Novosti
Khirurgii
This journal is
indexed in Scopus



Year 2016 Vol. 24 No 5

EXCHANGE OF EXPERIENCE

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18484/2305-0047.2016.5.519   |  

K.V. PUCHKOV1,2, D.A. KHUBEZOV2,3, D.K. PUCHKOV2,3, R.V. LUKANIN3

LAPAROSCOPIC RIGHT HEMICOLECTOMY WITH SPECIMEN EXTRACTION ACCORDING TO NOSE METHOD

ANCO "Center of Clinical and Experimental Surgery"1, Moscow,
SBEE HPE "Ryazan State Medical University Named after Academician I.P. Pavlov"2,
SBE RR "Ryazan Regional Clinical Hospital",
Ryazan.
The Russian Federation

Objectives. To evaluate the immediate and long-term results of surgical treatment of patients with simultaneous diseases of the abdominal and pelvic organs after laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with the specimen extraction transvaginelly according to the natural orifice organs specimen extraction (NOSE) method.
Methods. The article details the first clinical case: the patient with the tumour of the colon and uterus myoma nodes, and therefore, she was subjected to a simultaneous laparoscopic operation – hysterectomy, right hemicolectomy with extraction of resected specimen transvaginally with intracorporal anastomosis fistulization. At the first stage hysterectomy was performed, right hemicolectomy was carried out using the original combined latero-medial technique. Within 3 years 5 similar surgical procedures had been done and the results are presented in this article.
Results. Mean operative time was 133+12,9 min. Intraoperative blood loss did not exceed 90-100 ml. The length of the vascular pedicle (indersected iliac colic artery) was 9±1 cm. The fascia of colon was saved in all 5 cases. No intraoperative complication was observed. Postoperative complications were registered in 2 cases: the development of functional complication – dyspareunia was noted in 1 case. The development of this complication was associated with the violation of treatment guidelines – abstinence from sexual intercourse after an operation is advisable for 2 months. This complication was cured with vaginal suppositories within 2 weeks after the first symptoms appearance. One case of acute urinary retention was observed on the second day after surgery (after the urinary catheter removal). There was a need to set a urinary catheter within 12 hours. The level of postoperative pain ranged from 0 to 1.
Conclusion. Transvaginal access is considered to be an ideal way to extract the resected specimen due to anatomical and physiological features of the given area during the colon operations.

Keywords: laparoscopy, laparoscopic hemicolectomy, NOSE, intracorporeal interintestinal anastomosis formation, transvaginal access, postoperative pain, complication
p. 519-524 of the original issue
References
  1. Kuchumov VV, Liapkalo AA, Medvedeva OV. Aktual'nost' problemy profilaktiki zlokachestvennykh novoobrazovanii dlia Riazanskoi oblasti [The urgency of the problem of prevention of malignant neoplasms of the Ryazan region]. Ros Med-Biol Vestn im Akad IP Pavlova. 2014;(1):72-76.
  2. Xiong B, Ma L, Zhang C. Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of results of randomized controlled trials. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012 Sep;22(7):674-84. doi: 10.1089/lap.2012.0143.
  3. Kellokumpu IH, Kairaluoma MI, Nuorva KP, Kautiainen HJ, Jantunen IT. Short- and long-term outcome following laparoscopic versus open resection for carcinoma of the rectum in the multimodal setting. Dis Colon Rectum. 2012 Aug;55(8):854-63. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e31825b9052.
  4. Buunen M, Veldkamp R, Hop WC, Kuhry E, Jeekel J, Haglind E, et al. Survival after laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: long-term outcome of a randomised clinical trial. Lancet Oncol. 2009 Jan;10(1):44-52. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(08)70310-3.
  5. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005 May 14-20;365(9472):1718-26.
  6. Tong DK, Fan JK, Law WL. Outcome of laparoscopic colorectal resection. Surgeon. 2008 Dec;6(6):357-60.
  7. Poon JT, Law WL, Wong IW, Ching PT, Wong LM, Fan JK, et al. Impact of laparoscopic colorectal resection on surgical site infection. Ann Surg. 2009 Jan;249(1):77-81. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819279e3.
  8. Schwenk W, Haase O, Neudecker J, Müller JM. Short term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jul 20;(3):CD003145. doi: 10.1002/14651858.
  9. Wang Q, Wang C, Sun DH, Kharbuja P, Cao XY. Laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with natural orifice specimen extraction. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Feb 7;19(5):750-4. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i5.750.
  10. Puchkov KV, Khubezov DA. Maloinvazivnaia khirurgiia tolstoi kishki [Minimally invasive surgery of the colon]: ruk dlia vrachei. Moscow, RF: Meditsina; 2005. 280 p.
  11. Brinkmann L, Lorenz D. Minilaparoscopic surgery : alternative or supplement to single-port surgery? Chirurg. 2011 May;82(5):419-24. doi: 10.1007/s00104-010-2007-2. [Article in German]
  12. Zaghiyan KN, Murrell Z, Fleshner PR. Scarless single-incision laparoscopic loop ileostomy: a novel technique. Dis Colon Rectum. 2011 Dec;54(12):1542-6. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e31822b71eb.
  13. Dostalík J, Gunková P, Martínek L, Mazur M, Gunka I, Richter V, et al. NOSE (Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction) in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Rozhl Chir. 2012 Mar;91(3):141-45. [Article in Czech]
  14. Palanivelu C, Rangarajan M, Jategaonkar PA, Anand NV. An innovative technique for colorectal specimen retrieval: a new era of "natural orifice specimen extraction" (N.O.S.E). Dis Colon Rectum. 2008 Jul;51(7):1120-4. doi: 10.1007/s10350-008-9316-2.
  15. Gill IS, Cherullo EE, Meraney AM, Borsuk F, Murphy DP, Falcone T. Vaginal extraction of the intact specimen following laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol. 2002 Jan;167(1):238-41.
Address for correspondence:
390026, Russian Federation, Ryazan, Vyisokovoltnaya st.,
9, Ryazan State Medical University named by Academician I.P. Pavlov,
department of surgery with the course of endosurgery FAPE.
Tel: +7 (952) 122-81-85
E-mail: puchkovdk@mail.ru
Puchkov Dmitry Konstantinovich
Information about the authors:
Puchkov K.V. MD, Professor, Director, ANCO "Center of Clinical and Experimental Surgery", Moscow, Professor of department of surgery with the course of endosurgery FAPE, SBEE HPE "Ryazan State Medical University named after Academician I.P.Pavlov", Professor of department of obstetrics and gynaecology, SBEE APE "Russian Medical Academy of Post-graduate Education".
Khubezov D.A. MD, Professor, Head of department of surgery with the course of endosurgery FAPE, SBEE HPE "Ryazan State Medical University named after Academician I.P.Pavlov", Head of department of coloproctology, SBE RR "Ryazan Regional Clinical Hospital".
Puchkov D.K. Assistant of department of surgery with the course of endosurgery FAPE, SBEE HPE "Ryazan State Medical University named after Academician I.P.Pavlov", Coloproctologist of department of coloproctology, SBE RR "Ryazan Regional Clinical Hospital".
Lukanin R.V. Coloproctologist of department of coloproctology, SBE RR "Ryazan Regional Clinical Hospital".
Contacts | ©Vitebsk State Medical University, 2007