Reconstruction of the esophagojejunostomy by double stapling method using EEA™ OrVil™ in laparoscopic total gastrectomy and proximal gastrectomy

Here we report the method of anastomosis based on double stapling technique (hereinafter, DST) using a trans-oral anvil delivery system (EEATM OrVilTM) for reconstructing the esophagus and lifted jejunum following laparoscopic total gastrectomy or proximal gastric resection

A randomised, multi-centre, prospective, double blind pilot-study to evaluate safety and efficacy of the non-absorbable Optilene® Mesh Elastic versus the partly absorbable Ultrapro® Mesh for incisional hernia repair

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Randomised controlled trials with a long term follow-up (3 to 10 years) have demonstrated that mesh repair is superior to suture closure of incisional hernia with lower recurrence rates (5 to 20% versus 20 to 63%). Yet, the ideal size and material of the mesh are not defined. So far, there are few prospective studies that evaluate the influence of the mesh texture on patient's satisfaction, recurrence and complication rate. The aim of this study is to evaluate, if a non-absorbable mesh (Optilene^®Mesh Elastic) will result in better health outcomes compared to a partly absorbable mesh (Ultrapro^®Mesh).</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>In this prospective, randomised, double blind study, eighty patients with incisional hernia after a midline laparotomy will be included. Primary objective of this study is to investigate differences in the physical functioning score from the SF-36 questionnaire 21 days after mesh insertion. Secondary objectives include the evaluation of the patients' daily activity, pain, wound complication and other surgical complications (hematomas, seromas), and safety within six months after intervention.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study investigates mainly from the patient perspective differences between meshes for treatment of incisional hernias. Whether partly absorbable meshes improve quality of life better than non-absorbable meshes is unclear and therefore, this trial will generate further evidence for a better treatment of patients.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>NCT00646334</p

Inflammatory and Tumor Stimulating Responses after Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic colectomy has clinical benefits such as short hospital stay, less postoperative pain, and early return of bowel function. However, objective evidence of its immunologic and oncologic benefits is scarce. We compared functional recovery after open versus laparoscopic sigmoidectomy and investigated the effect of open versus laparoscopic surgery on acute inflammation as well as tumor stimulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 57 patients who were diagnosed with sigmoid colon cancer were randomized for elective conventional or laparoscopically assisted sigmoidectomy. Serum samples were obtained preoperatively and on postoperative day 1. C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were measured as inflammation markers, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) were used as tumor stimulation factors. Clinical parameters and serum markers were compared. RESULTS: Postoperative hospital stay (p=0.031), the first day of gas out (p=0.016), and the first day of soft diet (p<0.001) were significantly shorter for the laparoscopic surgery group than the open surgery group. The levels of CRP, IL-6, and VEGF rose significantly, and the concentration of IGFBP-3 fell significantly after both open and laparoscopic surgery. However, there were no significant differences in the preoperative and postoperative levels of CRP, IL-6, VEGF, and IGFBP-3 between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that both open and laparoscopic surgeries are accompanied by significant changes in IL-6, CRP, IGFBP-3, and VEGF levels. Acute inflammation markers and tumor stimulating factors may not reflect clinical benefits of laparoscopic surgery.ope

The influence of obesity and body mass index on the outcome of laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic literature review

AIM: The relationship between obesity, body-mass index (BMI) and laparoscopic colorectal resection is unclear. Our object was to assess systematically the available evidence to establish the influence of obesity and BMI on the outcome of laparoscopic colorectal resection. METHOD: A search of PubMed/Medline databases was performed in May 2015 to identify all studies investigating the impact of BMI and obesity on elective laparoscopic colorectal resection performed for benign or malignant bowel disease. Clinical end points examined included operation time, conversion rate to open surgery, post-operative complications including anastomotic leakage, length of hospital stay, readmission rate, reoperation rate and mortality. For patients who underwent an operation for cancer, the harvested number of lymph nodes and long-term oncological data were also examined. RESULTS: 45 studies were analysed, the majority of which were Level IV with only four level III case-controlled studies. Thirty comparative studies containing 23649 patients including 17895 non-obese and 5754 obese showed no significant differences between the two groups with respect to intraoperative blood loss, overall postoperative morbidity, anastomotic leakage, reoperation rate, mortality and the number of retrieved lymph nodes in patients operated on for malignancy. Most studies, including 15 non-comparative studies, reported a longer operation time in patients who underwent a laparoscopic procedure with the BMI being an independent predictor in multivariate analyses for the operation time. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic colorectal resection is safe and technically and oncologically feasible in obese patients. These results, however, may be different outside high volume centres of expertise. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Laparoscopic versus open sigmoid resection for diverticular disease: follow-up assessment of the randomized control Sigma trial

The short-term results of the Sigma trial show that laparoscopic sigmoid resection (LSR) used electively for diverticular disease offers advantages over open sigmoid resection (OSR). This study aimed to compare the overall mortality and morbidity rates after evaluation of the clinical outcomes at the 6-month follow-up evaluation. In a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-arm, randomized control trial, eligible patients were randomized to either LSR or OSR. The short-term results and methodologic details have been published previously. Follow-up evaluation was performed at the outpatient clinic 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. In this trial, 104 patients were randomized for either LSR or OSR, and the conversion rate was 19.2%. The LSR approach was associated with short-term benefits such as a 15.4% reduction in the major complications rate, less pain, and a shorter hospital stay at the cost of a longer operating time. At the 6-month follow-up evaluation, no significant differences in morbidity or mortality rates were found. Two patients died of cardiac causes (overall mortality, 3%). Late complications (7 LSR vs. 12 OSR; p = 0.205) consisted of three incisional hernias, five small bowel obstructions, four enterocutaneous fistulas, one intraabdominal abscess, one retained gauze, two anastomotic strictures, and three recurrent episodes of diverticulitis. Nine of these patients underwent additional surgical interventions. Consideration of the major morbidity over the total follow-up period (0-6 months) shows that the LSR patients experienced significantly fewer complications than the OSR patients (9 LSR vs. 23 OSR; p = 0.003). The Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire showed significantly better quality of life for LSR at the 6-week follow-up assessment. However, at the 6-month follow-up assessment, these differences were decreased. The late clinical outcomes did not differ between LSR and OSR during the 30-day to 6-month follow-up period. Consideration of total postoperative morbidity shows a 27% reduction in major morbidity for patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for diverticular diseas