OBJECTIVE To compare the outcomes between laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) and a novel percutaneous externally assembled laparoscopic (PEAL) nephrectomy in an in vivo porcine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS Ten female farm… Click to show full abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the outcomes between laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) and a novel percutaneous externally assembled laparoscopic (PEAL) nephrectomy in an in vivo porcine model. MATERIALS AND METHODS Ten female farm pigs were randomized to LESS nephrectomy (5) or PEAL nephrectomy (5). Operative times, estimated blood loss, and intraoperative and postoperative complications were compared. The surgeons used a Likert scale to grade difficulty of peritoneal access, port placement, tool assembly, hilar dissection, closure, and overall difficulty of surgery. Scar assessment was performed by a blinded plastic surgeon using the Vancouver Scar Scale. Descriptive statistics were reported as median and range. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for continuous and ordinal variables. A p value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS Median operative time was significantly shorter in the PEAL group vs the LESS group (85 minutes vs 127 minutes, pā=ā0.03). Median Likert scores showed overall hilar dissection and nephrectomy to be significantly easier using PEAL compared with LESS (2 vs 9, pā<ā0.01 for both). The PEAL instruments left no visible scar at 5 feet in any animal, and only 1 out of 10 scars could be identified on physical examination. CONCLUSIONS The PEAL surgical paradigm demonstrates nearly scarless outcomes while providing shorter operative times and easier performance than LESS nephrectomy in a porcine model.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.