Search

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques, currently considered the gold standard in the treatment of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), are mainly represented by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), both uniportal and multiportal, and by robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS). While multiportal RATS has been accepted as a valid alternative to VATS, carrying the advantages of three-dimensional high-definition visualisation and improved maneuverability, very few reports exist in literature on the application of uniportal RATS (U-RATS). Therefore, we describe our initial experience with this recently developed method in the treatment of early-stage NSCLC.U-RATS was conducted through a single 4 cm long antero-lateral mini-thoracotomy (ALMT) in the sixth intercostal space at the mid-axillary line. Three 8 mm robotic trocars were positioned and connected, from back to front, to robotic arms as follows: 30° camera arm, robotic arm 2 (bipolar fenestrated grasper) and 1 (Maryland bipolar forceps). Assistant access was identified as the most anterior part of ALMT.Case 1: an 82-year-old woman (American Society of Anaesthesiologists [ASA III]) underwent a left S6 segmentectomy for a clinical stage IA2 NSCLC, complicated by an air leak that resolved spontaneously by postoperative day three (POD 3). Case 2: a 75-year-old man (ASA III) underwent an uncomplicated right lower lobectomy for a clinical stage IA3 NSCLC. Case 1 and 2 were discharged on POD 5 and 4, respectively.From what emerged in our small series, U-RATS with the Da Vinci Xi surgical system might be considered a safe, reliable, and effective alternative to other MIS techniques. Larger prospective studies are required to validate these findings.

Background In recent years there has been a growing interest in the application of minimally invasive surgery in the management of cholecystectomy-related injury to the biliary tract. The aim of this analysis was to identify and combine the available evidence on the argument, with particular reference to major injuries to the main bile duct requiring biliodigestive anastomosis. Methods The PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science electronic databases were queried through May 2019. Inclusion criteria considered all studies reporting detailed data about patients with bile duct injury following cholecystectomy receiving minimally invasive (both laparoscopic and robotic) surgical repair. Clinical outcomes data were pooled and analyzed. Results A total of 31 studies reporting on the outcomes of 218 patients were eventually included in the analysis, whereby 148 patients with type D or E injury. Of these, there were 31 patients (21%) receiving direct bile duct repair and 117 patients (79%) undergoing bilioenteric reconstruction. Among patients with major bile duct injury, postoperative morbidity was 24%, being 12% the incidence of major complications and 6% the rate of patients requiring subsequent, further surgery. Conclusions The absence of high-level evidences precludes the possibility to draw definitive conclusions. However, the available data derived from a growing number of centers demonstrate that minimally invasive surgery may offer its well-known advantages on postoperative outcomes also in the setting of severe iatrogenic injury to the bile ducts.

Background Laparoscopic liver resection (LAPR) is safe and feasible with a better postoperative course as compared to open resections. Robot-assisted liver surgery (ROBR) is a potential alternative to LAPR. In this study we compare outcomes between ROBR and LAPR. Methods Forty patients underwent ROBR and 223 LAPR for various indications. The surgical outcomes of two institutions, each with a specific advanced experience in laparoscopic and robotic surgery, were reviewed. Results The major hepatectomy rate was significantly higher in LAPR (16.6% vs 0%, p = 0.011) while a parenchyma-preserving approach was favoured in ROBR (55% vs 34.1%, p = 0.019). More nodules were resected in the ROBR group (1.97 ± 1.4 vs 1.57 ± 1.1, p = 0.04). Overall conversion rate was 8/40 (20%) in the ROBR and 17/223 (7.6%) in the LAPR group (p = 0.034). Mean blood loss was 330 ± 303 ml and 174 ± 133 ml for the ROBR and LAPR groups, respectively (p = 0.001) Conclusions Despite higher conversion rates and blood loss, robot-assisted surgery may allow the resection of more liver lesions, especially those located in the postero-superior segments, facilitating parenchyma-saving surgery with a comparable complication rate with respect to LAPR. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Background A population-based case-control study was conducted in order to investigate the advantages of robot-assisted gastric resection (RGR) for gastric cancer as opposed to traditional open gastrectomy (OG). Methods Data were collected in two prospectively maintained databases on patients who underwent a D2 gastrectomy with curative intent for primary gastric adenocarcinoma. All (n = 29) the first consecutive gastric cancer patients submitted to RGR from a referral centre for minimally invasive surgery were matched to control cancers (n = 120) extrapolated from a high volume centre database including patients submitted to OG. Results Robot-assisted laparoscopic procedures implied increased operative time (290 vs 222 min, p = 0.004), decreased blood loss (197.6 vs 386.1 mL, p = 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (9.6 vs 13.4 days, p