No abstract

Background: Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) has gained popularity in urology over the last few years. Objective: To report a large multi-institutional worldwide series of LESS in urology. Design, Setting, And Participants: Consecutive cases of LESS done between August 2007 and November 2010 at 18 participating institutions were included in this retrospective analysis. Intervention: Each group performed a variety of LESS procedures according to its own protocols, entry criteria, and techniques. Measurements: Demographic data, main perioperative outcome parameters, and information related to the surgical technique were gathered and analyzed. Conversions to reduced-port laparoscopy, conventional laparoscopy, or open surgery were evaluated, as were intraoperative and postoperative complications. Results and Limitations: Overall, 1076 patients were included in the analysis. The most common procedures were extirpative or ablative operations in the upper urinary tract. The da Vinci robot was used to operate on 143 patients (13%). A single-port technique was most commonly used and the umbilicus represented the most common access site. Overall, operative time was 160 ± 93 min. and estimated blood loss was 148 ± 234 mL. Skin incision length at closure was 3.5 ± 1.5cm. Mean hospital stay was 3.6 ± 2.7 d with a visual analog pain score at discharge of 1.5 ± 1.4. An additional port was used in 23% of cases. The overall conversion rate was 20.8%; 15.8% of patients were converted to reduced-port laparoscopy, 4% to conventional laparoscopy/ robotic surgery, and 1% to open surgery. The intraoperative complication rate was 3.3%. Postoperative complications, mostly low grade, were encountered in 9.5% of cases. Conclusions: This study provides a global view of the evolution of LESS in the field of minimally invasive urologic surgery. A broad range of procedures have been effectively performed, primarily in the academic setting, within diverse health care systems around the world. Since LESS is performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, the risk of complications remains low when stringent patient-selection criteria are applied.

Analysis of a large data set from multiple institutions shows that surgical removal of symptomatic large prostatic adenomas can be carried out with good outcomes by using robot-assisted laparoscopy.

Purpose: To evaluate LithoVue, the new single-use digital flexible ureteroscope, in a human cadaveric model and compare it with a nondisposable fiber optic and digital flexible ureteroscopes.Materials and Methods: LithoVue, a conventional fiber optic, and digital flexible ureteroscopes were each tested in four renal units of recently deceased female cadavers by three surgeons. The following parameters were analyzed: accessibility to the kidney and navigation of the entire collecting system with and without ureteral access sheath (UAS), lower pole access measuring the deflection of the ureteroscope with the working channel empty, and with inside two different baskets and laser fibers. A subjective evaluation of maneuverability and visibility was assessed by each surgeon at the end of every procedure.Results: Kidney access into the Renal unit 1 was not possible without UAS for all ureteroscopes because of noncompliant ureter at the level of sacroiliac joint. The reusable digital ureteroscope was unable to reach one calix of the lower pole and one calix of the upper pole (Renal units 2 and 3) without UAS placement. Lower pole access with baskets and laser fibers was possible for each ureteroscope after UAS placement. No statistically significant differences were detected in angle deflection between ureteroscopes. The digital ureteroscope was preferred for visibility in all procedures: LithoVue for maneuverability in six procedures, fiber optic in five procedures, and the digital ureteroscope in one procedure.Conclusions: LithoVue seems to be comparable with conventional ureteroscopes in terms of visibility and manipulation into the collecting system in fresh human cadavers. Further studies in humans are needed to determine the clinical value of this new instrument.

This preliminary series suggests that VEIL can reduce morbidity, including hospitalization times,compared with standard open surgery. Oncologic results are premature but seem similar to the results from the conventional open operation. VEIL is a promising minimally invasive approach for radical inguinal dissection in penile cancer patients with nonpalpable or low-volume palpable inguinal disease.