This chapter provides an overview of recent innovations in pediatric minimally invasive surgery that have enabled pediatric surgeons to operate safely on their smallest patients through tiny incisions. The development of size appropriate laparoscopes and instruments has been key in the development of this specialty. We also discuss NOTES, telemedicine, and robotic surgery in our pediatric population.
The numerous MIS techniques, originally used in the adult population, have been successfully applied to our pediatric patients. MIS has become routine for the treatment of many pediatric surgical disease processes, due to the numerous benefits these techniques confer on the patient: decreased wound complications, shorter length of stay, and improved postoperative pain. Inherent in the application of these complex techniques to infants and children are many risks due to the size of these patients. Pediatric surgeons must be aware and understand these risks if they are to successfully and safely practice MIS.
MIS will continue to develop as long as industry is committed to developing pediatric equipment to provide better care for our patients. Surgical training must continue to evolve, to ensure that the next generation of surgeons is adequately trained in these complex techniques. The future of pediatric MIS is exciting for our patients and indeed the specialty of pediatric surgery.
Minimally invasive surgery Inguinal hernias Laparoscopy NOTES Telemedicine Robotic surgery
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Abell TL, et al. Gastric electrical stimulation in intractable symptomatic gastroparesis. Digestion. 2002;66(4):204–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adikibi BT, et al. The risks of minimal access surgery in children: an aid to consent. J Pediatr Surg. 2012;47(3):601–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal S, Slovick A, Soon Y. Single-port laparoscopy for the drainage of abdominal infected fluid collections in children, with the TriPort system: initial experience of 2 cases. Surg Innov. 2010;17(3):261–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson JE, et al. The first national examination of outcomes and trends in robotic surgery in the United States. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;215(1):107–14; discussion 114–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayinala S, et al. Temporary gastric electrical stimulation with orally or PEG-placed electrodes in patients with drug refractory gastroparesis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005;61(3):455–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blatnik JA, et al. Stitch versus scar – evaluation of laparoscopic pediatric inguinal hernia repair: a pilot study in a rabbit model. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012;22(8):848–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blinman T, Ponsky T. Pediatric minimally invasive surgery: laparoscopy and thoracoscopy in infants and children. Pediatrics. 2012;130(3):539–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bochner BH, et al. A randomized trial of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(4):389–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadière G-B, Buset M, et al. Antireflux transoral incisionless fundoplication using EsophyX: 12-month results of a prospective multicenter study. World J Surg. 2008a;32(8):1676–88.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadière GB, Rajan A, et al. Endoluminal fundoplication by a transoral device for the treatment of GERD: a feasibility study. Surg Endosc. 2008b;22(2):333–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandra V, et al. A comparison of laparoscopic and robotic assisted suturing performance by experts and novices. Surgery. 2010;147(6):830–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gagner M, Garcia-Ruiz A. Technical aspects of minimally invasive abdominal surgery performed with needlescopic instruments. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1998;8(3):171–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geller EJ, Matthews CA. Impact of robotic operative efficiency on profitability. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(1):20.e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman P, et al. Feasibility and safety of gastric electrical stimulation for a child with intractable visceral pain and gastroparesis. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2009;49(5):635–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Islam S, et al. Gastric electrical stimulation for children with intractable nausea and gastroparesis. J Pediatr Surg. 2008;43(3):437–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Islam S, Adams SD, Mahomed AA. SILS: is it cost- and time-effective compared to standard pediatric laparoscopic surgery? Minim Invasive Surg. 2012;2012:807609.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Jones VS, Cohen RC. Two decades of minimally invasive pediatric surgery-taking stock. J Pediatr Surg. 2008;43(9):1653–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meininger DD, et al. Totally endoscopic Nissen fundoplication with a robotic system in a child. Surg Endosc. 2001;15(11):1360.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ming YC, et al. Experience of single-incision laparoscopy in children. Minim Access Surg. 2016;12(3):245–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mintz Y, et al. NOTES: a review of the technical problems encountered and their solutions. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2008;18(4):583–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muls V, et al. Three-year results of a multicenter prospective study of transoral incisionless fundoplication. Surg Innov. 2013;20(4):321–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostlie DJ, et al. Patient scar assessment after single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: long-term follow-up from a prospective randomized trial. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23(6):553–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padilla BE, et al. The use of magnets with single-site umbilical laparoscopic surgery. Semin Pediatr Surg. 2011;20(4):224–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padilla BE, et al. Initial experience with magnet-assisted single trocar appendectomy in children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2013;23(5):463–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar