Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Complications of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Their Management

  • Minimally Invasive Surgery (T Guzzo, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Urology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Minimally invasive surgery, including both traditional laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic approaches, has increasingly become the standard of care for urologic abdominal and pelvic surgery. This is a comprehensive review of the contemporary literature regarding complications of laparoscopic and robotic urologic surgery. The review highlights pertinent studies with the goal of providing the minimally invasive urologic surgeon with an up-to-date overview of general and procedure-specific complications and their management.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Leighton TA, Liu SY, Bongard FS. Comparative cardiopulmonary effects of carbon dioxide versus helium pneumoperitoneum. Surgery. 1993;113:527–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fazeli-Matin S, Gill IS, Hsu TH, Sung GT, Novick AC. Laparoscopic renal and adrenal surgery in obese patients: comparison to open surgery. J Urol. 1999;162:665–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fugita OE, Chan DY, Roberts WW, Kavoussi LR, Jarrett TW. Laparoscopic radical nephrectomy in obese patients: outcomes and technical considerations. Urology. 2004;63:247–52. discussion 52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kapoor A, Nassir A, Chew B, Gillis A, Luke P, Whelan P. Comparison of laparoscopic radical renal surgery in morbidly obese and non-obese patients. J Endourol. 2004;18:657–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Colombo Jr JR, Haber GP, Aron M, Xu M, Gill IS. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in obese patients. Urology. 2007;69:44–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Romero FR, Rais-Bahrami S, Muntener M, Brito FA, Jarrett TW, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy in obese and non-obese patients: comparison with open surgery. Urology. 2008;71:806–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brown JA, Chenven E, Looney SW, Miller KM, Strup SE, Bagley DH, et al. Hand-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (HALNU): an assessment of the impact of obesity in 50 procedures. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2008;18:61–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Eichel L. Fundamentals of laparoscopic and robotic urologic surgery. In: Campbell-Walsh urology, 10th Ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2012.

  9. Pridgeon S, Bishop CV, Adshead J. Lower limb compartment syndrome as a complication of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: the UK experience. BJU Int. 2013;112:485–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sotelo RJ, Haese A, Machuca V, Medina L, Nunez L, Santinelli F, et al. Safer surgery by learning from complications: a focus on robotic prostate surgery. Eur Urol. 2015. Excellent in-depth overview of all possible areas of complications in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with an eye towards helping other urologists prevent complications in their own patients through prevention.

  11. Kan KM, Brown SE, Gainsburg DM. Ocular complications in robotic-assisted prostatectomy: a review of pathophysiology and prevention. Minerva Anestesiol. 2015;81:557–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ahmad G, Gent D, Henderson D, O’Flynn H, Phillips K, Watson A. Laparoscopic entry techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;8, CD006583.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Azevedo JL, Azevedo OC, Miyahira SA, Miguel GP, Becker Jr OM, Hypolito OH, et al. Injuries caused by Veress needle insertion for creation of pneumoperitoneum: a systematic literature review. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:1428–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sandadi S, Johannigman JA, Wong VL, Blebea J, Altose MD, Hurd WW. Recognition and management of major vessel injury during laparoscopy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2010;17:692–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Carmicheal D. Laparoscopy-cardiac considerations. Fertil Steril. 1971;22:69–70.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bhoyrul S, Vierra MA, Nezhat CR, Krummel TM, Way LW. Trocar injuries in laparoscopic surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192:677–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bushey R. Management of intraabdominal, pelvic, and genitourinary complications of colorectal surgery. In: UpToDate: UpToDate, Waltham. Accessed 4 Jan 2016.

  18. Leibl BJ, Schmedt CG, Schwarz J, Kraft K, Bittner R. Laparoscopic surgery complications associated with trocar tip design: review of literature and own results. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1999;9:135–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Franko J, O’Connell BG, Mehall JR, Harper SG, Nejman JH, Zebley DM, et al. The influence of prior abdominal operations on conversion and complication rates in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. JSLS. 2006;10:169–75.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Bishoff JT, Allaf ME, Kirkels W, Moore RG, Kavoussi LR, Schroder F. Laparoscopic bowel injury: incidence and clinical presentation. J Urol. 1999;161:887–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lee Z, Moore B, Giusto L, Eun DD. Use of indocyanine green during robot-assisted ureteral reconstructions. Eur Urol. 2015;67:291–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee Z, Simhan J, Parker DC, Reilly C, Llukani E, Lee DI, et al. Novel use of indocyanine green for intraoperative, real-time localization of ureteral stenosis during robot-assisted ureteroureterostomy. Urology. 2013;82:729–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Spaliviero M, Steinberg AP, Kaouk JH, Desai MM, Hammert WC, Gill IS. Laparoscopic injury and repair of obturator nerve during radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2004;64:1030.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Tewari A, Sooriakumaran P, Bloch DA, Seshadri-Kreaden U, Hebert AE, Wiklund P. Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;62:1–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Borland RN, Walsh PC. The management of rectal injury during radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol. 1992;147:905–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Masuda T, Kinoshita H, Nishida S, Kawa G, Kawakita M, Matsuda T. Rectal injury during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: detection and management. Int J Urol. 2010;17:492–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Roberts WB, Tseng K, Walsh PC, Han M. Critical appraisal of management of rectal injury during radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2010;76:1088–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 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;186:1928–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cassar K, Munro A. Iatrogenic splenic injury. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 2002;47:731–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Giri SK, Abdelrahman M, Flood HD. Experience with sliding-clip splenorrhaphy for splenic injury during radical nephrectomy. Can Urol Assoc J. 2015;9:E476–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Hayn MH, Hellenthal NJ, Hussain A, Stegemann AP, Guru KA. Defining morbidity of robot-assisted radical cystectomy using a standardized reporting methodology. Eur Urol. 2011;59:213–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kauffman EC, Ng CK, Lee MM, Otto BJ, Portnoff A, Wang GJ, et al. Critical analysis of complications after robotic-assisted radical cystectomy with identification of preoperative and operative risk factors. BJU Int. 2010;105:520–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Khan MS, Elhage O, Challacombe B, Rimington P, Murphy D, Dasgupta P. Analysis of early complications of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy using a standardized reporting system. Urology. 2011;77:357–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Pruthi RS, Nielsen ME, Nix J, Smith A, Schultz H, Wallen EM. Robotic radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: surgical and pathological outcomes in 100 consecutive cases. J Urol. 2010;183:510–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lowrance WT, Rumohr JA, Chang SS, Clark PE, Smith Jr JA, Cookson MS. Contemporary open radical cystectomy: analysis of perioperative outcomes. J Urol. 2008;179:1313–8. discussion 8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Smith AB, Woods ME, Raynor MC, Nielsen ME, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS. Prevention and management of complications following robot-assisted radical cystectomy: lessons learned after >250 consecutive cases. World J Urol. 2013;31:441–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Ng CK, Kauffman EC, Lee MM, Otto BJ, Portnoff A, Ehrlich JR, et al. A comparison of postoperative complications in open versus robotic cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2010;57:274–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Styn NR, Montgomery JS, Wood DP, Hafez KS, Lee CT, Tallman C, et al. Matched comparison of robotic-assisted and open radical cystectomy. Urology. 2012;79:1303–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yu HY, Hevelone ND, Lipsitz SR, Kowalczyk KJ, Nguyen PL, Choueiri TK, et al. Comparative analysis of outcomes and costs following open radical cystectomy versus robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy: results from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Eur Urol. 2012;61:1239–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Nix J, Smith A, Kurpad R, Nielsen ME, Wallen EM, Pruthi RS. Prospective randomized controlled trial of robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: perioperative and pathologic results. Eur Urol. 2010;57:196–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Parekh DJ, Messer J, Fitzgerald J, Ercole B, Svatek R. Perioperative outcomes and oncologic efficacy from a pilot prospective randomized clinical trial of open versus robotic assisted radical cystectomy. J Urol. 2013;189:474–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Bochner BH, Dalbagni G, Sjoberg DD, Silberstein J, Keren Paz GE, Donat SM, et al. Comparing open radical cystectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy: a randomized clinical trial. Eur Urol. 2015;67:1042–50. The largest, prospective randomized open versus robot-assisted radical cystectomy series to date, wherein all robotic patients underwent extracorporeal conduit creation.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Bochner BH, Sjoberg DD, Laudone VP. Memorial Sloan Kettering cancer center bladder cancer surgical trials G. A randomized trial of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:389–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Bjurlin MA, Zhao LC, Huang WC. More on robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy. N Engl J Med. 2014;371:1654–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Navai N, Matin SF. Words of wisdom. Re: A randomized trial of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;67:173–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ahmed K, Khan SA, Hayn MH, Agarwal PK, Badani KK, Balbay MD, et al. Analysis of intracorporeal compared with extracorporeal urinary diversion after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium. Eur Urol. 2014;65:340–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Novara G, Catto JW, Wilson T, Annerstedt M, Chan K, Murphy DG, et al. Systematic review and cumulative analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2015;67:376–401. Comprehensive meta-analysis of available cystectomy series with comparison of outcomes by approach as well as an attempt to account for the type and approach to urinary diversions when comparing perioperative complications.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Protyniak B, Dinallo AM, Boyan Jr WP, Dressner RM, Arvanitis ML. Intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence angiography—an objective evaluation of anastomotic perfusion in colorectal surgery. Am Surg. 2015;81:580–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Jafari MD, Lee KH, Halabi WJ, Mills SD, Carmichael JC, Stamos MJ, et al. The use of indocyanine green fluorescence to assess anastomotic perfusion during robotic assisted laparoscopic rectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:3003–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Sasmal PK, Mishra TS, Rath S, Meher S, Mohapatra D. Port site infection in laparoscopic surgery: a review of its management. World J Clin Cases. 2015;3:864–71.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Filip V, Plesa C, Tarcoveanu E, Bradea C, Moldovanu R. Incisional hernias after operative laparoscopy. Rev Med Chir Soc Med Nat Iasi. 2000;104:83–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Nezhat C, Nezhat F, Seidman DS, Nezhat C. Incisional hernias after operative laparoscopy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1997;7:111–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Moniz RR, Chauhan S, Orvieto MA, et al. Early complication rates in a single-surgeon series of 2500 robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies: report applying a standardized grading system. Eur Urol. 2010;57:945–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ahlering TE, Eichel L, Edwards R, Skarecky DW. Impact of obesity on clinical outcomes in robotic prostatectomy. Urology. 2005;65:740–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Tyritzis SI, Katafigiotis I, Constantinides CA. All you need to know about urethrovesical anastomotic urinary leakage following radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2012;188:369–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hu JC, Nelson RA, Wilson TG, Kawachi MH, Ramin SA, Lau C, et al. Perioperative complications of laparoscopic and robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2006;175:541–6. discussion 6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Di Pierro GB, Grande P, Wirth JG, Danuser H, Mattei A. Extended pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of surgical volume on efficacy and complications in a single-surgeon series. Can Urol Assoc J. 2015;9:107–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Ploussard G, Briganti A, de la Taille A, Haese A, Heidenreich A, Menon M, et al. Pelvic lymph node dissection during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: efficacy, limitations, and complications—a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2014;65:7–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Khoder WY, Trottmann M, Buchner A, Stuber A, Hoffmann S, Stief CG, et al. Risk factors for pelvic lymphoceles post-radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol. 2011;18:638–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Buckley JC. Complications after radical prostatectomy: anastomotic stricture and rectourethral fistula. Curr Opin Urol. 2011;21:461–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Breyer BN, Davis CB, Cowan JE, Kane CJ, Carroll PR. Incidence of bladder neck contracture after robot-assisted laparoscopic and open radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2010;106:1734–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Parihar JS, Ha YS, Kim IY. Bladder neck contracture-incidence and management following contemporary robot assisted radical prostatectomy technique. Prostate Int. 2014;2:12–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Tanagho YS, Kaouk JH, Allaf ME, Rogers CG, Stifelman MD, Kaczmarek BF, et al. Perioperative complications of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: analysis of 886 patients at 5 United States centers. Urology. 2013;81:573–9. This remains the largest series to date of partial nephrectomy outcomes.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Gill IS, Kavoussi LR, Lane BR, Blute ML, Babineau D, Colombo Jr JR, et al. Comparison of 1,800 laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomies for single renal tumors. J Urol. 2007;178:41–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Kim EH, Larson JA, Figenshau M, Figenshau RS. Perioperative complications of robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Curr Urol Rep. 2014;15:377. Overview of perioperative complication rates specific to robot-assisted partial nephrectomy.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Simmons MN, Gill IS. Decreased complications of contemporary laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: use of a standardized reporting system. J Urol. 2007;177:2067–73. discussion 73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Breda A, Stepanian SV, Lam JS, Liao JC, Gill IS, Colombo JR, et al. Use of haemostatic agents and glues during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a multi-institutional survey from the United States and Europe of 1347 cases. Eur Urol. 2007;52:798–803.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Lee Z, Reilly CE, Moore BW, Mydlo JH, Lee DI, Eun DD. Stone formation from nonabsorbable clip migration into the collecting system after robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. Case Rep Urol. 2014;2014:397427.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Finks JF, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2128–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Temple University School of Medicine, 3509 North Broad Street, 6th Floor, Boyer Pavilion, Philadelphia, PA, 19140, USA

    Joshua R. Kaplan, Ziho Lee, Daniel D. Eun & Adam C. Reese

Authors
  1. Joshua R. Kaplan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ziho Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel D. Eun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adam C. Reese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam C. Reese.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Joshua R. Kaplan, Ziho Lee, and Adam C. Reese each declare no potential conflicts of interest. Daniel D. Eun is a consultant for Medtronic/Covidien and lecturer for Intuitive Surgical.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Minimally Invasive Surgery

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

MIS Complications PTX (MOV 56803 kb)

MIS Complications Spleen (MOV 72692 kb)

MIS Complications Vascular (MOV 69526 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaplan, J.R., Lee, Z., Eun, D.D. et al. Complications of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Their Management. Curr Urol Rep 17, 47 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-016-0602-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-016-0602-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation