BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second highest cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide.About 5%-10%of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer(LARC)on present...BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second highest cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide.About 5%-10%of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer(LARC)on presentation.For LARC invading into other structures(i.e.T4b),multivisceral resection(MVR)and/or pelvic ex-enteration(PE)remains the only potential curative surgical treatment.MVR and/or PE is a major and complex surgery with high post-operative morbidity.Minimally invasive surgery(MIS)has been shown to improve short-term post-operative outcomes in other gastrointestinal malignancies,but there is little evi-dence on its use in MVR,especially so for robotic MVR.This is a single-center retrospective cohort study from 1st January 2015 to 31st March 2023.Inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with cT4b rectal cancer and underwent MVR,or stage 4 disease with resectable systemic metastases.Pa-tients who underwent curative MVR for locally recurrent rectal cancer,or me-tachronous rectal cancer were also included.Exclusion criteria were patients with systemic metastases with non-resectable disease.All patients planned for elective surgery were enrolled into the standard enhanced recovery after surgery pathway with standard peri-operative management for colorectal surgery.Complex sur-gery was defined based on technical difficulty of surgery(i.e.total PE,bladder-sparing prostatectomy,pelvic lymph node dissection or need for flap creation).Our primary outcomes were the margin status,and complication rates.Cate-gorical values were described as percentages and analysed by the chi-square test.Continuous variables were expressed as median(range)and analysed by Mann-Whitney U test.Cumulative overall survival(OS)and recurrence-free survival(RFS)were analysed using Kaplan-Meier estimates with life table analysis.Log-rank test was performed to determine statistical significance between cumulative estimates.Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.Meier estimates with life table analysis.Log-rank test was performed to determine statistical significance between cumulative estimates.Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.RESULTS A total of 46 patients were included in this study[open MVR(oMVR):12(26.1%),miMVR:36(73.9%)].Patients’American Society of Anesthesiologists score,body mass index and co-morbidities were comparable between oMVR and miMVR.There is an increasing trend towards robotic MVR from 2015 to 2023.MiMVR was associated with lower estimated blood loss(EBL)(median 450 vs 1200 mL,P=0.008),major morbidity(14.7%vs 50.0%,P=0.014),post-operative intra-abdominal collections(11.8%vs 50.0%,P=0.006),post-operative ileus(32.4%vs 66.7%,P=0.04)and surgical site infection(11.8%vs 50.0%,P=0.006)compared with oMVR.Length of stay was also shorter for miMVR compared with oMVR(median 10 vs 30 d,P=0.001).Oncological outcomes-R0 resection,recurrence,OS and RFS were comparable between miMVR and oMVR.There was no 30-d mortality.More patients underwent robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR for complex cases(robotic 57.1%vs laparoscopic 7.7%,P=0.004).The operating time was longer for robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR[robotic:602(400-900)min,laparoscopic:Median 455(275-675)min,P<0.001].Incidence of R0 resection was similar(laparoscopic:84.6%vs robotic:76.2%,P=0.555).Overall complication rates,major morbidity rates and 30-d readmission rates were similar between la-paroscopic and robotic MVR.Interestingly,3-year OS(robotic 83.1%vs 58.6%,P=0.008)and RFS(robotic 72.9%vs 34.3%,P=0.002)was superior for robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR.CONCLUSION MiMVR had lower post-operative complications compared to oMVR.Robotic MVR was also safe,with acceptable post-operative complication rates.Prospective studies should be conducted to compare short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic vs laparoscopic MVR.展开更多
Introduction: Treatments for cardiovascular diseases have increasingly evolved with the tendency to offer minimally invasive or transcatheter procedures instead of conventional sternotomy surgery. In this context, we ...Introduction: Treatments for cardiovascular diseases have increasingly evolved with the tendency to offer minimally invasive or transcatheter procedures instead of conventional sternotomy surgery. In this context, we highlight minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS), which has been shown to be an increasingly solid option with some superior results when compared to the conventional technique: better pain control, shorter hospital stays, shorter recovery time, shorter readmission rate in the first postoperative year, better aesthetic results, and lower overall cost. Aim: This study aims to evaluate the stages of MIMVS, by primary mitral valve consultation, in our service and compare these results with data from the literature. Methods: All electronic medical records of patients who underwent MIMVS for primary mitral valve injury in the Encore Hospital from January 2020 to February 2023 were analyzed. Tabulation and statistical analysis were performed using the Microsoft Excel<sup>®</sup> program. Quantitative variables were presented as means, standard deviations. Results: 46 patients were enrolled in our study (Age: 59.1 ± 12.4 years old;60.8% Female, BMI: 26 ± 4.4 Kg/m<sup>2</sup>, Low risk STS score: 82.6%). The observed 30-day mortality was 2.1%, plastic rate of 23.9%, blood transfusion rate of 41.3%, length of stay in an intensive care bed (ICB) of 3.3 ± 3.3 days and hospital stay of 6.4 ± 5.1 days. Conclusions: We noticed that the MIMVS results carried out in our service agree with data from national and international literature with approximately 1.3 days more hospitalization in ICB.展开更多
Advancements in technology and surgical training programs have increased the adaptability of minimally invasive surgery(MIS).Gastrointestinal MIS is superior to its open counterparts regarding post-operative morbidity...Advancements in technology and surgical training programs have increased the adaptability of minimally invasive surgery(MIS).Gastrointestinal MIS is superior to its open counterparts regarding post-operative morbidity and mortality.MIS has become the first-line surgical intervention for some types of gastrointestinal surgery,such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendicectomy.Carbon dioxide(CO_(2))is the main gas used for insufflation in MIS.CO_(2)contributes 9%-26%of the greenhouse effect,resulting in global warming.The rise in global CO_(2)concentration since 2000 is about 20 ppm per decade,up to 10 times faster than any sustained rise in CO_(2)during the past 800000 years.Since 1970,there has been a steady yet worrying increase in average global temperature by 1.7℃ per century.A recent systematic review of the carbon footprint in MIS showed a range of 6-814 kg of CO_(2)emission per surgery,with higher CO_(2)emission following robotic compared to laparoscopic surgery.However,with superior benefits of MIS over open surgery,this poses an ethical dilemma to surgeons.A recent survey in the United Kingdom of 130 surgeons showed that the majority(94%)were concerned with climate change but felt that the lack of leadership was a barrier to improving environmental sustainability.Given the deleterious environmental effects of MIS,this study aims to summarize the trends of MIS and its carbon footprint,awareness and attitudes towards this issue,and efforts and challenges to ensuring environmental sustainability.展开更多
In recent years,the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer has remained high.Currently,surgical resection is still the most effective method for treating gastrointestinal cancer.Traditionally,radical surgery depends on ...In recent years,the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer has remained high.Currently,surgical resection is still the most effective method for treating gastrointestinal cancer.Traditionally,radical surgery depends on open surgery.However,traditional open surgery inflicts great trauma and is associated with a slow recovery.Minimally invasive surgery,which aims to reduce postoperative complications and accelerate postoperative recovery,has been rapidly developed in the last two decades;it is increasingly used in the field of gastrointestinal surgery and widely used in early-stage gastrointestinal cancer.Nevertheless,many operations for gastrointestinal cancer treatment are still performed by open surgery.One reason for this may be the challenges of minimally invasive technology,especially when operating in narrow spaces,such as within the pelvis or near the upper edge of the pancreas.Moreover,some of the current literature has questioned oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for gastrointestinal cancer.Overall,the current evidence suggests that minimally invasive techniques are safe and feasible in gastrointestinal cancer surgery,but most of the studies published in this field are retrospective studies and casematched studies.Large-scale randomized prospective studies are needed to further support the application of minimally invasive surgery.In this review,we summarize several common minimally invasive methods used to treat gastrointestinal cancer and discuss the advances in the minimally invasive treatment of gastrointestinal cancer in detail.展开更多
Transurethral resection of the prostate(TURP)became the gold standard surgical treatment for benign prostatic obstruction without undergoing randomized controlled trials against the predecessor standard in open suprap...Transurethral resection of the prostate(TURP)became the gold standard surgical treatment for benign prostatic obstruction without undergoing randomized controlled trials against the predecessor standard in open suprapubic prostatectomy.TURP has historically been associated with significant morbidity and this has fuelled the development of minimally invasive surgical treatment options.Improvements in perioperative morbidity for TURP has been creating an ever increasing standard that must be met by any new technologies that are to be compared to this gold standard.Over recent years,there has been the emergence of novel minimally invasive treatments such as the prostatic urethral lift(PUL;UroLift System),convective WAter Vapor Energy(WAVE;Rezum System),Aquablation(AQUABEAM System),Histotripsy(Vortx Rx System)and temporary implantable nitinol device(TIND).Intraprostatic injections(NX-1207,PRX-302,botulinum toxin A,ethanol)have mostly been used with limited efficacy,but may be suitable for selected patients.This review evaluates these novel minimally invasive surgical options with special reference to the literature published in the past 5 years.展开更多
Objective:Once chronic inflammatory renal disease(IRD)develops,it creates a severe peri-fibrotic process,which makes it a relative contraindication for minimally invasive surgery(MIS).Our objective is to show that lap...Objective:Once chronic inflammatory renal disease(IRD)develops,it creates a severe peri-fibrotic process,which makes it a relative contraindication for minimally invasive surgery(MIS).Our objective is to show that laparoscopic nephrectomy(LN)is a surgical option in IRD with fewer complications and better outcomes.Methods:Retrospective review of patients who underwent a modified-surgical laparoscopic transperitoneal nephrectomy was performed.Data search included all operated patients between May 2013 and May 2018 that had a pathology result with any renal inflammatory condition(xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis,chronic nephritis,and renal tuberculosis).We describe intra-operative variables such as operative time,blood loss,conversion rate,postoperative complications and length of hospital stay.Results:There were 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy with a confirmatory pathology report for IRD.We identified four(8%)major complications;three of them required transfusion and one conversion to open surgery.The mean operative time was 233108 min.Mean estimated blood loss was 206242 mL excluding the conversion cases and 281423 mL including them.The mean length of hospital stay was 3.02.0 days.Conclusion:Laparoscopic nephrectomy for IRD can safely be done.It is a reproducible technique with low risks and complication rates.Our experience supports that releasing the kidney first and leaving the hilum for the end is a safe approach when vascular structures are embedded into a single block of inflammatory and scar tissue.展开更多
基金Informed consent was obtained from patients included(No.SDB-2023-0069-TTSH-01).
文摘BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second highest cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide.About 5%-10%of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced rectal cancer(LARC)on presentation.For LARC invading into other structures(i.e.T4b),multivisceral resection(MVR)and/or pelvic ex-enteration(PE)remains the only potential curative surgical treatment.MVR and/or PE is a major and complex surgery with high post-operative morbidity.Minimally invasive surgery(MIS)has been shown to improve short-term post-operative outcomes in other gastrointestinal malignancies,but there is little evi-dence on its use in MVR,especially so for robotic MVR.This is a single-center retrospective cohort study from 1st January 2015 to 31st March 2023.Inclusion criteria were patients diagnosed with cT4b rectal cancer and underwent MVR,or stage 4 disease with resectable systemic metastases.Pa-tients who underwent curative MVR for locally recurrent rectal cancer,or me-tachronous rectal cancer were also included.Exclusion criteria were patients with systemic metastases with non-resectable disease.All patients planned for elective surgery were enrolled into the standard enhanced recovery after surgery pathway with standard peri-operative management for colorectal surgery.Complex sur-gery was defined based on technical difficulty of surgery(i.e.total PE,bladder-sparing prostatectomy,pelvic lymph node dissection or need for flap creation).Our primary outcomes were the margin status,and complication rates.Cate-gorical values were described as percentages and analysed by the chi-square test.Continuous variables were expressed as median(range)and analysed by Mann-Whitney U test.Cumulative overall survival(OS)and recurrence-free survival(RFS)were analysed using Kaplan-Meier estimates with life table analysis.Log-rank test was performed to determine statistical significance between cumulative estimates.Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.Meier estimates with life table analysis.Log-rank test was performed to determine statistical significance between cumulative estimates.Statistical significance was defined as P<0.05.RESULTS A total of 46 patients were included in this study[open MVR(oMVR):12(26.1%),miMVR:36(73.9%)].Patients’American Society of Anesthesiologists score,body mass index and co-morbidities were comparable between oMVR and miMVR.There is an increasing trend towards robotic MVR from 2015 to 2023.MiMVR was associated with lower estimated blood loss(EBL)(median 450 vs 1200 mL,P=0.008),major morbidity(14.7%vs 50.0%,P=0.014),post-operative intra-abdominal collections(11.8%vs 50.0%,P=0.006),post-operative ileus(32.4%vs 66.7%,P=0.04)and surgical site infection(11.8%vs 50.0%,P=0.006)compared with oMVR.Length of stay was also shorter for miMVR compared with oMVR(median 10 vs 30 d,P=0.001).Oncological outcomes-R0 resection,recurrence,OS and RFS were comparable between miMVR and oMVR.There was no 30-d mortality.More patients underwent robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR for complex cases(robotic 57.1%vs laparoscopic 7.7%,P=0.004).The operating time was longer for robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR[robotic:602(400-900)min,laparoscopic:Median 455(275-675)min,P<0.001].Incidence of R0 resection was similar(laparoscopic:84.6%vs robotic:76.2%,P=0.555).Overall complication rates,major morbidity rates and 30-d readmission rates were similar between la-paroscopic and robotic MVR.Interestingly,3-year OS(robotic 83.1%vs 58.6%,P=0.008)and RFS(robotic 72.9%vs 34.3%,P=0.002)was superior for robotic compared with laparoscopic MVR.CONCLUSION MiMVR had lower post-operative complications compared to oMVR.Robotic MVR was also safe,with acceptable post-operative complication rates.Prospective studies should be conducted to compare short-term and long-term outcomes between robotic vs laparoscopic MVR.
文摘Introduction: Treatments for cardiovascular diseases have increasingly evolved with the tendency to offer minimally invasive or transcatheter procedures instead of conventional sternotomy surgery. In this context, we highlight minimally invasive mitral valve surgery (MIMVS), which has been shown to be an increasingly solid option with some superior results when compared to the conventional technique: better pain control, shorter hospital stays, shorter recovery time, shorter readmission rate in the first postoperative year, better aesthetic results, and lower overall cost. Aim: This study aims to evaluate the stages of MIMVS, by primary mitral valve consultation, in our service and compare these results with data from the literature. Methods: All electronic medical records of patients who underwent MIMVS for primary mitral valve injury in the Encore Hospital from January 2020 to February 2023 were analyzed. Tabulation and statistical analysis were performed using the Microsoft Excel<sup>®</sup> program. Quantitative variables were presented as means, standard deviations. Results: 46 patients were enrolled in our study (Age: 59.1 ± 12.4 years old;60.8% Female, BMI: 26 ± 4.4 Kg/m<sup>2</sup>, Low risk STS score: 82.6%). The observed 30-day mortality was 2.1%, plastic rate of 23.9%, blood transfusion rate of 41.3%, length of stay in an intensive care bed (ICB) of 3.3 ± 3.3 days and hospital stay of 6.4 ± 5.1 days. Conclusions: We noticed that the MIMVS results carried out in our service agree with data from national and international literature with approximately 1.3 days more hospitalization in ICB.
文摘Advancements in technology and surgical training programs have increased the adaptability of minimally invasive surgery(MIS).Gastrointestinal MIS is superior to its open counterparts regarding post-operative morbidity and mortality.MIS has become the first-line surgical intervention for some types of gastrointestinal surgery,such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendicectomy.Carbon dioxide(CO_(2))is the main gas used for insufflation in MIS.CO_(2)contributes 9%-26%of the greenhouse effect,resulting in global warming.The rise in global CO_(2)concentration since 2000 is about 20 ppm per decade,up to 10 times faster than any sustained rise in CO_(2)during the past 800000 years.Since 1970,there has been a steady yet worrying increase in average global temperature by 1.7℃ per century.A recent systematic review of the carbon footprint in MIS showed a range of 6-814 kg of CO_(2)emission per surgery,with higher CO_(2)emission following robotic compared to laparoscopic surgery.However,with superior benefits of MIS over open surgery,this poses an ethical dilemma to surgeons.A recent survey in the United Kingdom of 130 surgeons showed that the majority(94%)were concerned with climate change but felt that the lack of leadership was a barrier to improving environmental sustainability.Given the deleterious environmental effects of MIS,this study aims to summarize the trends of MIS and its carbon footprint,awareness and attitudes towards this issue,and efforts and challenges to ensuring environmental sustainability.
文摘In recent years,the incidence of gastrointestinal cancer has remained high.Currently,surgical resection is still the most effective method for treating gastrointestinal cancer.Traditionally,radical surgery depends on open surgery.However,traditional open surgery inflicts great trauma and is associated with a slow recovery.Minimally invasive surgery,which aims to reduce postoperative complications and accelerate postoperative recovery,has been rapidly developed in the last two decades;it is increasingly used in the field of gastrointestinal surgery and widely used in early-stage gastrointestinal cancer.Nevertheless,many operations for gastrointestinal cancer treatment are still performed by open surgery.One reason for this may be the challenges of minimally invasive technology,especially when operating in narrow spaces,such as within the pelvis or near the upper edge of the pancreas.Moreover,some of the current literature has questioned oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for gastrointestinal cancer.Overall,the current evidence suggests that minimally invasive techniques are safe and feasible in gastrointestinal cancer surgery,but most of the studies published in this field are retrospective studies and casematched studies.Large-scale randomized prospective studies are needed to further support the application of minimally invasive surgery.In this review,we summarize several common minimally invasive methods used to treat gastrointestinal cancer and discuss the advances in the minimally invasive treatment of gastrointestinal cancer in detail.
文摘Transurethral resection of the prostate(TURP)became the gold standard surgical treatment for benign prostatic obstruction without undergoing randomized controlled trials against the predecessor standard in open suprapubic prostatectomy.TURP has historically been associated with significant morbidity and this has fuelled the development of minimally invasive surgical treatment options.Improvements in perioperative morbidity for TURP has been creating an ever increasing standard that must be met by any new technologies that are to be compared to this gold standard.Over recent years,there has been the emergence of novel minimally invasive treatments such as the prostatic urethral lift(PUL;UroLift System),convective WAter Vapor Energy(WAVE;Rezum System),Aquablation(AQUABEAM System),Histotripsy(Vortx Rx System)and temporary implantable nitinol device(TIND).Intraprostatic injections(NX-1207,PRX-302,botulinum toxin A,ethanol)have mostly been used with limited efficacy,but may be suitable for selected patients.This review evaluates these novel minimally invasive surgical options with special reference to the literature published in the past 5 years.
文摘Objective:Once chronic inflammatory renal disease(IRD)develops,it creates a severe peri-fibrotic process,which makes it a relative contraindication for minimally invasive surgery(MIS).Our objective is to show that laparoscopic nephrectomy(LN)is a surgical option in IRD with fewer complications and better outcomes.Methods:Retrospective review of patients who underwent a modified-surgical laparoscopic transperitoneal nephrectomy was performed.Data search included all operated patients between May 2013 and May 2018 that had a pathology result with any renal inflammatory condition(xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis,chronic nephritis,and renal tuberculosis).We describe intra-operative variables such as operative time,blood loss,conversion rate,postoperative complications and length of hospital stay.Results:There were 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy with a confirmatory pathology report for IRD.We identified four(8%)major complications;three of them required transfusion and one conversion to open surgery.The mean operative time was 233108 min.Mean estimated blood loss was 206242 mL excluding the conversion cases and 281423 mL including them.The mean length of hospital stay was 3.02.0 days.Conclusion:Laparoscopic nephrectomy for IRD can safely be done.It is a reproducible technique with low risks and complication rates.Our experience supports that releasing the kidney first and leaving the hilum for the end is a safe approach when vascular structures are embedded into a single block of inflammatory and scar tissue.
