Stapler-Less Robotic Partial Gastrectomy: a Safety and Feasibility Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: No true preliminary work has been performed and published on the use of the bipolar cautery devices for transection of the stomach when performed as a part of the sleeve gastrectomy or gastric wedge resection. The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility and safety of substitution of linear surgical stapling devices for use of a bipolar electrosurgical sealing instrument in the performance of a totally robotic partial gastrectomy (TRPG). METHODS: Ten female pigs were assigned to an intervention or control group. Intervention included TRPG with a robotic bipolar tissue coagulation device. In the control group, TRPG was performed using the staplers. Assessed outcomes included presence of the intraoperative and postoperative bleeding or leak and features of the sections from the stapled line or sutured line. RESULTS: Mean operating time was (130 ± 31 min) and (87 ± 23 min) in the study and control groups (p = 0.03). Intraoperative gastroscopy revealed slow bleeding associated with the staple line in 3/5 control pigs; oozing was not appreciated in any of the study pigs (0/5). No leak was detected during intraoperative gastroscopy. No major complications were suspected postoperatively or identified at postmortem exam in either group. Mean injury width was (1.12 ± 0.93 mm) in the control group with greater mean injury width (7.88 ± 3.73 mm) in the study group (p = 0.001). Mean depth of ulceration was (0.99 ± 0.94 mm) in the control group, with greater mean ulceration depth (2.25 ± 0.84 mm) in the study group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The study showed the technical feasibility of performing stapler-less gastric wedge resection. The electrocautery alone failed to demonstrate the technical feasibility which was obtained with the concomitant use of a tissue clamp and a suture.

Lumbar spine surgery positioning complications: a systematic review.

OBJECT There are a variety of surgical positions that provide optimal exposure of the dorsal lumbar spine. These include the prone, kneeling, knee-chest, knee-elbow, and lateral decubitus positions. All are positions that facilitate exposure of the spine. Each position, however, is associated with an array of unique complications that result from excessive pressure applied to the torso or extremities. The authors reviewed clinical studies reporting complications that arose from positioning of the patient during dorsal exposures of the lumbar spine. METHODS MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science database searches were performed to find clinical studies reporting complications associated with positioning during lumbar spine surgery. For articles meeting inclusion criteria, the following information was obtained: publication year, study design, sample size, age, operative time, type of surgery, surgical position, frame or table type, complications associated with positioning, time to first observed complication, long-term outcomes, and evidence-based recommendations for complication avoidance. RESULTS Of 3898 articles retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, 34 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-four studies reported complications associated with use of the prone position, and 7 studies investigated complications after knee-chest positioning. Complications associated with the knee-elbow, lateral decubitus, and supine positions were each reported by a single study. Vision loss was the most commonly reported complication for both prone and knee-chest positioning. Several other complications were reported, including conjunctival swelling, Ischemic orbital compartment syndrome, nerve palsies, thromboembolic complications, pressure sores, lower extremity compartment syndrome, and shoulder dislocation, highlighting the assortment of possible complications following different surgical positions. For prone-position studies, there was a relationship between increased operation time and position complications. Only 3 prone-position studies reported complications following procedures of less than 120 minutes, 7 studies reported complications following mean operative times of 121-240 minutes, and 9 additional studies reported complications following mean operative times greater than 240 minutes. This relationship was not observed for knee-chest and other surgical positions. CONCLUSIONS This work presents a systematic review of positioning-related complications following prone, knee-chest, and other positions used for lumbar spine surgery. Numerous evidence-based recommendations for avoidance of these potentially severe complications associated with intraoperative positioning are discussed. This investigation may serve as a framework to educate the surgical team and decrease rates of intraoperative positioning complications.