Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Application of Real-Time Augmented Reality Laparoscopic Navigation in Splenectomy for Massive Splenomegaly

  • Original Scientific Report
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the clinical impact and technical feasibility of augmented reality laparoscopic navigation (ARLN) system in laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly.

Methods

The clinical data of 17 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic splenectomy using ARLN (ARLN group) and 26 patients without ARLN guidance (Non-ARLN group) between January 2018 and April 2020 were enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed between the patients with and without ARLN guidance at a ratio of 1:1.

Results

Mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the ARLN-group than in the Non-ARLN group (306.6 ml vs. 462.6 ml, p = 0.047). All the patients in the ARLN-group achieved successful splenic artery dissection, while surgical success was achieved in 12 patients in the Non-ARLN group (p = 0.044). Postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the Non-ARLN group (3.8 days vs. 4.5 days, p = 0.040).

Conclusions

ARLN can provide feasible and accurate intraoperative image guidance, and it could be helpful in the performance of laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Delaitre B, Maignien B (1991) Splenectomy by the laparoscopic approach, Report of a case. Presse Med 20:2263

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Peng F, Lai L, Luo M et al (2020) Comparison of early postoperative results between robot-assisted and laparoscopic splenectomy for non-traumatic splenic diseases rather than portal hypertensive hypersplenism-a meta-analysis. Asian J Surg 43:36–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cordera F, Long KH, Nagorney DM et al (2003) Open versus laparoscopic splenectomy for idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura: clinical and economic analysis. Surgery 134:45–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sotomayor-Ramirez RK (2009) Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic splenectomy: review of 14 adult cases using the lateral approach. Bol Asoc Med P R 101:43–49

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Casaccia M, Torelli P, Pasa A, Sormani MP, Rossi E (2010) Putative predictive parameters for the outcome of laparoscopic splenectomy: a multicenter analysis performed on the Italian Registry of Laparoscopic Surgery of the Spleen. Ann Surg 251:287–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ohta M, Nishizaki T, Matsumoto T et al (2005) Analysis of risk factors for massive intraoperative bleeding during laparoscopic splenectomy. J Hepatob Pancreat Surg 12:433–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Owera A, Hamade AM, Bani HO, Ammori BJ (2006) Laparoscopic versus open splenectomy for massive splenomegaly: a comparative study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 16:241–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Patel AG, Parker JE, Wallwork B et al (2003) Massive splenomegaly is associated with significant morbidity after laparoscopic splenectomy. Ann Surg 238:235–240

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Tsamalaidze L, Stauffer JA, Permenter SL, Asbun HJ (2017) Laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly: does size matter? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 27:1009–1014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shin RD, Lis R, Levergood NR, Brooks DC, Shoji BT, Tavakkoli A (2019) Laparoscopic versus open splenectomy for splenomegaly: the verdict is unclear. Surg Endosc 33:1298–1303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu Y, Zhao L, Tang Y et al (2016) Laparoscopic versus open splenectomy and devascularization for massive splenomegaly due to portal hypertension. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technol Med Sci 36:876–880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Prevost GA, Eigl B, Paolucci I et al (2019) Efficiency, accuracy and clinical applicability of a new image-guided surgery system in 3D laparoscopic liver surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 36:876–880

    Google Scholar 

  13. Luo H, Yin D, Zhang S et al (2020) Augmented reality navigation for liver resection with a stereoscopic laparoscope. Comput Methods Progr Biomed 187:105099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Elmi-Terander A, Burstrom G, Nachabe R et al (2020) Augmented reality navigation with intraoperative 3D imaging vs fluoroscopy-assisted free-hand surgery for spine fixation surgery: a matched-control study comparing accuracy. Sci Rep 10:707

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sun X, Liu Z, Selim MH, Huang Y (2019) Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy advantages over complete laparoscopic splenectomy for splenomegaly. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 29:109–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Habermalz B, Sauerland S, Decker G et al (2008) Laparoscopic splenectomy: the clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc 22:821–848

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang P, Luo H, Zhu W et al (2019) Real-time navigation for laparoscopic hepatectomy using image fusion of preoperative 3D surgical plan and intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence imaging. Surg Endosc 12:364–371

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fang CH, Tao HS, Yang J et al (2015) Impact of three-dimensional reconstruction technique in the operation planning of centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 220:28–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Fang CH, Kong D, Wang X et al (2014) Three-dimensional reconstruction of the peripancreatic vascular system based on computed tomographic angiography images and its clinical application in the surgical management of pancreatic tumors. Pancreas 43:389–395

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fang CH, Zhu W, Wang H et al (2012) A new approach for evaluating the resectability of pancreatic and periampullary neoplasms. Pancreatology 12:364–371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mahon D, Rhodes M (2003) Laparoscopic splenectomy: size matters. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 85:248–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Koshenkov VP, Nemeth ZH, Carter MS (2012) Laparoscopic splenectomy: outcome and efficacy for massive and supramassive spleens. Am J Surg 203:517–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Al-Mulhim AS (2012) Laparoscopic splenectomy for massive splenomegaly in benign hematological diseases. Surg Endosc 26:3186–3189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cavaliere D, Solaini L, Di Pietrantonio D et al (2018) Robotic vs laparoscopic splenectomy for splenomegaly: A retrospective comparative cohort study. Int J Surg 55:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fan Y, Liu YY, Wang P et al (2015) Study on the efficacies of splenic pedicle transection by using manual manipulation and Endo-GIA procedure for laparoscopic splenectomy. Int J Clin Exp Med 8:19430–19435

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This project was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 81601576 and 81627805), the Opening Research Fund of Guangdong Province Key Laboratory of Biomedical Imaging (Grant No. GPKLBI201911), the Science and Technology Plan Project of Guangdong Province (Grant Nos. 2016A020220013 and 2017ZC0110), and the Science and Technology Plan Project of Guangzhou (Grant Nos. 201604020144 and 201704020141).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hepatic Surgery Center, Tongji Hospital,Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430030, China

    Hai-Su Tao

  2. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510280, China

    Hai-Su Tao, Jin-Yu Lin, Wang Luo, Rui Chen, Wen Zhu, Chi-Hua Fang & Jian Yang

  3. Guangdong Provincial Clinical and Engineering Center of Digital Medicine, Guangzhou, 510282, China

    Hai-Su Tao, Jin-Yu Lin, Wang Luo, Rui Chen, Wen Zhu, Chi-Hua Fang & Jian Yang

Authors
  1. Hai-Su Tao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jin-Yu Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wang Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rui Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wen Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chi-Hua Fang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jian Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Chi-Hua Fang or Jian Yang.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Hai-Su Tao and Jin-Yu Lin have contributed equally to this work.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 19 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tao, HS., Lin, JY., Luo, W. et al. Application of Real-Time Augmented Reality Laparoscopic Navigation in Splenectomy for Massive Splenomegaly. World J Surg 45, 2108–2115 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-021-06082-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-021-06082-8

Search

Navigation