Efficacy of camera sleeve in conveyance of conduits.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal substitutes need conveyance from the abdomen into the neck for restoration of alimentary continuity. Reports suggest that the use of plastic camera sleeve may prove advantageous in restoring conveyance. This study aims to evaluate the practicability of this approach, specifically, in laparoscopy-assisted surgeries. METHODS: The efficacy of camera sleeve in conduit transposition was prospectively evaluated over 2 years. The following parameters were assessed: success/failure; time taken; blood loss; adequacy of length of the conduit delivered into the neck; conduit orientation; ease of procedure through different routes; conduit damage; complications; and drawbacks. RESULTS: The technique was used in 25 consecutive patients. Two ileo-colonic, 13 gastric, and 10 colonic conduits were transposed. Posterior mediastinal, retro-sternal, and ante-sternal routes were used in 15, 8, and 2 cases, respectively. There were no failures. The technique was easy to adopt. It added < 10 minutes to the procedure. It entailed no additional blood loss. Adequate length of the conduit was transposed into the neck, atraumatically. Conduits maintained their orientation without effort. Although no complications per se were associated with its use, extra conduit length became transposed into the neck, twice, necessitating its trimming/adjustment. In one case, traction suture became avulsed from the conduit, midway in the tunnel. This could easily be rectified by pulling out the sleeve from the neck, which brought up the conduit along with it, as desired. CONCLUSIONS: Use of camera sleeve proves efficacious in interposition of esophageal substitutes.

Port extériorisation appendectomy-our experience.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy is conventionally performed using 3 ports, with division of appendicular base and artery using staples/endoloops/clips. Paucity of surgical laparoscope and laparoscopic disposables necessitated adoption of laparoscopic technique obviating the need for the above. We document our experience with the port exteriorisation appendectomy performed predominantly using two ports. METHODS: Between July 2008 and April 2009, 65 appendectomies were performed at a zonal hospital, of which 26 were performed using the contemplated technique. Technical challenges, conversions, operative time, complications, postoperative recovery, and cosmesis were analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (13 males and 13 females), with a mean age of 22.88 ± 11.94 years, underwent port exteriorisation appendectomy. The median operative time was 20 minutes. Two cases (7.7%) needed conversion to open appendectomy. Dense adhesions necessitated addition of a working instrument/port in two cases (7.7%). Postoperative pain was < 25 by verbal response score. Visceral component predominated on the operative day, which got confined to port sites subsequently. One patient (3.85%) developed surgical site infection. Friable, gangrenous, short fibrosed appendix on a fixed caecum and very thick abdominal wall were its limitations. Postoperative recovery and cosmesis were excellent. CONCLUSION: Port exteriorisation appendectomy proves simple, safe, economical, and efficacious, when conditions favour its performance. However, difficult appendices warrant conversion to three ports technique or to open procedure.