Top

Surgical Endoscopy

Published in:

01-08-2016

Task performance in standard laparoscopy in comparison with single-incision laparoscopy in a modified skills trainer

Authors: Andrew S. Wright, Saurabh Khandelwal

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 8/2016

Abstract

Background

Single-incision laparoscopy (SIL) is similar to conventional laparoscopic surgery (LAP), but carries specific technical challenges due to lack of triangulation, reduced dexterity, conflicts due to inline instrumentation, and impaired visualization. This study was designed to evaluate technical skill performance of SIL versus LAP surgery in a simulated environment.

Methods

We developed a modified laparoscopic skills trainer for SIL based upon the fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) model. This includes a standard laparoscopic tower for visualization, allowing replication of the conflicts between scope and instruments. It also has a modified trainer box allowing use of different access devices and instruments for SIL. Sixteen subjects at different levels of training (novice through expert) completed four FLS tasks with standard LAP techniques. They then practiced the same tasks using SIL technique until they reached a steady state of performance. The first and last SIL trials were recorded.

Results

Baseline SIL peg transfer was worse than FLS (254 ± 157 s vs 99 ± 27, p < 0.0002). Final SIL time was still significantly worse than FLS (173 ± 130, p < 0.02). FLS, baseline SIL, and final SIL circle cutting were not significantly different (p = 0.058). Final SIL loop ligation was significantly faster than FLS (48 ± 19 vs 70 ± 42, p < 0.05). FLS suturing was faster than SIL suturing (281 ± 188 vs. 526 ± 105, p < 0.01). There was substantial dropout due to frustration with SIL, and only two surgeons were able to successfully complete SIL suturing.

Conclusions

There are technical challenges with SIL that vary depending on task. Peg transfer and suturing were significantly impaired in SIL, while circle cutting was not significantly affected, and ligating loop was faster with SIL than LAP. These challenges may impact clinical outcomes of SIL and should influence training in SIL as well as future product development.

Buckley FP 3rd, Vassaur H, Monsivais S, Jupiter D, Watson R, Eckford J (2014) Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy versus traditional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: an analysis of outcomes at a single institution. Surg Endosc 28:626–630CrossRefPubMed

Carter JT, Kaplan JA, Nguyen JN, Lin MY, Rogers SJ, Harris HW (2014) A prospective, randomized controlled trial of single-incision laparoscopic vs conventional 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy for treatment of acute appendicitis. J Am Coll Surg 218:950–959CrossRefPubMed

Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Di Franco F, Harris AM (2013) Systematic review and meta-analysis of single-incision versus conventional multiport appendicectomy. Br J Surg 100:1709–1718CrossRefPubMed

Jorgensen LN, Rosenberg J, Al-Tayar H, Assaadzadeh S, Helgstrand F, Bisgaard T (2014) Randomized clinical trial of single-versus multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 101:347–355CrossRefPubMed

Lujan JA, Soriano MT, Abrisqueta J, Perez D, Parrilla P (2015) Single-port colectomy vs. multi-port laparoscopic colectomy. Systematic review and meta-analysis of more than 2800 procedures. Cir Esp 93:307–319CrossRefPubMed

Fernandez JI, Farias CO, Ovalle CL, Cabrera CS, de la Maza JC (2015) Transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Obes Surg 25:430–435CrossRefPubMed

Gomberawalla A, Salamat A, Lutfi R (2014) Outcome analysis of single incision vs traditional multiport sleeve gastrectomy: a matched cohort study. Obes Surg 24:1870–1874CrossRefPubMed

Pucher PH, Sodergren MH, Singh P, Darzi A, Parakseva P (2013) Have we learned from lessons of the past? A systematic review of training for single incision laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 27:1478–1484CrossRefPubMed

Way LW, Stewart L, Gantert W et al (2003) Causes and prevention of laparoscopic bile duct injuries: analysis of 252 cases from a human factors and cognitive psychology perspective. Ann Surg 237:460–469PubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Swanstrom LL, Fried GM, Hoffman KI, Soper NJ (2006) Beta test results of a new system assessing competence in laparoscopic surgery. J Am Coll Surg 202:62–69CrossRefPubMed

11.

Peters JH, Fried GM, Swanstrom LL et al (2004) Development and validation of a comprehensive program of education and assessment of the basic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery. Surgery 135:21–27CrossRefPubMed

12.

Fraser SA, Klassen DR, Feldman LS, Ghitulescu GA, Stanbridge D, Fried GM (2003) Evaluating laparoscopic skills: setting the pass/fail score for the MISTELS system. Surg Endosc 17:964–967CrossRefPubMed

13.

Scott DJ, Ritter EM, Tesfay ST, Pimentel EA, Nagji A, Fried GM (2008) Certification pass rate of 100% for fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery skills after proficiency-based training. Surg Endosc 22:1887–1893CrossRefPubMed

14.

Khandelwal S, Wright AS, Figueredo E, Pellegrini CA, Oelschlager BK (2011) Single-incision laparoscopy: training, techniques, and safe introduction to clinical practice. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 21:687–693CrossRefPubMed

15.

Wright AS, Kim S, Ross B, Pellegrini C (2011) ISIS: the Institute for Simulation and Interprofessional Studies at the University of Washington. J Surg Educ 68:94–96CrossRefPubMed

16.

Islam A, Castellvi AO, Tesfay ST, Castellvi AD, Wright AS, Scott DJ (2011) Early surgeon impressions and technical difficulty associated with laparoendoscopic single-site surgery: a Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons Learning Center study. Surg Endosc 25:2597–2603CrossRefPubMed

17.

Alevizos L, Brinkman W, Fingerhut A, Jakimowicz J, Leandros E (2012) Novice surgeons versus experienced surgeons in laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery: a comparison of performances in a surgical simulator. World J Surg 36:939–944CrossRefPubMed

18.

Montero PN, Acker CE, Heniford BT, Stefanidis D (2011) Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is associated with poorer performance and increased surgeon workload compared with standard laparoscopy. Am Surg 77:73–77PubMed

19.

Koca D, Yildiz S, Soyupek F et al (2015) Physical and mental workload in single-incision laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparoscopy. Surg Innov 22:294–302CrossRefPubMed

20.

Alleblas CC, Velthuis S, Nieboer TE, Sietses C, Stegeman DF (2015) The physical workload of surgeons: a comparison of SILS and conventional laparoscopy. Surg Innov 22:376–381CrossRefPubMed

21.

Santos BF, Reif TJ, Soper NJ, Hungness ES (2011) Effect of training and instrument type on performance in single-incision laparoscopy: results of a randomized comparison using a surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25:3798–3804CrossRefPubMed

22.

Santos BF, Enter D, Soper NJ, Hungness ES (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) versus standard laparoscopic surgery: a comparison of performance using a surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25:483–490CrossRefPubMed

23.

Brown-Clerk B, de Laveaga AE, LaGrange CA, Wirth LM, Lowndes BR, Hallbeck MS (2011) Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparison of surgical port performance in a surgical simulator with novices. Surg Endosc 25:2210–2218CrossRefPubMed

24.

Broderick RC, Omelanczuk P, Harnsberger CR et al (2015) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a novel single-incision surgical platform through a standard 15 mm trocar: initial experience and technical details. Surg Endosc 29:1250–1256CrossRefPubMed

25.

Pryor AD, Tushar JR, DiBernardo LR (2010) Single-port cholecystectomy with the TransEnterix SPIDER: simple and safe. Surg Endosc 24:917–923CrossRefPubMed

26.

Villamizar N, Pryor AD (2010) SPIDER and flexible laparoscopy: the next frontier in abdominal surgery. Surg Technol Int 20:53–58PubMed

27.

Qadan M, Curet MJ, Wren SM (2014) The evolving application of single-port robotic surgery in general surgery. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 21:26–33CrossRefPubMed

28.

Morel P, Buchs NC, Iranmanesh P et al (2014) Robotic single-site cholecystectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 21:18–25CrossRefPubMed

29.

Spinoglio G, Lenti LM, Ravazzoni F, Formisano G, Pagliardi F, Marano A (2015) Evaluation of technical feasibility and safety of Single-Site robotic right colectomy: three case reports. Int J Med Robot 11:135–140CrossRefPubMed

30.

Vidovszky TJ, Carr AD, Farinholt GN, Ho HS, Smith WH, Ali MR (2014) Single-site robotic cholecystectomy in a broadly inclusive patient population: a prospective study. Ann Surg 260:134–141CrossRefPubMed

31.

Joseph M, Phillips MR, Farrell TM, Rupp CC (2012) Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a higher bile duct injury rate: a review and a word of caution. Ann Surg 256:1–6CrossRefPubMed

32.

Allemann P, Demartines N, Schafer M (2014) Remains of the day: biliary complications related to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Gastroenterol 20:843–851CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Tamini N, Rota M, Bolzonaro E et al (2014) Single-incision versus standard multiple-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of experimental and observational studies. Surg Innov 21:528–545CrossRefPubMed

34.

Vettoretto N, Cirocchi R, Randolph J, Morino M (2015) Acute appendicitis can be treated with single-incision laparoscopy: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Colorectal Dis 17:281–289CrossRefPubMed

35.

Antoniou SA, Koch OO, Antoniou GA et al (2014) Meta-analysis of randomized trials on single-incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy. Am J Surg 207:613–622CrossRefPubMed

36.

Yun JA, Yun SH, Park YA et al (2015) Oncologic outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopy for colon cancer. Ann Surg. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001226

37.

Antoniou SA, Morales-Conde S, Antoniou GA et al (2015) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery through the umbilicus is associated with a higher incidence of trocar-site hernia than conventional laparoscopy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hernia. doi:10.1007/s10029-015-1371-8

38.

Poulose BK, Vassiliou MC, Dunkin BJ et al (2014) Fundamentals of Endoscopic Surgery cognitive examination: development and validity evidence. Surg Endosc 28:631–638CrossRefPubMed

39.

Fundamental Use of Surgical Energy (2015). Accessed 4 Oct 2015, at http://www.fuseprogram.org/

40.

Fundamentals of Robotic Surgery (2015). Accessed 4 Oct 2015, at http://frsurgery.org/

41.

Lum MJ, Rosen J, Lendvay TS, Wright AS, Sinanan MN, Hannaford B (2008) TeleRobotic fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS): effects of time delay-pilot study. In Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008, pp 5597–5600

Title: Task performance in standard laparoscopy in comparison with single-incision laparoscopy in a modified skills trainer
Authors: Andrew S. Wright
Saurabh Khandelwal
Publication date: 01-08-2016
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 8/2016
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4658-z

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Task performance in standard laparoscopy in comparison with single-incision laparoscopy in a modified skills trainer

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2016

Surgical simulation: the value of individualization

Evaluating tactile feedback in robotic surgery for potential clinical application using an animal model

Is laparoscopic repair of incarcerated abdominal hernias safe? Analysis of short-term outcomes

Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: results of a multicenter cohort study on 196 patients

Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair with primary fascial closure versus bridged repair: a risk-adjusted comparative study

Incisional and port-site hernias following robotic colorectal surgery