Visceral and Gastrointestinal Complications in Robotic Urologic Surgery

  • Guillermo Velilla
  • Cristina Redondo
  • François Rozet
  • Rafael Sanchez-Salas
  • Xavier Cathelineau
Chapter

Abstract

Robot-assisted urologic surgery has become widely adopted worldwide. Despite the great advantages of this technique, complications also must be considered. Visceral and gastrointestinal lesions are among the most dangerous complications and could be life-threatening; therefore, an early diagnosis and management is crucial. Standardized systems for reporting and classification of surgical complications, such as Clavien–Dindo and Martin–Donat classifications, provide better information and can support correct identification and management. Preoperative imaging may help decrease the likelihood of complications and increase the chance of recognition when injury occurs. The main visceral and intestinal lesions, such as the most common ways to injury during robotic surgery, and the main risks associated with port placement must be known in order to avoid complications. Early recognition and intraoperative treatment of visceral or intestinal injuries during robotic surgery is essential, and otherwise, the quickness of postoperative diagnosis and management is crucial.

Keywords

Complications Gastrointestinal Robotic surgery Trocar insertion Bowel injury 

References

  1. 1.
    Kaplan JR, Lee Z, Eun DD, Reese AC. Complications of minimally invasive surgery and their management. Curr Urol Rep. 2016;17(6):47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soulie M, Salomon L, Seguin P, Mervant C, Mouly P, Hoznek A, Antiphon P, et al. Multi-institutional study of complications in 1085 laparoscopic urologic procedures. Urology. 2001;58(6):899–903.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Karadag MA, Cecen K, Demir A, Bagcioglu M, Kocaaslan R, Kadioglu TC. Gastrointestinal complications of laparoscopic/robot-assisted urologic surgery and a review of the literature. J Clin Med Res. 2015;7(4):203–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Agarwal PK, Sammon J, Bhandari A, Dabaja A, Diaz M, Dusik-Fenton S, et al. Safety profile of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a standardized report of complications in 3317 patients. Eur Urol. 2011;59(5):684–98.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mitropoulos D, Artibani W, Graefen M, Remzi M, Roupret M, Truss M. Reporting and grading of complications after urologic urgical procedures: an ad hoc EAU guidelines panel assessment and recommendations. Eur Urol. 2012;61(2):341–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clavien PA, Sanabria JR, Strasberg SM. Proposed classification of complications of surgery with examples of utility in cholecystectomy. Surgery. 1992;111:518–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Martin RC II, Brennan MF, Jaques DP. Quality of complication reporting in the surgical literature. Ann Surg. 2002;235:803–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Donat SM. Standards for surgical complication reporting in urologic oncology: time for a change. Urology. 2007;69:221–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rabbani F, Yunis LH, Pinochet R, Nogueira L, Vora KC, Eastham JA, et al. Comprehensive standardized report of complications of retropubic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2010;57(3):371–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pemberton RJ, Tolley DA, van Velthoven RF. Prevention and management of complications in urological laparoscopic port site placement. Eur Urol. 2006;50(5):958–68.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bianchi G, Martorana E, Ghaith A, Pirola GM, Rani M, Bove P, et al. Laparoscopic access overview: is there a safest entry method? Actas Urol Esp. 2016;40(6):386–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gaunay GS, Elsamra SE, Richstone L. Trocars: site selection, instrumentation and overcoming complications. J Endourol. 2016;30(8):833–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Putman SS, Bishoff JT. Visceral and gastrointestinal complications of laparoscopic and robotic urologic surgery. In: Ghavamian R, editor. Complications of laparoscopic and robotic urologic surgery. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hasson HM. A modified instrument and method for laparoscopy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971;110(6):886–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tan AF, Joyce A. Transperitoneal radical nephrectomy. In: de la Rosette J, Gill I, editors. Laparoscopic urologic surgery in malignancies. Berlin: Springer; 2005. p. 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Freiha FS. Preoperative bowel preparation in urologic surgery. J Urol. 1977;118(6):955–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bucher P, Mermillod B, Gervaz P, Morel P. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg. 2004;139(12):1359–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guenaga KKFG, Matos D, Wille-Jorgensen P. Mechanical bowel preparation for elective colorectal surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;7(9):CD001544.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tabibi A, Simforoosh N, Basiri A, Ezzatnejad M, Abdi H, Farrokhi F. Bowel preparation versus no preparation before ileal urinary diversion. Urology. 2007;70(4):654–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shafii M, Murphy D, Donovan M, Hickey DP. Is mechanical bowel preparation necessary in patients undergoing cystectomy and urinary diversion? BJU Int. 2002;89(9):879–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yang L, Chen HS, Welk B, Denstedt JD, Wang K, Li H, et al. Does using comprehensive preoperative bowel preparation offer any advantage for urinary diversion using ileum? A meta-analysis. Int Urol Nephrol. 2013;45(1):25–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chi A, McGuire B, Nadler R. Modern guidelines for bowel preparation and antimicrobial prophylaxis for open and laparoscopic urologic surgery. Urol Clin North Am. 2015;42(4):429–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Witjes JA, Comperat E, Cowan NC, De Santis M, Gakis G, Lebret T, et al. EAU guidelines on muscle-invasive and metastatic bladder cancer: summary of the 2013 guidelines. Eur Urol. 2014;65(4):778–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lasser MS, Doscher M, Keehn A, Chernyak V, Garfein E, Ghavamian R. Virtual surgical planning: a novel aid to robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Endourol. 2012;26(10):1372–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schwartz MJ, Faiena I, Cinman N, Kucharczyk J, Meriggi JS, Waingankar N, et al. Laparoscopic bowel injury in retroperitoneal surgery: current incidence and outcomes. J Urol. 2010;184(2):589–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kutikov A, Uzzo RG. The R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score: a comprehensive standardized system for quantitating renal tumor size, location and depth. J Urol. 2009;182(3):844–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ficarra V, Novara G, Secco S, Macchi V, Porzionato A, De Caro R, et al. Preoperative aspects and dimensions used for an anatomical (PADUA) classification of renal tumours in patients who are candidates for nephron sparing surgery. Eur Urol. 2009;56(5):786–93.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schiavina R, Novara G, Borghesi M, Ficarra V, Ahlawat R, Moon DA, et al. PADUA and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores correlate with perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: analysis of the Vattikuti global quality initiative in robotic urologic surgery (GQI-RUS) database. BJU Int. 2016;119:456. doi: 10.1111/bju.13628.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tavukçu HH, Aytaç O, Balcı C, Kulaksızoğıu H, Atuğ F. The efficacy and utilisation of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: does it change the surgical dissection plan? A preliminary report. EMJ Urol. 2015;3(3):45–9.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ou YC, Yang CK, Chang KS, Wang J, Hung SW, Tung MC, et al. Prevention and management of complications during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy following comprehensive planning: a large series involving a single surgeon. Anticancer Res. 2016;36(4):1991–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van der Voort M, Heiknsdijk EA, Gouma DJ. Bowel injury as a complication of laparoscopy. Br J Surg. 2004;91(10):1253–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bishoff J, Allaf NE, Kirkels W, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR, Schroder F. Laparoscopic bowel injury: incidence and clinical presentation. J Urol. 1999;161(3):887–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Thompson BH, Wheeless CR Jr. Gastrointestinal complications of laparoscopy sterilization. Obstet Gynecol. 1973;41(5):669–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Venkatesh R, Landman J. Laparoscopic complications: gastrointestinal. Chapter 81. In: Gill IS, editor. Text-book of laparoscopic urology. CRC Press, Informa Healthcare USA, New York: NY; 2006. p. 911–22.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Liakakos T, Thomakos N, Fine PM, Dervenis C, Young RL. Peritoneal adhesions: etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical significance. Recent advances in prevention and management. Dig Surg. 2001;18(4):260–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gill IS, Kavoussi LR, Clayman RV, Ehrlich R, Evans R, Fuchs G, et al. Complications of laparoscopic nephrectomy in 185 patients: a multiinstitutional review. J Urol. 1995;154:479–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fahlenkamp D, Rassweiler J, Fornara P, Frede T, Loening SA. Complications of laparoscopic procedures in urology: experience with 2407 procedures and 4 german centers. J Urol. 1999;162:765–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fear RE. Laparoscopy: a valuable aid in gynecologic diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol. 1968;31(31):297–309.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bowrey DJ, Blom D, Crookes PF, Bremner CG, Johansson JL, Lord RV, et al. Risk factors and the prevalence of trocar site herniation after laparoscopic fundoplication. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(7):663–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Montz FJ, Holschneider CH, Munro MG. Incisional hernia following laparoscopy: a survey of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;84(5):881–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Nezhat C, Nezhat F, Seidman DS, Nezhat C. Incisional hernias after operative laparoscopy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997;7(2):111–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Seamon LG, Backes F, Resnick K, Cohn DE. Robotic trocar site small bowel evisceration after gynecologic cancer surgery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(2):462–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hung CF, Yang CK, Cheng CL, Ou YC. Bowel complication during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Anticancer Res. 2011;31(10):3497–501.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Guillonneau B, Gupta R, El Fettouh H, Cathelineau X, Baumert H, Vallancien G. Laparoscopic management of rectal injury during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2003;169(5):1694–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ou YC, Yang CR, Wang J, Yang CK, Cheng CL, Patel VR, et al. The learning curve for reducing complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon. BJU Int. 2011;108(3):420–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sotelo RJ, Haese A, Machuca V, Medina L, Nuñez L, Santinelli F, et al. Safer surgery by learning from complications: a focus on robotic prostate surgery. Eur Urol. 2016;69(2):334–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wedmid A, Mendoza P, Sharma S, Hastings RL, Monahan KP, Walicki M, et al. Rectal injury during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: incidence and management. J Urol. 2011;186(5):1928–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kheterpal E, Bhandari A, Siddiqui S, Pokala N, Peabody J, Menon M. Management of rectal injury during robotic radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2011;77(4):976–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Cathelineau X, Sanchez-Salas R, Flamand V, Barret E, Galiano M, Rozet F, et al. The York Mason operation. BJU Int. 2010;106(3):436–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kasraeian A, Rozet F, Cathelineau X, Barret E, Galiano M, Vallancien G. Modified York-Mason technique for repair of iatrogenic rectourinary fistula: the Montsouris experience. J Urol. 2009;181(3):1178–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Moore EE, Shackford SR, Pachter HL, McAninch JW, Browner BD, Champion HR, et al. Organ injury scaling: spleen, liver, and kidney. J Trauma. 1989;29(12):1664–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Moore EE, Cogbill TH, Malangoni MA, Jurkovich GJ, Champion HR, Gennarelli TA, et al. Organ injury scaling. II: pancreas, duodenum, small bowel, colon, and rectum. J Trauma. 1990;30(11):1427–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guillermo Velilla
    • 1
  • Cristina Redondo
    • 1
  • François Rozet
    • 1
  • Rafael Sanchez-Salas
    • 1
  • Xavier Cathelineau
    • 1
  1. 1.L’Institut Mutualiste MontsourisParisFrance

Personalised recommendations