The critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Strasberg Yes or No? An Italian Multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is considered the gold standard for the treatment of gallbladder lithiasis; nevertheless, the incidence of bile duct injuries (BDI) is still high (0.3-0.8%) compared to open cholecystectomy (0.2%). In 1995, Strasberg introduced the "Critical View of Safety" (CVS) to reduce the risk of BDI. Despite its widespread use, the scientific evidence supporting this technique to prevent BDI is controversial. METHODS: Between March 2017 and March 2019, the data of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in 30 Italian surgical departments were collected on a national database. A survey was submitted to all members of Italian Digestive Pathology Society to obtain data on the preoperative workup, the surgical and postoperative management of patients and to judge, at the end of the procedure, if the isolation of the elements was performed according to the CVS. In the case of a declared critical view, iconographic documentation was obtained, finally reviewed by an external auditor. RESULTS: Data from 604 patients were analysed. The study population was divided into two groups according to the evidence (Group A; n = 11) or absence (Group B; N = 593) of BDI and perioperative bleeding. The non-use of CVS was found in 54.6% of procedures in the Group A, and 25.8% in the Group B, and evaluating the operator-related variables the execution of CVS was associated with a significantly lower incidence of BDI and intraoperative bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: The CVS confirmed to be the safest technique to recognize the elements of the Calot triangle and, if correctly performed, it significantly impacted on preventing intraoperative complications. Additional educational programs on the correct application of CVS in clinical practice would be desirable to avoid extreme conditions that may require additional procedures.

Overcoming the challenges of single-incision cholecystectomy with robotic single-site technology.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the preliminary experience with the new da Vinci single-site technology for cholecystectomy. HYPOTHESIS: Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is technically challenging and a related learning curve clearly exists. A novel approved robotic single-port platform has recently been introduced. This technology may help overcome some of the limitations of manual single-incision surgery relating to triangulation of instruments, ergonomics, and surgical exposure. DESIGN: A prospective longitudinal observational study was conducted on 100 consecutive da Vinci single-site cholecystectomies. SETTING: Five Italian centers of robotic general surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary end points were feasibility without conversion and the absence of major complications. Operative times were analyzed to define the learning curve using a mixed regression model.A questionnaire collected the opinions of the surgeons involved in using the new technique. RESULTS: Two patients underwent conversion. No major intraoperative complications occurred, but there were 12 minor incidents (7 ruptures of the gallbladder and 5 cases of minor bleeding from the gallbladder bed). Mean (SD) total operative time was 71 (19) minutes, with a mean (SD) console time of 32 (13) minutes. No significant reduction in the operative times was observed with the increasing of each surgeon's experience. The technique was judged more complex than standard 4-port laparoscopy but easier than single-incision laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Da Vinci single-site cholecystectomy is an easy and safe procedure for expert robotic surgeons. It allows the quick overcoming of the learning curve typical of single-incision laparoscopic surgery and may potentially increase the safety of this approach.

Single access laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

Single Access Laparoscopic Colectomy (SALC) were reported in several studies. The first Single Access laparoscopic right colectomy was descibed by Remzi et Al. We report our experience in SALC describing our approach for Right Colectomy. In our experience we perform as well an extracorporeal side-to-side anastomosis, in contrast wit a conventional laparoscopic right colectomy in which we perform an intra-corporeal anastomosis. We think that an important limit of this approach is represented by the difficult to perform a safe intra-corporeal anastomosis. In conclusion we think that right SALC is a safe and feasible approach. However, many issues will be established, as well as technological, economical and educational aspects, before its introduction in the daily clinical practice.