Search

Background: Anastomotic suturing is the Achilles heel of pancreatic surgery. Especially in laparoscopic and robotically assisted surgery, the pancreatic anastomosis should first be trained outside the operating room. Realistic training models are therefore needed. Methods: Models of the pancreas, small bowel, stomach, bile duct, and a realistic training torso were developed for training of anastomoses in pancreatic surgery. Pancreas models with soft and hard textures, small and large ducts were incrementally developed and evaluated. Experienced pancreatic surgeons (n = 44) evaluated haptic realism, rigidity, fragility of tissues, and realism of suturing and knot tying. Results: In the iterative development process the pancreas models showed high haptic realism and highest realism in suturing (4.6 ± 0.7 and 4.9 ± 0.5 on 1–5 Likert scale, soft pancreas). The small bowel model showed highest haptic realism (4.8 ± 0.4) and optimal wall thickness (0.1 ± 0.4 on −2 to +2 Likert scale) and suturing behavior (0.1 ± 0.4). The bile duct models showed optimal wall thickness (0.3 ± 0.8 and 0.4 ± 0.8 on −2 to +2 Likert scale) and optimal tissue fragility (0 ± 0.9 and 0.3 ± 0.7). Conclusion: The biotissue training models showed high haptic realism and realistic suturing behavior. They are suitable for realistic training of anastomoses in pancreatic surgery which may improve patient outcomes.

Background The value of open and minimally invasive liver resection for symptomatic solid benign liver tumours (BLT) such as hepatocellular adenoma, focal nodular hyperplasia and haemangioma is being debated. A systematic review on symptom relief, quality of life (QoL) and surgical outcome after both open and minimally invasive surgery for solid BLT is currently lacking. Methods A systematic search in PubMed and EMBASE was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines (January 1985–April 2018). Articles reporting pre-and postoperative symptoms or QoL in patients undergoing open or minimally surgery for BLT were evaluated. Methodological quality was assessed using the MINORS tool. Results Forty-two studies were included with 4061 patients undergoing surgery for BLT, 3536 (87%) open and 525 (13%) laparoscopic resections. Randomized and propensity-matched studies were lacking. Symptoms were the indication for resection in 56% of the patients. After a weighted mean of 28.5 months follow-up after surgery, symptoms were relieved in 82% of symptomatic patients. Validated QoL tools were used in eight studies, of which two found significant better QoL scores following laparoscopic compared to open surgery. Discussion Resection of symptomatic BLT seems safe and relieves symptoms in the vast majority of selected patients. Comparative studies are needed before more firm conclusions can be drawn.

BackgroundLaparoscopic liver resection (LLR) is now considered a feasible alternative to open liver resection (OLR) in selected patients. Nevertheless studies comparing LLR and OLR are few and concerns remain about long-term oncological equivalence. The present study compares outcomes with LLR vs. OLR using meta-analytical methods.MethodsElectronic literature searches were conducted to identify studies comparing LLR and OLR. Short-term outcomes evaluated included operating time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, peri-operative morbidity and resection margin status. Longer-term outcomes included local and distant recurrence, and overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Meta-analyses were performed using the Mantel–Haenszel method and Cohen's d method, with results expressed as odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference (SMD), respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsTwenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria with a population of 1678 patients. LLR resulted in longer operating time, but reduced blood loss, portal clamp time, overall and liver-specific complications, ileus and length of stay. No difference was found between LLR and OLR for oncological outcomes.DiscussionLLR has short-term advantages and seemingly equivalent long-term outcomes and can be considered a feasible alternative to open surgery in experienced hands.