Efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia for ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND Ovarian cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in female reproductive system in the world,and the choice of its treatment is very important for the survival rate and prognosis of patients.Traditional open surgery is the main treatment for ovarian cancer,but it has the disadvantages of big trauma and slow recovery.With the continuous development of minimally invasive technology,minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia has been gradually applied to the treatment of ovarian cancer because of its advantages of less trauma and quick recovery.However,the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia in the treatment of ovarian cancer are still controversial.AIM To explore the efficacy and safety of general anesthesia minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of ovarian cancer.METHODS The clinical data of 90 patients with early ovarian cancer in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively.According to the different surgical treatment methods,patients were divided into study group and control group(45 cases in each group).The study group received minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia for ovarian cancer,while the control group received traditional open surgery for ovarian cancer.The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire(EORTC QLQ-C30),clinical efficacy and safety of the two groups were compared.RESULTS The intraoperative blood loss,length of hospital stay,postoperative gas evacuation time,and postoperative EORTC QLQ-C30 score of the study group were significantly better than those of the control group(P<0.05).The incidence of postoperative complications in the study group was significantly lower than in the control group(P<0.05).The two groups had no significant differences in the preoperative adrenocorticotropic hormone(ACTH),androstenedione(AD),cortisol(Cor),cluster of differentiation 3 positive(CD3+),and cluster of differentiation 4 positive(CD4+)indexes(P>0.05).In contrast,postoperatively,the study group's ACTH,AD,and Cor indexes were lower,and the CD3+and CD4+indexes were higher than those in the control group(P<0.05).CONCLUSION Minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia in patients with early ovarian cancer can significantly improve the efficacy and safety,improve the short-term prognosis and quality of life of patients,and is worth popularizing.

Comparing short-term outcomes of robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic total mesorectal excision surgery for rectal cancer in elderly patients

BACKGROUND Da Vinci Robotics-assisted total mesorectal excision(TME)surgery for rectal cancer is becoming more widely used.There is no strong evidence that roboticassisted surgery and laparoscopic surgery have similar outcomes in elderly patients with TME for rectal cancer.AIM To determine the improved oncological outcomes and short-term efficacy of robot-assisted surgery in elderly patients undergoing TME surgery.METHODS A retrospective study of the clinical pathology and follow-up of elderly patients who underwent TME surgery at the Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology at the Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine was conducted from March 2020 through September 2023.The patients were divided into a robotassisted group(the R-TME group)and a laparoscopic group(the L-TME group),and the short-term efficacy of the two groups was compared.RESULTS There were 45 elderly patients(≥60 years)in the R-TME group and 50 elderly patients(≥60 years)in the L-TME group.There were no differences in demographics,conversion rates,or postoperative complication rates.The L-TME group had a longer surgical time than the R-TME group[145(125,187.5)vs 180(148.75,206.25)min,P=0.005),and the first postoperative meal time in the L-TME group was longer than that in the R-TME(4 vs 3 d,P=0.048).Among the sex and body mass index(BMI)subgroups,the R-TME group had better out-comes than did the L-TME group in terms of operation time(P=0.042)and intraoperative assessment of bleeding(P=0.042).In the high BMI group,catheter removal occurred earlier in the R-TME group than in the L-TME group(3 vs 4 d,P=0.001),and autonomous voiding function was restored.CONCLUSION The curative effect and short-term efficacy of robot-assisted TME surgery for elderly patients with rectal cancer are similar to those of laparoscopic TME surgery;however,robotic-assisted surgery has better short-term outcomes for individuals with risk factors such as obesity and pelvic stenosis.Optimizing the learning curve can shorten the operation time,reduce the recovery time of gastrointestinal function,and improve the prognosis.

Clinical study of enhanced recovery after surgery in laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendici

BACKGROUND Enhanced recovery after surgery(ERAS)protocol is a comprehensive manage-ment modality that promotes patient recovery,especially in the patients undergo-ing digestive tumor surgeries.However,it is less commonly used in the appen-dectomy.AIM To study the application value of ERAS in laparoscopic surgery for acute appen-dicitis.METHODS A total of 120 patients who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy due to acute appendicitis were divided into experimental group and control group by random number table method,including 63 patients in the experimental group and 57 patients in the control group.Patients in the experimental group were managed with the ERAS protocol,and those in the control group were received the tra-ditional treatment.The exhaust time,the hospitalization duration,the hospita-lization expense and the pain score between the two groups were compared.RESULTS There was no significant difference in age,gender,body mass index and Sunshine Appendicitis Grading System score between the experimental group and the con-trol group(P>0.05).Compared to the control group,the patients in the expe-rimental group had earlier exhaust time,shorter hospitalization time,less hospi-talization cost and lower degree of pain sensation.The differences were statis-tically significant(P<0.01).CONCLUSION ERAS could significantly accelerate the recovery of patients who underwent la-paroscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis,shorten the hospitalization time and reduce hospitalization costs.It is a safe and effective approach.

Clinical feasibility of laparoscopic left lateral segment liver resection with magnetic anchor technique:The first clinical study from China

BACKGROUND Magnetic anchor technique(MAT)has been applied in laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic appendectomy,but has not been reported in laparoscopic partial hepatectomy.AIM To evaluate the feasibility of the MAT in laparoscopic left lateral segment liver resection.METHODS Retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of eight patients who underwent laparoscopic left lateral segment liver resection assisted by MAT in our department from July 2020 to November 2021.The Y-Z magnetic anchor devices(Y-Z MADs)was independently designed and developed by the author of this paper,which consists of the anchor magnet and magnetic grasping apparatus.Surgical time,intraoperative blood loss,intraoperative accidents,operator experience,postoperative incision pain score,postoperative complications,and other indicators were evaluated and analyzed.RESULTS All eight patients underwent a MAT-assisted laparoscopic left lateral segment liver resection,including three patients undertaking conventional 5-port and five patients having a transumbilical single-port operation.The mean operation time was 138±34.32 min(range 95-185 min)and the mean intraoperative blood loss was 123±88.60 mL(range 20-300 mL).No adverse events occurred during the operation.The Y-Z MADs showed good workability and maneuverability in both tissue and organ exposure.In particular,the operators did not experience either a“chopstick”or“sword-fight”effect in the single-port laparoscopic operation.CONCLUSION The results show that the MAT is safe and feasible for laparoscopic left lateral segment liver resection,especially,exhibits its unique abettance for transumbilical single-port laparoscopic left lateral segment liver resection.

Predictive factors for anastomotic leakage after laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Every colorectal surgeon during his or her career is faced with anastomotic leakage(AL); one of the most dreaded complications following any type of gastrointestinal anastomosis due to increased risk of morbidity, mortality, overall impact on functional and oncologic outcome and drainage on hospital resources. In order to understand and give an overview of the AL risk factors in laparoscopic colorectal surgery, we carried out a careful review of the existing literature on this topic and found several different definitions of AL which leads us to believe that the lack of a consensual, standard definition can partly explain the considerable variations in reported rates of AL in clinical studies. Colorectal leak rates have been found to vary depending on the anatomic location of the anastomosis with reported incidence rates ranging from 0 to 20%, while the laparoscopic approach to colorectal resections has not yet been associated with a significant reduction in AL incidence. As well, numerous risk factors, though identified, lack unanimous recognition amongst researchers. For example, the majority of papers describe the risk factors for left-sided anastomosis, the principal risk being male sex and lower anastomosis, while little data exists defining AL risk factors in a right colectomy. Also, gut microbioma is gaining an emerging role as potential risk factor for leakage.

Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic digestivesurgery:Present and future directions

Laparoscopic surgery is applied today worldwide to most digestive procedures. In some of them, such as cholecystectomy, Nissen's fundoplication or obesity surgery, laparoscopy has become the standard in practice. In others, such as colon or gastric resection, the laparoscopic approach is frequently used and its usefulness is unquestionable. More complex procedures, such as esophageal, liver or pancreatic resections are, however, more infrequently performed, due to the high grade of skill necessary. As a result, there is less clinical evidence to support its implementation. In the recent years, robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly applied, again with little evidence for comparison with the conventional laparoscopic approach. This review will focus on the complex digestive procedures as well as those whose use in standard practice could be more controversial. Also novel robot-assisted procedures will be updated.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery:current status andimplementation of the latest technological innovations

The introduction of laparoscopy is an example of surgical innovation with a rapid implementation in many areas of surgery. A large number of controlled studiesand meta-analyses have shown that laparoscopic colorectal surgery is associated with the same benefits than other minimally invasive procedures, including lesser pain, earlier recovery of bowel transit and shorter hospital stay. On the other hand, despite initial concerns about oncological safety, well-designed prospective randomized multicentre trials have demonstrated that oncological outcomes of laparoscopy and open surgery are similar. Although the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery has increased in recent years, the percentages of patients treated with surgery using minimally invasive techniques are still reduced and there are also substantial differences among centres. It has been argued that the limiting factor for the use of laparoscopic procedures is the number of surgeons with adequate skills to perform a laparoscopic colectomy rather than the tumour of patients' characteristics. In this regard, future efforts to increase the use of laparoscopic techniques in colorectal surgery will necessarily require more efforts in teaching surgeons. We here present a review of recent controversies of the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery, such as in rectal cancer operations, the possibility of reproducing complete mesocolon excision, and the benefits of intracorporeal anastomosis after right hemicolectomy. We also describe the results of latest innovations such as single incision laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for colon and rectal diseases.

Laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery for gastric submucosal tumors

AIM:To assess the feasibility,safety,and advantages of minimally invasive laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery(LECS)for gastric submucosal tumors(SMT).METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed 101 consecutive patients,who had undergone partial,proximal,or distal gastrectomy using LECS for gastric SMT at Peking Union Medical College Hospital from June 2006to April 2013.All patients were followed up by visit or telephone.Clinical data,surgical approach,pathological features such as the size,location,and pathological type of each tumor;and follow-up results were analyzed.The feasibility,safety and effectiveness of LECS for gastric SMT were evaluated,especially for patients with tumors located near the cardia or pylorus.RESULTS:The 101 patients included 43(42.6%)menand 58(57.4%)women,with mean age of 51.2±13.1 years(range,14-76 years).The most common symptom was belching.Almost all(n=97)patients underwent surgery with preservation of the cardia and pylorus,with the other four patients undergoing proximal or distal gastrectomy.The mean distance from the lesion to the cardia or pylorus was 3.4±1.3 cm,and the minimum distance from the tumor edge to the cardia was 1.5 cm.Tumor pathology included gastrointestinal stromal tumor in 78 patients,leiomyoma in 13,carcinoid tumors in three,ectopic pancreas in three,lipoma in two,glomus tumor in one,and inflammatory pseudotumor in one.Tumor size ranged from 1 to8.2 cm,with 65(64.4%)lesions<2 cm,32(31.7%)>2 cm,and four>5 cm.Sixty-six lesions(65.3%)were located in the fundus,21(20.8%)in the body,10(9.9%)in the antrum,three(3.0%)in the cardia,and one(1.0%)in the pylorus.During a median follow-up of 28 mo(range,1-69 mo),none of these patients experienced recurrence or metastasis.The three patients who underwent proximal gastrectomy experienced symptoms of regurgitation and belching.CONCLUSION:Laparoscopic-endoscopic cooperative surgery is feasible and safe for patients with gastric submucosal tumor.Endoscopic intraoperative localization and support can help preserve the cardia and pylorus during surgery.

Surgery for inflammatory bowel disease in the era of laparoscopy

During the course of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), surgery may be needed. Approximately 20% of patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) will require surgery, whereas up to 80% of Crohn's disease (CD) patients will undergo an operation during their lifetime. For UC patients requiring surgery, total proctocolectomy and ileoanal pouch anastomosis (IPAA) is the operation of choice as it provides a permanent cure and good quality of life. Nevertheless a permanent stoma is a good option in selected patients, especially the elderly. Minimally invasive surgery has replaced the conventional open approach in many specialized centres worldwide. Laparoscopic colectomy and restorative IPAA is rapidly becoming the standard of care in the treatment of UC requiring surgery, whilst laparoscopic ileo-cecal resection is already the new gold standard in the treatment of complicated CD of terminal ileum. Short term advantages of laparoscopic surgery includes faster recovery time and reduced requirement for analgesics. It is, however, in the long term that minimally invasive surgery has demonstrated its superiority over the open approach. A better cosmesis, a reduced number of incisional hernias and fewer adhesions are the long term advantages of laparoscopy in IBD surgery. A reduction in abdominal adhesions is of great benefit when a second operation is needed in CD and this influences positively the pregnancy rate in young women undergoing restorative IPAA. In developing the therapeutic plan for IBD patients it should be recognized that the surgical approach to the abdomen has changed and that surgical treatment of complicated IBD can be safely performed with a true minimally invasive approach with great patient satisfaction.

Advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma

The greatest advantages of laparoscopy when compared to open surgery include the faster recovery times, shorter hospital stays, decreased postoperative pain, earlier return to work and resumption of normal daily activity as well as cosmetic benefits. Laparoscopy today is considered the gold standard of care in the treatment of cholecystitis and appendicitis worldwide. Laparoscopy has even been adopted in colorectal surgery with good results. The technological improvements in this surgical field along with the development of modern techniques and the acquisition of specific laparoscopic skills have allowed for its utilization in operations with fully intracorporeal anastomoses. Further progress in laparoscopy has included single-incision laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice trans-luminal endoscopic surgery. Nevertheless, laparoscopy for emergency surgery is still considered challenging and is usually not recommended due to the lack of adequate experience in this area. The technical difficulties of operating in the presence of diffuse peritonitis or large purulent collections and diffuse adhesions are also given as reasons. However, the potential advantages of laparoscopy, both in terms of diagnosis and therapy, are clear. Major advantages may be observed in cases with diffuse peritonitis secondary to perforated peptic ulcers,for example, where laparoscopy allows the confirmation of the diagnosis, the identification of the position of the ulcer and a laparoscopic repair with effective peritoneal washout. Laparoscopy has also revolutionized the approach to complicated diverticulitis even when intestinal perforation is present. Many other emergency conditions can be effectively managed laparoscopically, including trauma in select hemodynamically-stable patients. We have therefore reviewed the most recent scientific literature on advances in laparoscopy for acute care surgery and trauma in order to demonstrate the current indications and outcomes associated with a laparoscopic approach to the treatment of the most common emergency surgical conditions.

Short-and long-term outcomes following laparoscopic vs open surgery for pathological T4 colorectal cancer: 10 years of experience in a single center

AIM To evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes following laparoscopic vs open surgery for pathological T4(pT 4) colorectal cancer.METHODS We retrospectively analyzed the short-and long-term outcomes of proven p T4 colorectal cancer patients who underwent complete resection by laparoscopic or open surgery from 2006 to 2015 at Guangdong General Hospital.RESULTS A total of 211 p T4 colorectal cancer patients were included in this analysis, including 101 cases in thelaparoscopy(LAP) group and 110 cases in the open surgery(OPEN) group [including 15(12.9%) cases of conversion to open surgery]. Clinical information(age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, etc.) did not differ between the two groups. In terms of blood loss, postoperative complications and rate of recovery, the LAP group performed significantly more favorably(P < 0.05). With regard to p T4 a/b and combined organ resection, there were significantly more cases in the OPEN group(P < 0.05). The 3-and 5-year overall survival rates were 74.9% and 60.5%, respectively, for the LAP group and 62.4% and 46.5%, respectively, for the OPEN group(P = 0.060). The 3-and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 68.0% and 57.3%, respectively, for the LAP group and 55.8% and 39.8%, respectively, for the OPEN group(P = 0.053). Multivariate analysis showed that ⅢB/ⅢC stage, lymph node status, and CA19-9 were significant predictors of overall survival. PT4 a/b, ⅢC stage, histological subtypes, CA19-9, and adjuvant chemotherapy were independent factors affecting disease-free survival.CONCLUSION Laparoscopy is safely used in the treatment of p T4 colorectal cancer while offering advantages of minimal invasiveness and faster recovery. Laparoscopy is able to achieve good oncologic outcomes similar to those of open surgery. We recommend that laparoscopy be carried out in experienced centers. It is still required to screen the appropriate cases for laparoscopic surgery, optimize the preoperative diagnosis process, and reduce the conversion rate. Multi-center, prospective, and large-sample studies are required to assess these issues.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery

AIM To investigate the role of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer and determine surgical, clinical, and oncological outcomes.METHODS This is a propensity score-matched case-control study, comparing three treatment arms: robotic gastrectomy(RG), laparoscopic gastrectomy(LG), open gastrectomy(OG). Data collection started after sharing a specific study protocol. Data were recorded through a tailored and protected web-based system. Primary outcomes: harvested lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, complications rate. Among the secondary outcomes, there are: operative time, R0 resections, POD of mobilization, POD of starting liquid diet and soft solid diet. The analysis includes the evaluation of type and grade of postoperative complications. Detailed information of anastomotic leakages is also provided.RESULTS The present analysis was carried out of 1026 gastrectomies. To guarantee homogenous distribution of cases, patients in the RG, LG and OG groups were 1:1:2 matched using a propensity score analysis with a caliper = 0.2. The successful matching resulted in a total sample of 604 patients(RG = 151; LG = 151; OG = 302). The three groups showed no differences in all baseline patients characteristics, type of surgery(P = 0.42) and stage of the disease(P = 0.16). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LG(95.93 ± 119.22) and RG(117.91 ± 68.11) groups compared to the OG(127.26 ± 79.50, P = 0.002). The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the RG(27.78 ± 11.45), LG(24.58 ± 13.56) and OG(25.82 ± 12.07) approach. A benefit in favor of the minimally invasive approaches was found in the length of hospital stay(P < 0.0001). A similar complications rate was found(P = 0.13). The leakage rate was not different(P = 0.78) between groups.CONCLUSION Laparoscopic and robotic surgery can be safely performed and proposed as possible alternative to open surgery. The main highlighted benefit is a faster postoperative functional recovery.

Early rehabilitation programs after laparoscopic colorectal surgery:Evidence and criticism

During the past several decades,early rehabilitation programs for the care of patients with colorectal surgery have gained popularity.Several randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have confirmed that the implementation of these evidence-based detailed perioperative care protocols is useful for early recovery of patients after colorectal resection.Patients cared for based on these protocols had a rapid recovery of bowel movement,shortened length of hospital stay,and fewer complications compared with traditional care programs.However,most of the previous evidence was obtained from studies of early rehabilitation programs adapted to open colonic resection.Currently,limited evidence exists on the effects of early rehabilitation after laparoscopic rectal resection,although this procedure seems to be associated with a higher morbidity than that reported with traditional care.In this article,we review previous studies and guidelines on early rehabilitation programs in patients undergoing rectal surgery.We investigated the status of early rehabilitation programs in rectal surgery and analyzed the limitations of these studies.We also summarized indications and detailed protocol components of current early rehabilitation programs after rectal surgery,focusing on laparoscopic resection.

Laparoscopic surgery for benign and malign diseases of the digestive system:Indications,limitations,and evidence

The laparoscopic technique was introduced in gastrointestinal surgery in the mid 1980s.Since then,the development of this technique has been extraordinary.Triggered by technical innovations(stapling devices or coagulation/dissecting devices),nowadays any type of gastrointestinal resection has been successfully performed laparoscopically and can be performed laparoscopically dependent on the patient’s condition.This summary gives an overview over 30 years of laparoscopic surgery with focus on today’s indications and evidence.Main indications remain the more common procedures,e.g.,appendectomy,cholecystectomy,bariatric procedures or colorectal resections.For all these indications,the laparoscopic approach has become the gold standard with less perioperative morbidity.Regarding oncological outcome there have been several highquality randomized controlled trials which demonstrated equivalency between laparoscopic and open colorectal resections.Less common procedures like esophagectomy,oncological gastrectomy,liver and pancreatic resections can be performed successfully as well by anexperienced surgeon.However,the evidence for these special indications is poor and a general recommendation cannot be given.In conclusion,laparoscopic surgery has revolutionized the field of gastrointestinal surgery by reducing perioperative morbidity without disregarding surgical principles especially in oncological surgery.

Evolution and future of laparoscopic colorectal surgery

The advances of laparoscopic surgery since the early 1990 s have caused one of the largest technical revolutions in medicine since the detection of antibiotics(1922,Flemming),the discovery of DNA structure(1953,Watson and Crick),and solid organ transplantation(1954,Murray).Perseverance through a rocky start and increased familiarity with the chop-stick surgery in conjunction with technical refinements has resulted in a rapid expansion of the indications for minimally invasive surgery.Procedure-related factors initially contributed to this success and included the improved postoperative recovery and cosmesis,fewer wound complications,lower risk for incisional hernias and for subsequent adhesionrelated small bowel obstructions; the major breakthrough however came with favorable long-term outcomes data on oncological parameters.The future will have to determine the specific role of various technical approaches,define prognostic factors of success and true progress,and consider directing further innovation while potentially limiting approaches that do not add to patient outcomes.

Laparoscopic revolution in bariatric surgery

The history of bariatric surgery is investigational.Dedicated surgeons have continuously sought for an ideal procedure to relieve morbidly obese patients from their burden of comorbid conditions,reduced life expectancy and low quality of life.The ideal procedure must have low complication risk,both in short- and long term,as well as minimal impact on daily life.The revolution of laparoscopic techniques in bariatric surgery is described in this summary.Advances in minimal invasive techniques have contributed to reduced operative time,length of stay,and complications.The development in bariatric surgery has been exceptional,resulting in a dramatic increase of the number of procedures performed world wide during the last decades.Although,a complex bariatric procedure can be performed with operative mortality no greater than cholecystectomy,specific procedure-related complications and other drawbacks must be taken into account.The evolution of laparoscopy will be the legacy of the 21 st century and at present,day-care surgery and further reduction of the operative trauma is in focus.The impressive effects on comorbid conditions have prompted the adoption of minimal invasive bariatric procedures into the field of metabolic surgery.

Impact of laparoscopic surgery training laboratory on surgeon's performance

Minimally invasive surgery has been replacing the open standard technique in several procedures. Similar or even better postoperative outcomes have been described in laparoscopic or robot-assisted procedures when compared to open surgery. Moreover, minimally invasive surgery has been providing less postoperative pain, shorter hospitalization, and thus a faster return to daily activities. However, the learning curve required to obtain laparoscopic expertise has been a barrier in laparoscopic spreading. Laparoscopic surgery training laboratory has been developed to aid surgeons to overcome the challenging learning curve. It may include tutorials, inanimate model skills training(box models and virtual reality simulators), animal laboratory, and operating room observation. Several different laparoscopic courses are available with specific characteristics and goals. Herein, we aim to describe the activities performed in a dry and animal-model training laboratory and to evaluate the impact of different kinds of laparoscopic surgery training courses on surgeon's performance. Several tasks are performed in dry and animal laboratory to reproduce a real surgery. A short period of training can improve laparoscopic surgical skills, although most of times it is not enough to confer laparoscopic expertise for participants. Nevertheless, this short period of training is able to increase the laparoscopic practice of surgeons in their communities. Full laparoscopic training in medical residence or fellowship programs is the best way of stimulating laparoscopic dissemination.

Core value of laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Since laparoscopy was first used in cholecystectomy in 1987, it has developed quickly and has been used in most fields of traditional surgery. People have now accepted its advantages like small incision, quick recovery, light pain, beauty and short hospital stays. In early times, there are still controversies about the application of laparoscopy in malignant tumor treatments, especially about the problems of oncology efficacy, incision implantation and operation security. However, these concerns have been fully eliminated by evidences on the basis of evidence-basis medicine. In recent years, new minimally invasive technologies are appearing continually, but they still have challenges and may increase the difficulties of radical dissection and the risks of potential complications, so they are confined to benign or early malignant tumors. The core value of the laparoscopic technique is to ensure the high quality of tumor's radical resection and less complications. On the basis of this, it is allowed to pursue more minimally invasive techniques. Since the development of laparoscopic colorectal surgery is rapid and unceasing, we have reasons to believe that laparoscopic surgery will become gold standard for colorectal surgery in the near future.

Single access laparoscopic surgery:Complementary or alternative to NOTES?

In recent years,single access laparoscopic surgery(SALS) and natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery(NOTES) have gained interest from both clinical and industrial point of view,with the increased development of different laparoscopic instruments,production of various access ports,and improvement of operative endoscopes.The main advantages stimulating these two approaches are the cosmetic result,the rapid recovery of the patient,and the reduced need for pain killers.SALS and NOTES are in part complementary and in part alternative techniques.Currently,SALS is much simpler and technically easier than NOTES.

Technical and instrumental prerequisites for single-port laparoscopic solo surgery:state of art

With the aid of advanced surgical techniques and instruments, single-port laparoscopic surgery(SPLS) can be accomplished with just two surgical members: an operator and a camera assistant. Under these circumstances, the reasonable replacement of a human camera assistant by a mechanical camera holder has resulted in a new surgical procedure termed singleport solo surgery(SPSS). In SPSS, the fixation and coordinated movement of a camera held by mechanicaldevices provides fixed and stable operative images that are under the control of the operator. Therefore, SPSS primarily benefits from the provision of the operator's eye-to-hand coordination. Because SPSS is an intuitive modification of SPLS, the indications for SPSS are the same as those for SPLS. Though SPSS necessitates more actions than the surgery with a human assistant, these difficulties seem to be easily overcome by the greater provision of static operative images and the need for less lens cleaning and repositioning of the camera. When the operation is expected to be difficult and demanding, the SPSS process could be assisted by the addition of another instrument holder besides the camera holder.