Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS™) versus standard laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of performance using a surgical simulator

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS™) is a potentially less invasive approach than standard laparoscopy (LAP). However, SILS™ may not allow the same level of manual dexterity and technical performance compared to LAP. We compared the performance of standardized tasks from the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) program using either the LAP or the SILS™ technique.

Methods

Medical students, surgical residents, and attending physicians were recruited and divided into inexperienced (IE), laparoscopy-experienced (LE), and SILS™-experienced (SE) groups. Each subject performed standardized tasks from FLS, including peg transfer, pattern cutting, placement of ligating loop, and intracorporeal suturing using a standard three-port FLS box-trainer with standard laparoscopic instruments. For SILS™, the subjects used an FLS box-trainer modified to accept a SILS Port™ with two working ports for instruments and one port for a 30° 5-mm laparoscope. SILS™ tasks were performed with instruments capable of unilateral articulation. SILS™ suturing was performed both with and without an articulating EndoStitch™ device. Task scores, including cumulative laparoscopic FLS score (LS) and cumulative SILS™ FLS score (SS), were calculated using standard time and accuracy metrics.

Results

There were 27 participants in the study. SS was inferior to LS in all groups. LS increased with experience level, but was similar between LE and SE groups. SS increased with experience level and was different among all groups. SILS™ suturing using the articulating suturing device was superior to the use of a modified needle driver technique.

Conclusions

SILS™ is more technically challenging than standard laparoscopic surgery. Using currently available SILS™ platforms and instruments, even surgeons with SILS™ experience are unable to match their overall LAP performance. Specialized training curricula should be developed for inexperienced surgeons who wish to perform SILS™.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Romanelli JR, Earle DB (2009) Single-port laparoscopic surgery: an overview. Surg Endosc 23:1419–1427

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S, Carcoforo P, Donini I (1997) One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84:695

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chow A, Purkayastha S, Paraskeva P (2009) Appendicectomy and cholecystectomy using single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS): the first UK experience. Surg Innov 16:211–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barbaros U, Dinccag A (2009) Single incision laparoscopic splenectomy: the first two cases. J Gastrointest Surg 13:1520–1523

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Canes D, Berger A, Aron M, Brandina R, Goldfarb DA, Shoskes D, Desai MM, Gill IS (2010) Laparo-endoscopic single site (LESS) versus standard laparoscopic left donor nephrectomy: matched-pair comparison. Eur Urol 57(1):95–101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Desai MM, Berger AK, Brandina R, Aron M, Irwin BH, Canes D, Desai MR, Rao PP, Sotelo R, Stein R, Gill IS (2009) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: initial hundred patients. Urology 74:805–812

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Merchant AM, Lin E (2009) Single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for a colon mass. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1021–1024

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Saber AA, Elgamal MH, Itawi EA, Rao AJ (2008) Single incision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SILS): a novel technique. Obes Surg 18:1338–1342

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Nguyen NT, Hinojosa MW, Smith BR, Reavis KM (2008) Single laparoscopic incision transabdominal (SLIT) surgery-adjustable gastric banding: a novel minimally invasive surgical approach. Obes Surg 18:1628–1631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Derossis AM, Fried GM, Abrahamowicz M, Sigman HH, Barkun JS, Meakins JL (1998) Development of a model for training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills. Am J Surg 175:482–487

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fraser SA, Klassen DR, Feldman LS, Ghitulescu GA, Stanbridge D, Fried GM (2003) Evaluating laparoscopic skills: setting the pass/fail score for the MISTELS system. Surg Endosc 17:964–967

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fried GM, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Fraser SA, Stanbridge D, Ghitulescu G, Andrew CG (2004) Proving the value of simulation in laparoscopic surgery. Ann Surg 240:518–525 (discussion 525-518)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. McCluney AL, Vassiliou MC, Kaneva PA, Cao J, Stanbridge DD, Feldman LS, Fried GM (2007) FLS simulator performance predicts intraoperative laparoscopic skill. Surg Endosc 21:1991–1995

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Peters JH, Fried GM, Swanstrom LL, Soper NJ, Sillin LF, Schirmer B, Hoffman K, Committee SF (2004) Development and validation of a comprehensive program of education and assessment of the basic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. Surgery 135:21–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Joseph RA, Goh AC, Cuevas SP, Donovan MA, Kauffman MG, Salas NA, Miles B, Bass BL, Dunkin BJ (2010) “Chopstick” surgery: a novel technique improves surgeon performance and eliminates arm collision in robotic single-incision laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 24(6):1331–1335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Martinec DV, Gatta P, Zheng B, Denk PM, Swanstrom LL (2009) The trade-off between flexibility and maneuverability: task performance with articulating laparoscopic instruments. Surg Endosc 23:2697–2701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Stefanidis D, Korndorffer JR Jr, Markley S, Sierra R, Scott DJ (2006) Proficiency maintenance: impact of ongoing simulator training on laparoscopic skill retention. J Am Coll Surg 202:599–603

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moore MJ, Bennett CL (1995) The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The Southern Surgeons Club. Am J Surg 170:55–59

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Archer SB, Brown DW, Smith CD, Branum GD, Hunter JG (2001) Bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a national survey. Ann Surg 234:549–558 (discussion 558-549)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Massarweh NN, Devlin A, Symons RG, Broeckel Elrod JA, Flum DR (2009) Risk tolerance and bile duct injury: surgeon characteristics, risk-taking preference, and common bile duct injuries. J Am Coll Surg 209:17–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sroka G, Feldman LS, Vassiliou MC, Kaneva PA, Fayez R, Fried GM (2010) Fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery simulator training to proficiency improves laparoscopic performance in the operating room-a randomized controlled trial. Am J Surg 199:115–120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge David Irvin and Deborah Rooney, M.A.M.S. of the Northwestern Center for Advanced Surgical Education (NCASE), for their assistance in the completion of the study. We are also grateful to Covidien for providing some of the instruments used in the study. In addition, we are grateful to the Goldberg Family Charitable Trust for assistance with travel and conference expenses.

Disclosures

Dr. Santos and Daniel Enter have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Dr. Soper is a member of scientific advisory boards for Covidien, Terumo, and Transenterix. Dr. Hungness has consulting agreements with Covidien, Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Olympus, Terumo, and Boston Scientific. Some of the instruments used in this study were provided by Covidien.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 676 North Saint Clair Street, Suite 650, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Byron F. Santos, Daniel Enter, Nathaniel J. Soper & Eric S. Hungness

Authors
  1. Byron F. Santos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Enter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nathaniel J. Soper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eric S. Hungness
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric S. Hungness.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Santos, B.F., Enter, D., Soper, N.J. et al. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS™) versus standard laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of performance using a surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25, 483–490 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1197-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1197-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation