» Articles » PMID: 22504282

Transanal Employment of Single Access Ports is Feasible for Rectal Surgery

Overview
Journal Ann Surg
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2012 Apr 17
PMID 22504282
Citations 39
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of transanal single port surgery in 15 consecutive patients.

Background: The current method of choice for local resection of rectal tumors is transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM), a complex and expensive technique. Single access surgery is easy, relatively cheap, and more broadly applied in laparoscopy. Evidence regarding transanal use of single access ports is scarce.

Methods: Consecutive patients with a rectal lesion otherwise eligible for TEM were operated using the Single Site Laparoscopic Access System (SSL) and standard laparoscopic instrumentation. Patient, lesion and procedure characteristics, hospitalization length, and peroperative and postoperative complications were recorded.

Results: Fifteen patients were planned for single port transanal surgery. In 2 patients (13.3%), intrarectal retractor expansion failed, and conversion to conventional TEM was necessary. The remaining 13 patients were successfully operated. Rectal lesions (mean diameter 36 mm, standard deviation ±25 mm, mean distance from the dentate line 6 cm [±4.5]) included adenoma in 7 patients, T1 adenocarcinoma in 1, T2 adenocarcinoma in 3, carcinoid in 1, and fibrosis only in 1 (after prior polypectomy). All patients were operated in lithotomy position. Resections were en bloc, full thickness, and had complete margins. Resection specimens measured 65 (±35) × 52 (±24) mm. Twelve rectal defects were sutured. One peroperative pneumoscrotum occurred. Mean operating time was 57 (±39) minutes. One patient presented with postoperative hemorrhage, treated conservatively (postoperative morbidity rate 7.7%). Mean hospitalization lasted 2.5 days (±2.7).

Conclusions: Transanal single port surgery via the SSL is feasible and safe and may become a promising alternative to TEM.

Citing Articles

Minimally Invasive Rectal Surgery: Current Status and Future Perspectives in the Era of Digital Surgery.

Goglia M, Pavone M, DAndrea V, De Simone V, Gallo G J Clin Med. 2025; 14(4).

PMID: 40004765 PMC: 11856500. DOI: 10.3390/jcm14041234.


Transanal Endoscopic Platforms: TAMIS versus Rigid Platforms: Pros and Cons.

Devane L, Daly M, Albert M Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2022; 35(2):93-98.

PMID: 35237103 PMC: 8885160. DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1742108.


Transanal minimally invasive surgery using laparoscopic instruments of the rectum: A review.

Kim M, Lee T World J Gastrointest Surg. 2021; 13(10):1149-1165.

PMID: 34754384 PMC: 8554714. DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v13.i10.1149.


Education and Training in Transanal Endoscopic Surgery and Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision.

Keller D, de Lacy F, Hompes R Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2021; 34(3):163-171.

PMID: 33814998 PMC: 8013784. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1718682.


First clinical experience with single-port robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery (SP rTAMIS) for benign rectal neoplasms.

Marks J, Kunkel E, Salem J, Martin C, Anderson B, Agarwal S Tech Coloproctol. 2020; 25(1):117-124.

PMID: 33068190 DOI: 10.1007/s10151-020-02358-8.