Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery

Wesley White, Raj K. Goel, Jihad H. Kaouk

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Any new surgical approach or technique requires a stringent inquisition of its relative merits and risks. When laparoscopic cholecystectomy was introduced nearly two decades ago, a small rise in complications during the learning curve of the procedure was accepted by both physicians and patients given the tangibly lessened morbidity and shortened convalescence that were associated with the approach [1]. Single port laparoscopy was conceptualized and refined over the last 18 months in an attempt to further reduce patient discomfort and to improve cosmesis. Collectively, over 200 single port urologic procedures have been successfully completed and include both extirpative and reconstructive indications [2-4]. Thus far, results have been generally favorable with a modicum of complications commensurate with any new technique. However, the superiority of the single port approach as compared to standard laparoscopy has yet to be firmly established [4]. Given that the single port approach is, at least in the short term, demonstrating only marginal differential benefit, complications with single port surgery must be critically evaluated. This chapter will offer a brief review of the single port laparoscopic literature with an emphasis on reported complications and finally outline our algorithm for addressing single port adverse events.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationComplications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery
PublisherSpringer New York
Pages261-266
Number of pages6
ISBN (Print)9781607616757
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2010

Fingerprint

Robotics
Laparoscopy
Learning Curve
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Morbidity
Physicians

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

White, W., Goel, R. K., & Kaouk, J. H. (2010). Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery. In Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery (pp. 261-266). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21

Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery. / White, Wesley; Goel, Raj K.; Kaouk, Jihad H.

Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer New York, 2010. p. 261-266.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

White, W, Goel, RK & Kaouk, JH 2010, Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery. in Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer New York, pp. 261-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21
White W, Goel RK, Kaouk JH. Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery. In Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer New York. 2010. p. 261-266 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21
White, Wesley ; Goel, Raj K. ; Kaouk, Jihad H. / Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery. Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer New York, 2010. pp. 261-266
@inbook{57bffce8654f45da9f5d68e5d19fc9e4,
title = "Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery",
abstract = "Any new surgical approach or technique requires a stringent inquisition of its relative merits and risks. When laparoscopic cholecystectomy was introduced nearly two decades ago, a small rise in complications during the learning curve of the procedure was accepted by both physicians and patients given the tangibly lessened morbidity and shortened convalescence that were associated with the approach [1]. Single port laparoscopy was conceptualized and refined over the last 18 months in an attempt to further reduce patient discomfort and to improve cosmesis. Collectively, over 200 single port urologic procedures have been successfully completed and include both extirpative and reconstructive indications [2-4]. Thus far, results have been generally favorable with a modicum of complications commensurate with any new technique. However, the superiority of the single port approach as compared to standard laparoscopy has yet to be firmly established [4]. Given that the single port approach is, at least in the short term, demonstrating only marginal differential benefit, complications with single port surgery must be critically evaluated. This chapter will offer a brief review of the single port laparoscopic literature with an emphasis on reported complications and finally outline our algorithm for addressing single port adverse events.",
author = "Wesley White and Goel, {Raj K.} and Kaouk, {Jihad H.}",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9781607616757",
pages = "261--266",
booktitle = "Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery",
publisher = "Springer New York",
address = "United States",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Complications of single port laparoscopic and robotic surgery

AU - White, Wesley

AU - Goel, Raj K.

AU - Kaouk, Jihad H.

PY - 2010/12/1

Y1 - 2010/12/1

N2 - Any new surgical approach or technique requires a stringent inquisition of its relative merits and risks. When laparoscopic cholecystectomy was introduced nearly two decades ago, a small rise in complications during the learning curve of the procedure was accepted by both physicians and patients given the tangibly lessened morbidity and shortened convalescence that were associated with the approach [1]. Single port laparoscopy was conceptualized and refined over the last 18 months in an attempt to further reduce patient discomfort and to improve cosmesis. Collectively, over 200 single port urologic procedures have been successfully completed and include both extirpative and reconstructive indications [2-4]. Thus far, results have been generally favorable with a modicum of complications commensurate with any new technique. However, the superiority of the single port approach as compared to standard laparoscopy has yet to be firmly established [4]. Given that the single port approach is, at least in the short term, demonstrating only marginal differential benefit, complications with single port surgery must be critically evaluated. This chapter will offer a brief review of the single port laparoscopic literature with an emphasis on reported complications and finally outline our algorithm for addressing single port adverse events.

AB - Any new surgical approach or technique requires a stringent inquisition of its relative merits and risks. When laparoscopic cholecystectomy was introduced nearly two decades ago, a small rise in complications during the learning curve of the procedure was accepted by both physicians and patients given the tangibly lessened morbidity and shortened convalescence that were associated with the approach [1]. Single port laparoscopy was conceptualized and refined over the last 18 months in an attempt to further reduce patient discomfort and to improve cosmesis. Collectively, over 200 single port urologic procedures have been successfully completed and include both extirpative and reconstructive indications [2-4]. Thus far, results have been generally favorable with a modicum of complications commensurate with any new technique. However, the superiority of the single port approach as compared to standard laparoscopy has yet to be firmly established [4]. Given that the single port approach is, at least in the short term, demonstrating only marginal differential benefit, complications with single port surgery must be critically evaluated. This chapter will offer a brief review of the single port laparoscopic literature with an emphasis on reported complications and finally outline our algorithm for addressing single port adverse events.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891380707&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84891380707&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21

DO - 10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781607616757

SP - 261

EP - 266

BT - Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery

PB - Springer New York

ER -