Zusammenfassung
Ein chirurgischer Eingriff sollte eine bestehende Erkrankung idealerweise kurativ versorgen und dies mit geringer Komplikationsrate und minimalem Trauma erreichen. Für die Cholezystolithiasis konnte sich die laparoskopische Cholezystektomie in diesem Sinne als anerkannter Standard etablieren. Neuere Verfahren, wie etwa der Single-Port-Ansatz oder NOTES sind angetreten, das bereits geringe Trauma des Verfahrens weiter zu reduzieren und ein besseres kosmetisches Ergebnis zu bieten. Bei allen neuen Methoden steht hierbei die Reduktion der transabdominellen Zugänge im Vordergrund des Bestrebens. Der vorliegende Beitrag versucht anhand publizierter Ergebnisse und DRG(Diagnosis Related Group)-Daten zu untersuchen, ob dieser Anspruch erreicht wird, v. a. aber soll geprüft werden, ob das Ziel auch unter Berücksichtigung der Ergebnisqualität und Komplikationsraten realisiert wurde. Neben den genannten Ansätzen werden hierbei auch die robotische Cholezystektomie und das Reduced-Port-Verfahren betrachtet.
Abstract
Surgical interventions should ideally treat an existing disease curatively and achieve this with a low complication rate and minimal trauma. In this sense, laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become established as the recognized standard for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis. Newer procedures, such as single-port surgery or natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) have recently emerged to reduce the already low interventional trauma even further and to provide a better cosmetic outcome. With all new methods the main aim is the reduction of the transabdominal access points. Based on published results and diagnosis-related groups (DRG) data, this article examines whether this goal has been achieved, also with respect to the overall quality of treatment and the complication rates. In this context and in addition to the already mentioned approaches, robotic cholecystectomy and the reduced port approach are also considered.
Literatur
Archer SB, Brown DW, Smith CD, Branum GD, Hunter JG (2001) Bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a national survey. Ann Surg 234(4):549–558 (discussion 558–549)
Strasberg SM, Brunt LM (2010) Rationale and use of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 211(1):132–138
Marescaux J, Dallemagne B, Perretta S, Wattiez A, Mutter D, Coumaros D (2007) Surgery without scars: report of transluminal cholecystectomy in a human being. Arch Surg 142(9):823–826
Marescaux J, Leroy J, Gagner M, Rubino F, Mutter D, Vix M, Butner SE, Smith MK (2001) Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery. Nature 413(6854):379–380
FDZ der Statistischen Ämter des Bundes und der Länder, Fallpauschalenbezogene Krankenhausstatistik (DRG-Statistik) (2008–2018) eigene Berechnungen
R Core Team (2020) R: a language and environment for statistical computing
Gutt C, Jenssen C, Barreiros A‑P, Götze TO, Stokes CS, Jansen PL, Neubrand M, Lammert F (2018) Updated S3-guideline for prophylaxis, diagnosis and treatment of gallstones. German society for digestive and metabolic diseases (DGVS) and German society for surgery of the alimentary tract (DGAV)-AWMF registry 021/008. Z Gastroenterol 56(8):912–966
Keus F, de Jong JA, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJ (2006) Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:Cd6231
Alexander HC, Bartlett AS, Wells CI, Hannam JA, Moore MR, Poole GH, Merry AF (2018) Reporting of complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review. HPB 20(9):786–794
Rao A, Kynaston J, MacDonald ER, Ahmed I (2010) Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches? Surg Endosc 24(12):3016–3025
Pucher PH, Brunt LM, Fanelli RD, Asbun HJ, Aggarwal R (2015) SAGES expert Delphi consensus: critical factors for safe surgical practice in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 29(11):3074–3085
Rao G, Mansard M, Ravula P, Rebala P, Dama R, Reddy D (2009) Single-port surgery: current applications and limitations. Asian J Endosc Surg 2(3):56–64
Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S, Carcoforo P, Donini I (2005) One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84(5):695–695
Carus T (2010) Single-port-Technik in der laparoskopischen Chirurgie. Chirurg 81(5):431–440
Arezzo A, Passera R, Bullano A, Mintz Y, Kedar A, Boni L, Cassinotti E, Rosati R, Romario UF, Sorrentino M (2017) Multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy: results of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (MUSIC trial). Surg Endosc 31(7):2872–2880
Marks JM, Phillips MS, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, DeNoto G, Gecelter G, Rubach E, Rivas H, Islam A (2013) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1‑year results of a prospective randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 216(6):1037–1047
Jensen SA-MS, Fonnes S, Gram-Hanssen A, Andresen K, Rosenberg J (2021) Low long-term incidence of incisional hernia after cholecystectomy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Surgery 169(6):1268–1277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2020.12.027
Evers L, Bouvy N, Branje D, Peeters A (2017) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 31(9):3437–3448
Haueter R, Schütz T, Raptis DA, Clavien PA, Zuber M (2017) Meta-analysis of single-port versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy comparing body image and cosmesis. Br J Surg 104(9):1141–1159
Arezzo A, Passera R, Forcignanò E, Rapetti L, Cirocchi R, Morino M (2018) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is responsible for increased adverse events: results of a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc 32(9):3739–3753
Lyu Y, Cheng Y, Wang B, Zhao S, Chen L (2020) Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a current meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc 34(10):4315–4329
Kalloo AN, Singh VK, Jagannath SB, Niiyama H, Hill SL, Vaughn CA, Magee CA, Kantsevoy SV (2004) Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity. Gastrointest Endosc 60(1):114–117
Buess G, Frimberger E (2007) The dirty way to the gallbladder. Endoscopy 39(10):893–894
Bessler M, Stevens PD, Milone L, Parikh M, Fowler D (2007) Transvaginal laparoscopically assisted endoscopic cholecystectomy: a hybrid approach to natural orifice surgery. Gastrointest Endosc 66(6):1243–1245
Meining A, Feussner H, Swain P, Yang G, Lehmann K, Zorron R, Meisner S, Ponsky J, Martiny H, Reddy N (2011) Natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) in Europe: summary of the working group reports of the Euro-NOTES meeting 2010. Endoscopy 43(02):140–143
Zornig C, Emmermann A, von Waldenfels H, Mofid H (2007) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy without visible scar: combined transvaginal and transumbilical approach. Endoscopy 39(10):913–915
Zornig C, Siemssen L, Emmermann A, Alm M, von Waldenfels HA, Felixmüller C, Mofid H (2011) NOTES cholecystectomy: matched-pair analysis comparing the transvaginal hybrid and conventional laparoscopic techniques in a series of 216 patients. Surg Endosc 25(6):1822–1826
Lehmann KS, Klinger C, Bulian DR, Burghardt J, Zornig C, Buhr HJ (2017) Outcome of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) cholecystectomy: data from the German NOTES registry. J Am Coll Surg 225(4):e22–e23
Schwaitzberg SD, Roberts K, Romanelli JR, Desilets DJ, Earle D, Horgan S, Swanstrom L, Hungness E, Soper N, Kochman ML (2018) The NOVEL trial: natural orifice versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy—a prospective, randomized evaluation. Surg Endosc 32(5):2505–2516
Bulian DR, Knuth J, Cerasani N, Sauerwald A, Lefering R, Heiss MM (2015) Transvaginal/transumbilical hybrid—NOTES—versus 3‑trocar needlescopic cholecystectomy: short-term results of a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 261(3):451
Benhidjeb T, Kosmas IP, Hachem F, Mynbaev O, Stark M, Benhidjeb I (2018) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery cholecystectomy: results of a prospective comparative single-center study. Gastrointest Endosc 87(2):509–516
Borchert DH, Federlein M, Rückbeil O, Schöpe J (2017) Less pain after transvaginal cholecystectomy: single-center pooled analysis. Surg Endosc 31(6):2573–2576
Sodergren MH, Markar S, Pucher PH, Badran IA, Jiao LR, Darzi A (2015) Safety of transvaginal hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 29(8):2077–2090
Yang E, Nie D, Li Z (2019) Comparison of major clinical outcomes between transvaginal notes and traditional laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Surg Res 244:278–290
Peng C, Ling Y, Ma C, Ma X, Fan W, Niu W, Niu J (2016) Safety outcomes of NOTES cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 26(5):347
Thomaidis P, Weltermann NJ, Seefeldt CS, Richards DC, Sauerwald A, Heiss MM, Bulian DR (2021) Transvaginal hybrid-NOTES procedures—do they have a negative impact on pregnancy and delivery? Langenbecks Arch Surg 406(6):2045–2052
Bulian DR, Sauerwald A, Thomaidis P, Seefeldt CS, Richards DC, Schulz S‑A, Weltermann NJ, Heiss MM, Eisenberger CF (2021) Does a prior hysterectomy complicate transvaginal/transumbilical hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy?—a comparative analysis of prospectively collected data. Langenbecks Arch Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-021-02401-8
Curcillo PG, Wu AS, Podolsky ER, King SA (2011) Reduced port surgery : developing a safe pathway to single port access surgery. Chirurg 82(5):391–397
Hajibandeh S, Finch DA, Mohamedahmed AYY, Iskandar A, Venkatesan G, Hajibandeh S, Satyadas T (2021) Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of three-port vs four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (level 1 evidence). Updates Surg 73(2):451–471
Ciftci A, Yazicioglu MB, Tiryaki C, Turgut HT, Subasi O, Ilgoz M, Civil O, Yildiz SY (2016) Is the fourth port routinely required for laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Our three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy experience. Ir J Med Sci 185(4):909–912
Zarbaliyev E, Sevmiş M, Sarsenov D, Çelik S, Çağlıkülekçi M (2021) When should I use an additional port at the time of three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy? J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2021.0523
Hajong R, Khariong PD (2016) A comparative study of two-port versus three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Min Access Surg 12(4):311–314
Begin E, Gagner M, Hurteau R, de Santis S, Pomp A (1995) A robotic camera for laparoscopic surgery: conception and experimental results. Surg Laparosc Endosc 5(1):6–11
Goh PM, Lomanto D, So JB (2002) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 16(1):216–217
Nio D, Bemelman W, Busch O, Vrouenraets B, Gouma D (2004) Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative study. Surg Endosc 18(3):379–382
Han C, Shan X, Yao L, Yan P, Li M, Hu L, Tian H, Jing W, Du B, Wang L (2018) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 32(11):4377–4392
Shenoy R, Mederos MA, Ye L, Mak SS, Begashaw MM, Booth MS, Shekelle PG, Wilson M, Gunnar W, Maggard-Gibbons M (2021) Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted cholecystectomy: a systematic review. Syst Rev 10(1):1–10
Morel P, Hagen ME, Bucher P, Buchs NC, Pugin F (2011) Robotic single-port cholecystectomy using a new platform: initial clinical experience. J Gastrointest Surg 15(12):2182–2186
Migliore M, Arezzo A, Arolfo S, Passera R, Morino M (2018) Safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 32(12):4716–4727
Hagen ME, Balaphas A, Podetta M, Rohner P, Jung MK, Buchs NC, Buehler L, Mendoza JM, Morel P (2018) Robotic single-site versus multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a case-matched analysis of short- and long-term costs. Surg Endosc 32(3):1550–1555
Wang W, Sun X, Wei F (2021) Laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for single-incision cholecystectomy: an updated systematic review. Updates Surg 73(6):2039–2046
Grochola LF, Soll C, Zehnder A, Wyss R, Herzog P, Breitenstein S (2019) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic single-incision cholecystectomy: results of a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 33(5):1482–1490
AQUA – Institut für angewandte Qualitätsförderung und Forschung im Gesundheitswesen GmbH (2015) 12/1 – Cholezystektomie Qualitätsindikatoren. http://www.sqg.de/downloads/Bundesauswertungen/2014/bu_Gesamt_12N1-CHOL_2014.pdf. Zugegriffen: 27. Dez. 2021
Morales-Conde S, Peeters A, Meyer YM, Antoniou SA, Del Agua IA, Arezzo A, Arolfo S, Yehuda AB, Boni L, Cassinotti E et al (2019) European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 33(4):996–1019
Bucher P, Ostermann S, Pugin F, Morel P (2011) Female population perception of conventional laparoscopy, transumbilical LESS, and transvaginal NOTES for cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 25(7):2308–2315
Strasberg SM (2012) Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and the introduction of innovative surgical procedures. Ann Surg 256(1):7–9
Lima DL, Lima RNC, dos Santos DC, Shadduck PP, Carvalho GL, Malcher F (2020) Which cholecystectomy technique would surgeons prefer on themselves? Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 30(6):495–499
Umemura A, Suto T, Nakamura S, Fujiwara H, Endo F, Nitta H, Takahara T, Sasaki A (2019) Comparison of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus needlescopic cholecystectomy: a single institutional randomized clinical trial. Dig Surg 36(1):53–58
Tekeli AE, Eker E, Bartin MK, Öner MÖ (2020) The efficacy of transversus abdominis plane block for postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy cases: a retrospective evaluation of 515 patients. J Int Med Res 48(8):300060520944058
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Interessenkonflikt
M. Berlet, A. Jell, D. Bulian, H. Friess und D. Wilhelm geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.
Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autoren keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.
Additional information
Redaktion
C.T. Germer, Würzburg
QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Berlet, M., Jell, A., Bulian, D. et al. Klinischer Stellenwert alternativer Technologien zur standardmäßigen laparoskopischen Cholezystektomie – Single-Port, Reduced-Port, Roboter, NOTES. Chirurgie 93, 566–576 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-022-01608-9
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-022-01608-9