Robotic Approach to Paediatric Gastrointestinal Diseases: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: The use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for paediatric surgery has been on the rise since the early 2000s and is complicated by factors unique to paediatric surgery. The rise of robotic surgery has presented an opportunity in MIS for children, and recent developments in the reductions in port sizes and single-port surgery offer promising prospects. This study aimed to present a systematic overview and analysis of the existing literature around the use of robotic platforms in the treatment of paediatric gastrointestinal diseases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In accordance with the PRISMA Statement, a systematic review on paediatric robotic gastrointestinal surgery was conducted on Pubmed, Cochrane, and Scopus. A critical appraisal of the study was performed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included, of which seven were on Hirschsprung's disease and eight on other indications. Included studies were heterogeneous in their populations, age, and sex, but all reported low incidences of intraoperative complications and conversions in their robotic cohorts. Only one study reported on a comparator cohort, with a longer operative time in the robotic cohort (180 vs. 152 and 156 min, p < 0.001), but no significant differences in blood loss, length of stay, intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, or conversion. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic surgery may play a role in the treatment of paediatric gastrointestinal diseases. There is limited data available on modern robotic platforms and almost no comparative data between any robotic platforms and conventional minimally invasive approaches. Further technological developments and research are needed to enhance our understanding of the potential that robotics may hold for the field of paediatric surgery.

'Cut and push' as an alternative to endoscopic retrieval of PEG type gastrostomy tubes.

PURPOSE: Percutaneous Endoscopically placed Gastrostomy (PEG) tubes are frequently used in children. The traditional endoscopic method to remove/change the PEG device requires general anaesthesia in children. A minimally invasive alternative is the 'Cut and Push' method (C&P): avoiding the risks/wait times of general anaesthesia and reducing resource burden. Data regarding the safety/effectiveness of C&P in children are lacking with concerns raised about the possibility of gastrointestinal obstruction. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all cases of PEG removal / change to button in children (< 18 years) between December 2020 and January 2022. Cases were identified from a prospectively maintained database and all cases of C&P included. Parents/carers were asked if the child had suffered any complications following C&P and if flange was visualised in stools. RESULTS: During the time period, 27 PEGs were either removed or changed to button via C&P. The average waiting time for C&P was 14.29 days, significantly shorter than the minimum 6-month waiting time for elective endoscopy. Our evaluation revealed no complications of C&P at median 70 days (range 25-301). In three cases the flange was visualised in the stool, at 2 days, 3 days and 5 weeks following C&P respectively. DISCUSSION: These data support the available literature suggesting C&P is an effective means to facilitate minimally invasive and prompt PEG removal/change to button in children. We recommend minimum weight and age parameters for this procedure and further evaluation of the safety and resource implications of this technique.

Comparison of the effectiveness of thoracic epidural and rectus sheath catheter as analgesic modalities following laparotomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Rectus sheath catheters are used as an analgesic alternative to thoracic epidural. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the analgesic effects and side effects of thoracic epidural and rectus sheath catheter in the setting of emergency or elective laparotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review of the Cochrane library, Embase, PubMed and Medline was conducted. Papers that directly compared thoracic epidurals and rectus sheath catheters following laparotomy were identified. Literature published between 2001 and 2021 were included. Data were extracted on the following postoperative outcomes: additional analgesic requirements, pain scores, hypotension and ambulation. A random effects meta-analysis model was used to compare additional opioid requirements between thoracic epidural and rectus sheath catheter. RESULTS: Eight publications were included from five countries. This comprised 484 patients, with 120 patients being extracted from randomised trials. Thoracic epidural reduced the requirement for additional intravenous analgesia compared with rectus sheath catheters (p = 0.004). Despite this, both analgesic techniques were equivalent with regard to reported pain scores. Furthermore, rectus sheath catheters have a lower rate of postoperative hypotension and allow for earlier ambulation compared with thoracic epidural. CONCLUSIONS: The literature suggests that rectus sheath catheters provide similar analgesic effect to thoracic epidurals, but rectus sheath catheters have a favourable side effect profile.