Comparison of lateral flank approach and low anterior access for single port (SP) retroperitoneal partial nephrectomy: an analysis from the single port advanced research consortium (SPARC).

Single Port (SP) robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) can be performed via retroperitoneal and transperitoneal approach. We aim to compare outcomes of two commonly described incisions for retroperitoneal SP RPN: lateral flank approach (LFA) and low anterior access (LAA). We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent SP retroperitoneal RPN from 2018 to 2023 as part of a large multi-institute collaboration (SPARC). Baseline demographic, clinical, tumor-specific characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were compared using χ2, t test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariable analyses were conducted using robust and logistic regressions. A total of 70 patients underwent SP retroperitoneal RPN, with 44 undergoing LAA. Overall, there were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The LAA group exhibited significantly lower median RENAL scores (8 vs. 5, p < 0.001) and more varied tumor locations (p = 0.002). In the bivariate analysis, there were no statistically significant differences in ischemia time, estimated blood loss, or complication rates between the groups. However, the LAA group had longer operative times (101 vs. 134 min, p < 0.001), but was more likely to undergo a same-day discharge (p < 0.001). When controlling for other variables, LAA was associated with shorter ischemia time (p = 0.005), but there was no significant difference in operative time (p = 0.348) and length of stay (p = 0.122). Both LFA and LAA are acceptable approaches for SP retroperitoneal RPN with comparable perioperative outcomes. This early data suggests the LAA is more versatile for varying tumor locations; however, larger cohort studies are needed to ascertain whether there is an overall difference in patient recovery.

Minimizing minimally invasive surgery: Current status of the single-port robotic surgery in Urology.

BACKGROUND: The novel da Vinci Single-Port (SP) robotic platform received the US FDA approval in 2018. The device, specifically conceived for single-site approach, is pushing through the limits of minimally invasive surgery. We sought to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of the clinical experiences accomplished by the da Vinci SP in urology, and to discuss future perspectives. METHODS: A non-systematic literature review was performed focusing on single port articles in urological surgery using Medline/PubMed and Embase search electronic engines. The authors analyzed findings and a brief report of the clinical experience for surgical procedures completed by the SP platform was described. RESULTS: The current data available from single-port robotic established the safety and feasibility of urologic procedures using this novel platform. However, the results come from single-center case series, small cohorts and retrospective studies that need to be cautiously interpreted. Additional evidence is required to determine the asset of the SP platform in the urological community. CONCLUSIONS: The SP robotic system opens new frontiers on the surgical scenery facilitating the completion of urological surgeries through a single incision. Further comparative studies will be required to assess perioperative and long-term oncological and functional outcomes among SP, multi-arm robotic and open approaches.

Minimizando la cirugía mínimamente invasiva: estado actual de la cirugía robótica de puerto único en Urología / Minimizing minimally invasive surgery: Current status of the single-port robotic surgery in Urology

Antecedentes: La novedosa plataforma robótica da Vinci Single-Port (single port [SP]=puerto único [PU]) recibió la aprobación de la FDA en 2018. El equipo, concebido específicamente para el acceso por un solo puerto, está superando los límites de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva. Buscamos proporcionar una visión global del estado actual de las experiencias clínicas logradas por el PU da Vinci en Urología y discutir las perspectivas futuras.MétodosSe realizó una revisión bibliográfica no sistemática centrada en artículos de cirugía urológica de puerto único utilizando los motores de búsqueda Medline/PubMed y Embase. Los autores analizaron los hallazgos y se describió un breve informe de la experiencia clínica de los procedimientos quirúrgicos llevados a cabo mediante la plataforma PU.ResultadosLos datos actuales disponibles de la cirugía robótica de puerto único han establecido la seguridad y la viabilidad de los procedimientos urológicos que utilizan esta novedosa plataforma. Sin embargo, los resultados provienen de series de casos de un solo centro, cohortes pequeñas y estudios retrospectivos que deben ser interpretados con cautela. Se necesitan estudios adicionales para determinar el valor de la plataforma de PU en la comunidad urológica.ConclusionesEl sistema robótico de PU abre nuevas fronteras en el escenario quirúrgico facilitando la realización de cirugías urológicas a través de una única incisión. Se necesitarán más estudios comparativos para evaluar los resultados oncológicos y funcionales perioperatorios y a largo plazo entre los abordajes de PU, robótico multibrazo y abierto. (AU)

Background: The novel da Vinci Single-Port (SP) robotic platform received the US FDA approval in 2018. The device, specifically conceived for single-site approach, is pushing through the limits of minimally invasive surgery. We sought to provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of the clinical experiences accomplished by the da Vinci SP in urology, and to discuss future perspectives.MethodsA non-systematic literature review was performed focusing on single port articles in urological surgery using Medline/PubMed and Embase search electronic engines. The authors analyzed findings and a brief report of the clinical experience for surgical procedures completed by the SP platform was described.ResultsThe current data available from single-port robotic established the safety and feasibility of urologic procedures using this novel platform. However, the results come from single-center case series, small cohorts and retrospective studies that need to be cautiously interpreted. Additional evidence is required to determine the asset of the SP platform in the urological community.ConclusionsThe SP robotic system opens new frontiers on the surgical scenery facilitating the completion of urological surgeries through a single incision. Further comparative studies will be required to assess perioperative and long-term oncological and functional outcomes among SP, multi-arm robotic and open approaches. (AU)

Single-Port Percutaneous Transvesical Simple Prostatectomy Using the SP Robotic System: Initial Clinical Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To present our initial experience with single-port percutaneous transvesical simple prostatectomy using the novel SP robotic surgical system. METHODS: Ten patients underwent single-port transvesical simple prostatectomy between February and November 2019. Percutaneous access to the bladder dome was made and all SP instruments were inserted through the SP multichannel cannula directly into the bladder. Prostate adenoma enucleation, hemostasis and trigonization were done according to the principles of open simple prostatectomy technique. Demographics and perioperative outcomes were prospectively collected and analyzed. RESULTS: All procedures were performed successfully without the need for conversion to open surgery. Median preoperative estimated prostate size was 159 (Interquartile range (IQR) 108-223) grams. No intraoperative complications occurred. Median operative time and estimated blood loss were 190 (IQR 146-203) minutes and 100 (IQR 68-175) ml, respectively. Mean postoperative specimen weight was 84.3 ± 34 grams. Median length of hospital stay was 19 (IQR 17-28) hours. All patients were satisfied with their urinary flow after catheter removal without any episode of acute urinary retention 1-6 months, postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Single-port transvesical simple prostatectomy can be offered as an alternative treatment option for surgical management of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with large prostate adenoma. Sparing the peritoneal cavity, minimum dissection of the bladder, excellent visualization of the prostate fossa can be some of the potential advantages of this minimally invasive approach. Comparative studies with standard techniques are advisable to evaluate the surgical outcome and postoperative morbidity of each treatment modality.

Cirugía robótica multicuadrante concomitante para prostatectomía radical y nefrectomía parcial izquierda. Dos procedimientos mediante un solo abordaje / Multiquadrant combined robotic radical prostatectomy and left partial nephrectomy: a combined procedure by a single approach

INTRODUCCIÓN: Presentar el primer caso de cirugía multicuadrante concomitante-prostatectomía radical robótica y nefrectomía parcial robótica izquierda- realizadas con técnica de puerto único utilizando el sistema quirúrgico da Vinci SP(R) (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA, EE. UU.). PACIENTE Y METODOLOGÍA: Varón de 66 años con diagnóstico de cáncer de próstata localizado y lesión sospechosa en riñón izquierdo encontrada en tomografía axial computarizada (TAC) durante la evaluación del cáncer de próstata. Ambos procedimientos se realizaron usando una sola incisión de 3cm, y un puerto laparoscópico adicional; utilizando un Gelpoint(R) estándar (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, EE. UU.) y replicando la técnica previamente descrita de puerto único para prostatectomía radical robótica y nefrectomía parcial con el uso de la plataforma robótica puerto único prostatectomía SP(R). RESULTADOS: Tiempo operatorio total fue 256 min, con un tiempo de consola de 108min para la prostatectomía radical, y 101 min para la nefrectomía parcial, respectivamente, incluyendo un tiempo de isquemia de 26 min. La pérdida sanguínea estimada fue de 250 cc. No sé necesito transfusión. La enfermedad final de próstata fue adenocarcinoma Gleason 7 (4+3) y para la lesión renal fue carcinoma de células renales. Después de 2 meses de seguimiento, PSA fue indetectable, sin recurrencia o complicaciones. CONCLUSIONES: La técnica de puerto único presenta ventajas como: más fácil planificación quirúrgica y transición para cirugías combinadas y multicuadrantes, recuperación más rápida, dolor postoperatorio mínimo y menor uso de opioides, además de excelentes resultados cosméticos. Sugerimos que procedimientos combinados deberían ser realizados solo en instituciones con un alto volumen de pacientes, por cirujanos con amplia experiencia en cirugía robótica y con pacientes seleccionados

INTRODUCTION: To present the first case of a concomitant robotic radical prostatectomy and a left robotic partial nephrectomy performed by a single-port approach using the SP(R) da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA, EE. UU. ). PATIENT AND METHODS: A 66-year-old male diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and a left kidney renal mass incidentally found on computed tomography (CT) scan during prostate cancer evaluation. Procedures were performed using a single supra-umbilical 3cm incision, plus one additional laparoscopic port, utilizing a standard Gelpoint(R) (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, EE. UU. ) and replicating the technique previously described for single-port transperitoneal radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy with the use of the SP(R) robotic platform. RESULTS: Total operative time was 256 minutes (min) with a console time of 108min for radical prostatectomy, and 101 min for the partial nephrectomy respectively, including a warm ischemia time of 26 min. Estimated blood loss was 250 cc. Blood transfusion was not needed. Final pathology for prostate was adenocarcinoma Gleason 7 (4+3) and for the kidney lesion was renal cell carcinoma. After two months of follow-up, PSA was undetectable and no complications or recurrence were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The single-port approach has advantages as easier surgical planning and transition for combined and multi-quadrants surgeries: faster recovery, minimal postoperative pain and need for opioids, and excellent cosmetic outcome. We suggest that combined procedures should be performed only in high volume institutions by surgeons with vast experience in robotic surgery in selected patients

No ischemia technique, parenchymal preservation and age are the most important determinants of renal function after partial nephrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare the outcomes of Off-Clamp to On -Clamp approach during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). MATERIEL AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 940 patients who underwent a RAPN between 2007 and 2015 for cT1a tumors using On-Clamp or Off-Clamp approaches. Patient with solitary kidney or multifocal were excluded. Overall, 103 patients underwent Off-Clamp approach and 37 patients On-Clamp approach. We matched the patients in terms of tumor size, Charlson comorbidity index and R.E.N.A.L. score. At all, 309 patients from the On-Clamp were matched to the Off-Clamp group. We compared the clinic-pathological characteristics, perioperative morbidity and late functional outcomes between the 2 propensity score matched groups. Limitation included retrospective analysis. RESULTS: After matching, there were no difference in clinic-pathological characteristics in terms of gender, age, race, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (e-GFR), tumor size, R.E.N.A.L. score complexity, hilar (H) location between the 2 groups. Regarding perioperative outcomes; while operative time (P=0,4), estimated blood loss (P=0,28), Clavien grade III-IV complications (P=0,8) surgical reoperation (P=1), 30-day readmission (P=1), positive surgical margin (5,5% vs. 5,8%, P=0,9) were comparable between the 2 groups, there were significant difference in excisional volume loss (median, 7,08 vs. 3,51cm3, P<0,01), e-GFR decline (median, -9,7 vs. -2,2ml/min/1,73 m2, P<0,01), percent of e-GFR preservation (median, 87% vs. 97%, P<0,01), and CKD upstaging (36,5% vs. 23,3%, P=0,01), Off-Clamp approach (P=0,01), and age (P=0,02) were predictors of renal function preservation, whereas excisional volume loss (OR=1,035, CI 95% (1,015-1,06), P<0,01) predicted upstaging. CONCLUSION: RAPN for selected renal mass using Off-Clamp approach offered renal functional advantage over On-Clamp, without adding morbidities. While no ischemia technique was associated with less excisional volume loss, Off-Clamp approach, and age were independent predictors of renal function preservation. Clinical significance of these findings in various clinical settings will require further investigation.

Multiquadrant Combined Robotic Radical Prostatectomy And Left Partial Nephrectomy: A Combined procedure by A Single Approach. / Cirugía robótica multicuadrante concomitante para prostatectomía radical y nefrectomía parcial izquierda. Dos procedimientos mediante un solo abordaje.

INTRODUCTION: To present the first case of a concomitant robotic radical prostatectomy and a left robotic partial nephrectomy performed by a single-port approach using the SP® da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA, EE.UU.). PATIENT AND METHODS: A 66-year-old male diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and a left kidney renal mass incidentally found on computed tomography (CT) scan during prostate cancer evaluation. Procedures were performed using a single supra-umbilical 3cm incision, plus one additional laparoscopic port, utilizing a standard Gelpoint® (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, EE.UU.) and replicating the technique previously described for single-port transperitoneal radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy with the use of the SP® robotic platform. RESULTS: Total operative time was 256minutes (min) with a console time of 108min for radical prostatectomy, and 101min for the partial nephrectomy respectively, including a warm ischemia time of 26min. Estimated blood loss was 250cc. Blood transfusion was not needed. Final pathology for prostate was adenocarcinoma Gleason 7 (4+3) and for the kidney lesion was renal cell carcinoma. After two months of follow-up, PSA was undetectable and no complications or recurrence were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The single-port approach has advantages as easier surgical planning and transition for combined and multi-quadrants surgeries: faster recovery, minimal postoperative pain and need for opioids, and excellent cosmetic outcome. We suggest that combined procedures should be performed only in high volume institutions by surgeons with vast experience in robotic surgery in selected patients.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic excision of prostatic utricle in a 3-year old.

Prostatic utricles have traditionally been excised via the open approach or laparoscopically. Recently, the robot-assisted laparoscopic approach has been described in a 19-year-old male. the case of a 3-year-old male with a disorder of sex development (mosaic 45X/46 XY), with multiple associated anomalies, who presented with recurrent UTI is presented. Renal/bladder ultrasound revealed normal bilateral kidneys, and a 4.3 × 2.8 × 3.3 cm cystic mass in the midline posterior to the bladder. Voiding cystourethrogram demonstrated a large cystic mass behind the bladder, concerning for large prostatic utricle. The patient was brought to the operating room and placed in lithotomy. The urethra was examined cystoscopically. The os of the utricle was identified, an open-ended catheter was advanced, the cystoscope was removed, and a Foley was placed. The camera port was introduced supraumbilically, and robotic ports were introduced inferolaterally. Irrigation of the catheter and distension of the utricle allowed manipulation of the utricle to facilitate identification of a plane of dissection. The neck of the utricle was identified and incised. The catheter was removed, transection was completed, and the stump was oversewn. CONCLUSION: Combined cystoscopic and robotic approach to prostatic utricle excision is feasible, safe, and effective in this patient population.

Perioperative morbidity, oncological outcomes and predictors of pT3a upstaging for patients undergoing partial nephrectomy for cT1 tumors.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate perioperative morbidity, oncological outcome and predictors of pT3a upstaging after partial nephrectomy (PN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective study of 1042 patients who underwent PN for cT1N0M0 renal cell carcinoma between 2007 and 2015. A total of 113 cT1 patients were upstaged to pT3a, while 929 were staged as pT1. Demographic, perioperative and pathological variables were reviewed. We compared the clinico-pathological characteristics, perioperative morbidity and oncological outcomes between pT3a and pT1 groups. Multivariate regression evaluates variables associated with T3a upstaging. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival analyses were performed. Survival curves were compared using log-rank test. RESULTS: The pT3a tumors were high complexity tumors (median RENAL score 8 vs. 7, p < 0.01), higher hilar (h) location (27.5 vs. 14.8%, p < 0.01), higher grade (57.5 vs. 38.2%, p < 0.01), and higher positive surgical margins (18.6 vs. 5.8%, p < 0.01. Patients with pT3a had a higher estimated blood loss, transfusion rate, ischemia time and overall complications, though there were no differences in median e-GFR decline and major (Grade III-V) complications. Five-year RFS was 78.5% for pT3a group vs. 94.6% for pT1 group (log-rank p < 0.01). Male gender (OR 2.2, p < 0.01), and R.E.N.A.L. score (OR 2.3, p = 0.01) were preoperative predictors of upstaging. We acknowledge limitations in our study, most are inherent problems of retrospective studies. CONCLUSION: Perioperative morbidity, after partial nephrectomy, is acceptable in cT1/pT3 tumors in comparison to cT1/pT1; however, upstaged patients had a worse oncological outcome. cT1/pT3a tumors are associated with adverse clinico-pathological features. Preoperative risk predictors of upstaging were higher R.E.N.A.L. score and male gender.

Perioperative factors associated with acute kidney injury after partial nephrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Partial nephrectomy is performed with the aim to preserve renal function. But the occurrence of postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) can interfere with this goal. Our primary aim was to evaluate associations between pre-specified modifiable factors and estimated glomerular filtration rate after partial nephrectomy. Our secondary aims were to evaluate associations between pre-specified modifiable factors and both serum creatinine concentration and type of nephrectomy. METHODS: The records of 1955 patients who underwent partial nephrectomy were collected. Postoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was used as the primary outcome measure. Twenty modifiable risk factors were studied. A repeated-measures linear model with autoregressive within-subject correlation structure was used. The interaction between all the factors and type of nephrectomy was also studied. RESULTS: A total of 1187 (61%) patients had no kidney injury, 647 (33%) had stage I, 80 (4%) had stage II, and 41 (2%) had stage III injury. The mean eGFR increased an estimated 0.83 (99.76% CI 0.79-0.88) ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) for a unit increase in baseline eGFR. Mean eGFR was 2.65 (99.76% CI: 0.13, 5.18) ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) lower in patients with hypertension. Mean eGFR decreased 0.42 (99.76% CI: 0.22, 0.62) ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) for a 10-minute longer in duration of procedure and decreased 2.09 (99.76% CI: 1.39, 2.80) ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) for a 10-minute longer in ischemia time. It was 3.53 (99.76% CI: 0.83, 6.23) ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2) lower for patients who received warm ischemia as compared to cold ischemia. CONCLUSION: Potentially modifiable factors associated with AKI in the postoperative period were identified as baseline renal function, preoperative hypertension, longer duration of surgical time and ischaemia time, and warm ischaemia.

[Robotic partial nephrectomy: five years retrospective analysis at a single center]. / Néphrectomie partielle laparoscopique assistée par robot : analyse monocentrique et rétrospective sur cinq ans.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to assess perioperative outcomes in a large series of robotic partial nephrectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 413 patients undergoing a robotic partial nephrectomy in a single center between June 2006 and December 2011. We analyzed demographic characteristics, operative and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Mean age was 58.6±11.9 years, body mass index was 30.5±7.1 kg/m2 and median ASA score 3. Mean tumor size was 3.2±1.66 cm and was divided in low, moderate and high RENAL nephrometry score respectively in 40%, 44% and 16%. Operative time and warm ischemia time were respectively 191 and 21min. Mean estimated blood loss was 200 mL and there were 4.3% major complications (Clavien-Dindo System). Mean length of stay was 3.6 days. The latest estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 74.84 mL/min×1.73 m2 with a mean decrease of 8.6%. In multivariate analysis, Charlson comorbidity index (P=0.005), preoperative eGFR (P<0.001) and warm ischemia time (P=0.0025) were found to be independent predictors of latest postoperative renal function. CONCLUSION: Robotic partial nephrectomy is feasible and safe in experienced hands. In our study preoperative renal function, Charlson comorbidity index and warm ischemia time were independent predictors of latest eGFR.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for a 7-cm mass in a renal allograft.

Treatment options for a suspicious renal mass in a renal allograft include radical nephrectomy or nephron-sparing surgery (NSS). To our knowledge robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RPN) as treatment for a renal mass in a transplant kidney has not been previously reported. We report the case of RPN for a 7-cm renal mass in a transplanted kidney. A 35-year-old female with reflux nephropathy received a living-related donor kidney transplant in 1986. At 24 years after transplantation she had a 7-cm Bosniak III cystic mass of the allograft detected on computerized tomography (CT) scan. Preoperative creatinine was 2.2 mg/dL with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) . RPN was performed with bulldog clamping of the renal vessels, the graft was left in situ and immunosuppression was maintained postoperatively. Tumor diameter was 7.3 cm with a nephrometry score of 10a. Warm ischemia time (WIT) was 26.5 min. Estimated blood loss was 100 mL. There was no change between pre- and postoperative eGFR. There were no operative complications. Histology was papillary renal cell carcinoma type 1, nuclear grade 2. Margins were negative. RPN is a technically feasible treatment option for a suspicious renal mass in renal allografts.

[Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic ureterolithotomy]. / Ureterolitotomía laparoscópica con incisión única transumbilical.

INTRODUCTION: laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) using transumbilical access and conventional laparoscopic instruments is a very attractive alternative to perform ureterolithotomy for ureteral stone with failed endourological management. MATERIAL AND METHOD: a 29-year-old woman presented with chronic right lumbar pain and a 1.2 cm impacted calculus localized at transition of abdominal to pelvic ureter. Semi-rigid ureteroscopy had failed to fragment the stone and shockwave lithotripsy was not available. Double-J ureteral catheter had been inserted preoperatively. We performed a transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic ureterolithotomy. Three conventional trocars were inserted in a single semi-circular umbilical incision. Right colon was detached and the ureter was identified. Calculus was extracted and the ureteral incision was closed with intracorporal sutures. RESULTS: ureterolithotomy was successfully completed, with all the operative steps performed transumbically. Operative time was 180 minutes. No single-port device or articulating and bent instruments were utilized. Estimated blood loss was less than 50 mL. No intraoperative, access-related and postoperative complications took place. The duration of hospitalization was 24 hours and scarless appearance was observed on postoperative day 15. CONCLUSION: transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic ureterolithotomy is feasible and safe. This approach offers an inherent cosmetic advantage and few postoperative discomfort. Additional experience and continued investigation are warranted.

[Single-port in urology]. / Single-port en urologie.

UNLABELLED: Single-port transumbilical laparoscopy has emerged as an attempt to further enhance cosmetic benefits and reduce morbidity of minimally invasive surgery. Within a short span, several clinical reports have emerged in the urologic literature. As this field is poised to move forward, a complete understanding of its evolution and current status seems imperative. We have summarized and reviewed the history of Single-Port across surgical disciplines. This review emphasizes nomenclature, surgical technique, instrumentation, and perioperative outcomes. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Using the National Library of Medicine database, the English language literature was reviewed for the past 40 years. Keyword searches included scarless, scar free, single-port/trocar/incision, laparoendoscopic single site surgery intraumbilical, and transumbilical. Within the bibliography of selected references, additional sources were retrieved. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The major findings and surgical techniques described in these papers, are summarized in a chronological and subject-grouped manner. CONCLUSIONS: Single-port has made its initial forays into laparoscopic surgery. Ongoing refinement in technique and instrumentation is likely to expand its future role.

Single-port laparoscopy in colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopy is the approach of choice for the majority of colorectal disorders that require a minimally invasive abdominal operation. As the emphasis on minimizing the technique continues, natural orifice surgery is quickly evolving. The authors utilized an embryologic natural orifice, the umbilicus, as sole access to the abdomen to perform a colorectal procedure. Herein, we present our initial experience of single-port laparoscopic colorectal surgery using a Uni-X Single-Port Access Laparoscopic System (Pnavel Systems, Morganville, New Jersey, USA) with a multi-channel cannula and specially designed curved laparoscopic instrumentation. METHOD: The abdomen was approached through a 3.5 cm incision via the umbilicus and a single-port access device was utilized to perform a right hemicolectomy on a patient with an unresectable caecal polyp and a body mass index of 35. Ligation of the ileocolic artery was done with a LigaSure Device (Covidien Ltd, Norwalk, Connecticut, USA), and was followed by colonic mobilization, extraction and extracorporeal ileocolic anastomosis. RESULTS: The total operative time was 115 min with minimal blood loss. Hospital stay was 4 days with no undue sequelae. CONCLUSION: Single-port laparoscopic surgery may allow common colorectal laparoscopic operations to be performed entirely through the patient's umbilicus and enable an essentially scarless procedure. Additional experience and continued investigation are warranted.