Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 10/2010

01-10-2010

Effectiveness of a Surgical Glove Port for Single Port Surgery

Authors: Michihiro Hayashi, Mitsuhiro Asakuma, Koji Komeda, Yoshiharu Miyamoto, Fumitoshi Hirokawa, Nobuhiko Tanigawa

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 10/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

A new surgical concept, such as single port surgery (SPS), usually raises many questions regarding safety, usefulness, appropriateness, applicability, and cost. Because many new port devices have been developed, choosing the type of port device for SPS is the most important factor. We herein briefly report our newly developed SPS port made using a standard surgical glove.

Methods

SPS starts with a 1.5-cm skin incision on the umbilicus. Subsequently, a wound retractor of XS size is installed at the umbilical wound. Then, a non-powdered surgical glove (5.5 inches) is put on the wound retractor through which three 5-mm slim trocars are inserted via the finger tips. A semi-flexible laparoscopic camera is inserted via the middle finger port. From June to December 2009, 23 cases of SPS (20 cholecystectomies, 1 choledocholithotomy, 1 appendectomy, and 1 gastropexy) were performed in our institute using this technique.

Results

All cases were successfully performed without any intra- or postoperative complications. No conversion to other procedures was needed. The median operative time for cholecystectomy was 110 (range, 55–170) min.

Conclusions

This surgical-glove port is easy to install and is made from conventional, commonly used surgical equipment, making it unnecessary to purchase any expensive new devices. This surgical-glove port technique is a promising method to introduce SPS, because developing or purchasing new devices is unnecessary. Our experience demonstrates the efficacy, appropriateness, and cost-effectiveness of this simple port technique.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Mutter D, Leroy J, Cahill RA et al (2008) A simple technical option for single-port cholecystectomy. Surg Innov 15:332–333CrossRefPubMed Mutter D, Leroy J, Cahill RA et al (2008) A simple technical option for single-port cholecystectomy. Surg Innov 15:332–333CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Leroy J, Cahill RA, Asakuma M et al (2009) Single-access laparoscopic sigmoidectomy as definitive surgical management of prior diverticulitis in a human patient. Arch Surg 144:173–179 (discussion 179)CrossRefPubMed Leroy J, Cahill RA, Asakuma M et al (2009) Single-access laparoscopic sigmoidectomy as definitive surgical management of prior diverticulitis in a human patient. Arch Surg 144:173–179 (discussion 179)CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Targarona EM, Balague C, Martinez C et al (2009) Single-port access: a feasible alternative to conventional laparoscopic splenectomy. Surg Innov 16:348–352CrossRefPubMed Targarona EM, Balague C, Martinez C et al (2009) Single-port access: a feasible alternative to conventional laparoscopic splenectomy. Surg Innov 16:348–352CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Eklund A, Carlsson P, Rosenblad A et al (2010) Long-term cost-minimization analysis comparing laparoscopic with open (Lichtenstein) inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 97(5):765–771CrossRefPubMed Eklund A, Carlsson P, Rosenblad A et al (2010) Long-term cost-minimization analysis comparing laparoscopic with open (Lichtenstein) inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 97(5):765–771CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Slater M, Booth MI, Dehn TC (2009) Cost-effective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 91:670–672CrossRefPubMed Slater M, Booth MI, Dehn TC (2009) Cost-effective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 91:670–672CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Sporn E, Petroski GF, Mancini GJ et al (2009) Laparoscopic appendectomy—is it worth the cost? Trend analysis in the US from 2000 to 2005. J Am Coll Surg 208:179–185e2CrossRefPubMed Sporn E, Petroski GF, Mancini GJ et al (2009) Laparoscopic appendectomy—is it worth the cost? Trend analysis in the US from 2000 to 2005. J Am Coll Surg 208:179–185e2CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Breitenstein S, Nocito A, Puhan M et al (2008) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a case-matched control study. Ann Surg 247:987–993CrossRefPubMed Breitenstein S, Nocito A, Puhan M et al (2008) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: outcome and cost analyses of a case-matched control study. Ann Surg 247:987–993CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Munoz E, Munoz W III, Wise L (2010) National and surgical health care expenditures, 2005–2025. Ann Surg 251(2):195–200CrossRefPubMed Munoz E, Munoz W III, Wise L (2010) National and surgical health care expenditures, 2005–2025. Ann Surg 251(2):195–200CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Effectiveness of a Surgical Glove Port for Single Port Surgery
Authors
Michihiro Hayashi
Mitsuhiro Asakuma
Koji Komeda
Yoshiharu Miyamoto
Fumitoshi Hirokawa
Nobuhiko Tanigawa
Publication date
01-10-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 10/2010
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-010-0649-3

Other articles of this Issue 10/2010

World Journal of Surgery 10/2010 Go to the issue