Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 12/2014

01-12-2014

Prospective Assessment of Trocar-Specific Morbidity in Laparoscopy

Authors: Alessandra Cristaudi, Marie-Laure Matthey-Gié, Nicolas Demartines, Dimitri Christoforidis

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 12/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The purpose of the present study was to challenge the hypothetical advantage of single port laparoscopy (SPL) over conventional laparoscopy by measuring prospectively the morbidity specifically related to conventional trocar sites (TS).

Methods

From November 2010 to December 2011, 300 patients undergoing various laparoscopic procedures were enrolled. Patient, surgery, and trocar characteristics were recorded. We evaluated at three time points (in-hospital and at 1 and 6 months postoperatively) specifically for each TS, pain (Visual Analog Scale), morbidity (infection, hematoma, hernia), and cosmesis (Patient Scar Assessment Score; PSAS). Patients designated their “worst TS,” and a composite endpoint “bad TS” was defined to include any adverse outcome at a TS.

Results

We analyzed 1,074 TS. Follow-up was >90 %. Pain scores of >3/10 at 1 and 6 months postoperatively, were reported by 3 and 1 % of patients at the 5 mm TS and by 9 and 1 % at the larger TS, respectively (5 mm TS vs larger TS; p = 0.001). Pain was significantly lower for TS located in the lower abdomen than for the upper abdomen or the umbilicus (p = 0.001). The overall complication rate was <1 % and significantly lower for the 5 mm TS (hematoma p = 0.046; infection p = 0.0001). No hernia was found. The overall PSAS score was low and significantly lower for the 5 mm TS (p = 0.0001). Significant predictors of “bad TS” were larger TS (p = 0.001), umbilical position (p = 0.0001), emergency surgery (p = 0.0001), accidental trocar exit (p = 0.022), fascia closure (p = 0.006), and specimen extraction site (p = 0.0001).

Conclusions

Specific trocar morbidity is low and almost negligible for 5 mm trocars. The umbilicus appears to be an unfavorable TS.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Trumurthy S et al (2012) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs conventional multiport cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 26:1213–1250 Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Trumurthy S et al (2012) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs conventional multiport cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 26:1213–1250
2.
go back to reference Ahmed K, Wang T, Patel VM et al (2011) The role of single-incision laparoscopic surgery in abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 25:378–396PubMedCrossRef Ahmed K, Wang T, Patel VM et al (2011) The role of single-incision laparoscopic surgery in abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 25:378–396PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Luna R, Nogueira DB, Varela PS et al (2012) A prospective, randomized comparison of pain, inflammatory response, and short-term outcomes between single port and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 27:1254–1259PubMedCrossRef Luna R, Nogueira DB, Varela PS et al (2012) A prospective, randomized comparison of pain, inflammatory response, and short-term outcomes between single port and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 27:1254–1259PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Pisanu A, Reccia I, Porceddu G et al (2012) Meta-analysis of prospective randomized studies comparing single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC). J Gastrointest Surg 16:1790–1810PubMedCrossRef Pisanu A, Reccia I, Porceddu G et al (2012) Meta-analysis of prospective randomized studies comparing single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC). J Gastrointest Surg 16:1790–1810PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Song T, Liau B, Liu J et al (2012) Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review of available data. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 22:e190–e196PubMedCrossRef Song T, Liau B, Liu J et al (2012) Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review of available data. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 22:e190–e196PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Fung AKY, Aly EH (2012) Systematic review of single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery. Br J Surg 99:1353–1364PubMedCrossRef Fung AKY, Aly EH (2012) Systematic review of single-incision laparoscopic colonic surgery. Br J Surg 99:1353–1364PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Aprea G, Coppola Battazzi E, Guida F et al (2011) Laparoscopic single site (LESS) versus classic video-laparoscopic cholecytectomy: a randomized prospective study. J Surg Res 166:e109–e112PubMedCrossRef Aprea G, Coppola Battazzi E, Guida F et al (2011) Laparoscopic single site (LESS) versus classic video-laparoscopic cholecytectomy: a randomized prospective study. J Surg Res 166:e109–e112PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Kurien A, Rajapurkar S, Sinha L et al (2011) Standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy: a randomized comparative study. J Endourol 25:365–370PubMedCrossRef Kurien A, Rajapurkar S, Sinha L et al (2011) Standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy versus laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy: a randomized comparative study. J Endourol 25:365–370PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Wewers ME, Lowe NK (1990) A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health 13:227–236PubMedCrossRef Wewers ME, Lowe NK (1990) A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health 13:227–236PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ et al (1992) CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 13:606–608PubMedCrossRef Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ et al (1992) CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 13:606–608PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Deslauriers V, Rouleau DM, Alami G et al (2009) Translation of the Patient Scar Assessement Scale (PSAS) to French with cross-cultural adaptation, reliability evaluation and validation. Can J Surg 52:259–263 Deslauriers V, Rouleau DM, Alami G et al (2009) Translation of the Patient Scar Assessement Scale (PSAS) to French with cross-cultural adaptation, reliability evaluation and validation. Can J Surg 52:259–263
12.
go back to reference Dunker MS, Stigglebout AM, vaan Hogezand RA et al (1998) Cosmesis and body image after laparoscopic-assisted and open ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease. Surg Endosc 12:1334–1340PubMedCrossRef Dunker MS, Stigglebout AM, vaan Hogezand RA et al (1998) Cosmesis and body image after laparoscopic-assisted and open ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease. Surg Endosc 12:1334–1340PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Saad S, Strassel V, Sauerland S et al (2013) Randomized clinical trial of single-port, minilaparoscopic and conventional cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 100:339–349PubMedCrossRef Saad S, Strassel V, Sauerland S et al (2013) Randomized clinical trial of single-port, minilaparoscopic and conventional cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 100:339–349PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Fanfani F, Fagotti A, Gagliardi ML et al (2013) Minilaparoscopic versus single-port total hysterectomy: a randomized trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 20(2):192–197PubMedCrossRef Fanfani F, Fagotti A, Gagliardi ML et al (2013) Minilaparoscopic versus single-port total hysterectomy: a randomized trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 20(2):192–197PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Park SK, Olweny EL, Best SL et al (2011) Patient-reported body image and cosmesis outcomes following kidney surgery: comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site, laparoscopic and open surgery. Eur Urol 60:1097–1104PubMedCrossRef Park SK, Olweny EL, Best SL et al (2011) Patient-reported body image and cosmesis outcomes following kidney surgery: comparison of laparoendoscopic single-site, laparoscopic and open surgery. Eur Urol 60:1097–1104PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Dauser B, Görgel A, Stopfer J et al (2012) Conventional laparoscopy vs single port surgery from a patient’s point of view: influence of demographics and body mass index. Wien Klin Wochenschr 124:834–841PubMedCrossRef Dauser B, Görgel A, Stopfer J et al (2012) Conventional laparoscopy vs single port surgery from a patient’s point of view: influence of demographics and body mass index. Wien Klin Wochenschr 124:834–841PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Bucher P, Pugin F, Ostermann S et al (2011) Population perception of surgical safety and body image trauma: a plea for scareless surgery? Surg Endosc 25:408–415PubMedCrossRef Bucher P, Pugin F, Ostermann S et al (2011) Population perception of surgical safety and body image trauma: a plea for scareless surgery? Surg Endosc 25:408–415PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Lamadé W, Friedrich C, Ulmer C et al (2011) Impact of body image on patient’s attitude towards conventional, minimal invasive and natural orifice surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 396:331–336PubMedCrossRef Lamadé W, Friedrich C, Ulmer C et al (2011) Impact of body image on patient’s attitude towards conventional, minimal invasive and natural orifice surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 396:331–336PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Mohammadhosseini B, Shirani S (2011) Intra-abdominal and abdominal wall hematoma from 5 mm port insertion site in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Videosurgery 6:164–166 Mohammadhosseini B, Shirani S (2011) Intra-abdominal and abdominal wall hematoma from 5 mm port insertion site in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Videosurgery 6:164–166
20.
go back to reference Park J, Kwak H, Kim SG et al (2012) Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy: comparison with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 22:142CrossRef Park J, Kwak H, Kim SG et al (2012) Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy: comparison with conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech 22:142CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Swank HA, Mulder IM, la Chapelle CF et al (2012) Systematic review of trocar-site hernia. Br J Surg 99:315–323PubMedCrossRef Swank HA, Mulder IM, la Chapelle CF et al (2012) Systematic review of trocar-site hernia. Br J Surg 99:315–323PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Prospective Assessment of Trocar-Specific Morbidity in Laparoscopy
Authors
Alessandra Cristaudi
Marie-Laure Matthey-Gié
Nicolas Demartines
Dimitri Christoforidis
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 12/2014
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2683-z

Other articles of this Issue 12/2014

World Journal of Surgery 12/2014 Go to the issue