Innovative Approaches to Address the Technical Challenge of Hernial Sac Distension Due to Pneumoperitoneum in the Synchronous Management of Complex Hernias in Individuals With Morbid Obesity.

Although repairing ventral hernias in individuals who have undergone bariatric surgery is a common practice, persistent technical intricacies and controversies surround their management. Concurrently, addressing ventral hernias in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery presents a significant surgical challenge, amplified by the larger intraperitoneal cavities and the presence of large hernial sacs. This technical report introduces two innovative techniques to alleviate the challenge of hernia sac distension due to pneumoperitoneum associated with simultaneous bariatric surgery and ventral hernia repair using laparoscopic technique. The methods are designed to address the complexities of the procedures, making their simultaneous execution feasible and safe. The goal is to eliminate the need for two separate interventions while ensuring the outcomes of each procedure remain uncompromised. The larger intraperitoneal cavities and the presence of large hernial sacs are managed successfully, demonstrating the feasibility and safety of the introduced methods. Importantly, the simultaneous execution of both procedures does not compromise the outcomes of either intervention. Concurrently managing ventral hernias in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery requires innovative solutions to overcome technical challenges. The introduction of these two novel techniques proves to be a valuable approach, making simultaneous execution feasible and safe. Eliminating the need for two separate interventions streamlines the surgical process without compromising the outcomes of either bariatric surgery or ventral hernia repair.

Comparison of Objectively Assessed Versus Patient-Reported Clarity of Last Rectal Effluent for the Prediction of Quality of Bowel Preparation for Colonoscopy: A Prospective, Case-Control Study.

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy is a crucial procedure for various clinical purposes, including screening for colorectal cancer. Adequate bowel preparation is essential for its success. Poor bowel preparation can lead to bad outcomes. An objective assessment of bowel preparation quality is typically only possible after the colonoscope is inserted. This study aimed to objectively correlate the clarity of last rectal effluent, directly collected in a transparent container, with the quality of bowel preparation, and compare it with patient-reported descriptions. METHODS: This prospective, single-centre, case-control study obtained ethical clearance and included patients aged >18 years undergoing colonoscopies. Cases included patients who collected the last rectal effluent and took photographs, while controls relied on verbal descriptions. Data collected included demographics, clinical information, bowel preparation quality, and lastly, stool clarity. A statistical analysis was performed to identify correlations and associations. RESULTS: Of the 70 included patients, 45 were male. The mean age was 35.8 ± 14.3 years. Cases had a higher mean age (37.8 ± 14.6). A higher number of cases had comorbidities (11, 68.8%). Photographic recording of the last rectal effluent was not associated with the adequacy of bowel preparation. Thin yellow fluid was the most common last-rectal effluent clarity (33, 47.1%). Thin, clear fluid was significantly associated with adequate bowel preparation. CONCLUSION: Objective assessment of last rectal effluent clarity correlates with the quality of bowel preparation. This can improve the quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopies and potentially reduce the need for repeat procedures, contributing to better patient outcomes and cost savings in healthcare systems.

Initial Retrocolic Endoscopic Tunnel Approach As an Ergonomic and Oncologically Apt Laparoscopic Technique for Resection of Malignant Right Colonic Lesions: An Experience from a University Hospital.

Introduction: Radical minimal access cancer surgery has demonstrated similar outcomes as open surgery of late, but with less morbidity, improving the quality of life especially in patients with colorectal cancer. Initial retrocolic endoscopic tunnel approach (IRETA) has been described in the literature by Palanivelu et al. as a laparoscopic technique for radical resection of malignant right colonic lesions (MRCL) following the modified concept of medial to lateral dissection. In this work, the authors present their experience of this ergonomic surgical technique. Materials and Methods: To begin with, retrocolic dissection was carried out to free and dissect the ascending colon up to hepatic flexure with the reflection of the peritoneum over the right colon along the white line of Toldt with abdominal wall kept intact initially to sustain intracorporeal specimen steadiness. Subsequently, the specimen is lifted medially in a distinct lymphovascular sheath, leading to high ligation of ileocolic, right colic, and the right branch of the middle colic vein with a consequent definite en bloc thorough removal of the lesion. The specimen was delivered through a transumbilical incision. Results: Ten patients (age 45.4 ± 5.6 years) underwent resection by the IRETA technique with a mean operating time of 185 ± 30 minutes and blood loss of 90 ± 20 mL. Mean hospital stay was 6 days. R0 surgical resection was achieved in all patients with proper marginal clearance. Ninety percent had adequate lymph nodal resection. One patient had an intraoperative complication and n = 3 patients developed postoperative ileus. Adjuvant chemotherapy was given and there is no recurrence on 28 months of average follow-up. Conclusion: With the increasing use of laparoscopic surgery for the management of colorectal cancers, the IRETA technique appears to be an ergonomic and oncologically robust procedure for the removal of MRCL. The presented data set needs to be increased with at least 5 years of follow-up to establish long-term surgical outcomes.

A prospective randomised control trial to compare the perioperative outcomes and ergonomic challenges between triangular versus midline port placement in total extra-peritoneal repair of uncomplicated unilateral inguinal hernia.

BACKGROUND: Routine TEP technique requires three skin incisions for placement of three trocars in the midline. Otherwise, this can be done by three-port triangular technique or two-hand technique. This study reports a randomised trial of perioperative outcomes and ergonomics characteristics of this procedure using two different techniques of port insertion. METHODS: N = 28 patients were randomised into two groups for triangular three-port (TTEP) versus midline three-port TEP (MTEP) hernioplasty after informed written consent in Department of Surgery, King George's Medical University UP between September 2016 and September 2017 after institutional ethical approval. Patient-related outcomes in terms of quality of life (QOL) and ergonomic evaluation of the technique were compared in double-blinded fashion. RESULTS: Postoperative pain score at 24 h post surgery (5.1 ± 0.6; 95% CI 4.9-5.3 vs. 4.8 ± 0.4; 95% CI 4.6-4.9) differed, while hospital stay, time to return to routine work, tolerance to oral feeds and intraoperative complications occurrence (OR 2.1; 95% CI 0.2-24.3) were comparable in both groups. Time to return to office work (5.5 ± 0.5; 95% CI 5.4-5.7 vs. 4.0 ± 0.8; 95% CI 3.7-4.3) and immediate postoperative sensation of mesh and pain score were significantly higher in MTEP compared to TTEP. Ergonomic parameters including visualization of landmark score, spreading of mesh score and total surgeon satisfaction score (TTEP 8.4 ± 0.7; 95% CI 8.1-8.6 vs. MTEP 7.0 ± 0.8; 95% CI 6.7-7.3), mental effort quotient (SMEQ score: TTEP 50.6 ± 12.7; 95% CI 45.9-55.3 vs. MTEP 70.8 ± 12.6: 95% CI 66.1-75.4) and physical effort quotient (LEDQ scores in wrist, hand, arm and shoulders) were also superior in triangular technique of port placement. CONCLUSION: Triangular three-port TEP hernioplasty is ergonomically feasible and enables a surgeon to perform surgery safely using basic principles of laparoscopy.