (2011) Evaluation of commercially available port access devices for single-incision laparoscopy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 21:e134–e137. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e318216f49b CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gonzalez AM, Rabaza JR, Donkor C, Romero RJ, Kosanovic R, Verdeja JC (2013) Single-incision cholecystectomy: a comparative study of standard laparoscopic, robotic, and SPIDER platforms. Surg Endosc 27:4524–4531CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kroh M, El-Hayek K, Rosenblatt S, Chand B, Escobar P, Kaouk J et al (2011) First human surgery with novel single-port robotic system: cholecystectomy using the da Vinci Single-Site platform. Surg Endosc 25:3566–3573CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wren SM, Curet MJ (2011) Single-port robotic cholecystectomy: results from a first human use clinical study of the new da Vinci single-site surgical platform. Arch Surg 146:1122–1127CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barband A, Fakhree MB, Kakaei F, Daryani A (2012) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using glove port in comparison with standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy SILC using glove port. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 22:17–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Day W, Lau P (2011) Novel “glove” access port for single port surgery in right hemicolectomy: a pilot study. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 21(3):e145–e147. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31821aa97e.2011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Orozakunov E, Akyol C, Tantoglu U, Basceken SI, Kayilioglu IS, Bumin CS, Cakmak A (2013) Surgical glove-port single-incision laparoscopic gastric wedge resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: initial experience with 2 cases. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 23:e160–e161. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31828b891b CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sodergren MH, Aslanyan A, Mcgregor CG, Purkayastha S, Malhotra S, Darzi A, Paraskeva P (2014) Pain, well-being, body image and cosmesis: a comparison of single-port and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 23:223–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jørgensen LN, Rosenberg J, Al-Tayar H, Assaadzadeh S, Helgstrand F, Bisgaard T (2014) Randomized clinical trial of single- versus multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 101:347–355CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Qiu J, Yuan H, Chen S, He Z, Han P, Wu H (2013) Single-port versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 23:815–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weiss HG, Brunner W, Biebl MO, Schirnhofer J, Pimpl K, Mittermair C, Obrist C, Brunner E, Hell T (2014) Wound complications in 1145 consecutive transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic procedures. Ann Surg 259:89–95CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zehetner J, Pelipad D, Darehzereshki A, Mason RJ, Lipham JC, Katkhouda N (2013) Single-access laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 23:235–243CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mir Labrador J, Sánchez Artigues, de Rojas E, Albors Baga P, Fabra Ramis R (2014) Single port cholecystectomy. Glove Port Cir Esp 92:374–375CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oruc MT, Ugurlu MU (2013) Extraumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with standard laparoscopic instruments. Scand J Surg 102:209–214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pfluke JM, Parker M, Stauffer JA, Paetau AA, Bowers SP, Asbun HJ et al (2011) Laparoscopic surgery performed through a single incision: a systematic review of the current literature. J Am Coll Surg 212:113–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hussain A (2011) Difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: current evidence and strategies of management. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 21:211–217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosenberg J, Bisgaard T (2000) The difficult gallbladder: technical tips for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 10:249–252PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vivek MA, Augustine AJ, Rao RA (2014) comprehensive predictive scoring method for difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Minim Access Surg 10:62–67CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Antoniou SA, Pointner R, Granderath FA (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 25:367–377CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ingraham A, Cohen M, Ko C, Hall B (2010) A current profile and assessment of North American Cholecystectomy: results from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg 211:176–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Keus F, de Jong JA, Goozsen HG, van Laarhoven CJ (2006) Laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cohcrane Database Syst Rev. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006231 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jose E. Escobar-Dominguez
    • 1
  • Pedro Garcia-Quintero
    • 1
  • Christian Hernandez-Murcia
    • 1
  • Juan-Carlos Verdeja
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Baptist Health Medical Group – General SurgeryBaptist Health South FloridaMiamiUSA
  2. 2.Herbert Wertheim College of MedicineFlorida International UniversityMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations