Skip to main content

Complications of Single Port Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic 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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Gilchrist BF, Vlessis AA, Kay GA, et al. Open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an initial analysis. J Laparoendosc Surg. 1991;1:193–6.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kaouk JH, Haber GP, Goel RK, et al. Single-port laparoscopic surgery in urology: initial experience. Urology. 2008;71:3–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Desai MM, Rao PP, Aron M, et al. Scarless single port transumbilical nephrectomy and pyeloplasty: first clinical report. BJU Int. 2008;101:83–8.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Raman JD, Cadeddu JA, Rao P, et al. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery: initial urological experience and comparison with natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. BJU Int. 2008;101:493–6.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bishoff JT, Kavoussi LR. Laparoscopic surgery of the kidney. In: Kavoussi LR, Novick AC, Partin AW, Peters CA, Wein AJ, editors. Campbell-Walsh urology. 9th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2007. pp. 1759–809.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wheeless CR. A rapid, inexpensive and effective method of surgical sterilization by laparoscopy. J Reprod Med. 1969;3:65–9.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pelosi MA, Pelosi MA 3rd. Laparoscopic hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy using a single umbilical puncture. N J Med. 1991;88:721–6.

    Google Scholar 

  8. D’Alessio A, Piro E, Tadini B, et al. One-trocar transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy in children: our experience. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2002;12:24–7.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rane A, Kommu S, Eddy B, et al. Clinical evaluation of a novel laparoscopic port (R-port) and evolution of the single laparoscopic port procedure (SLiPP). J Endourol. 2007;21 Suppl 1:A22–3.

    Google Scholar 

  10. White WM, Goel RK, Kaouk JH. Single port laparoscopic retroperitoneal surgery: initial operative experience and comparative outcomes. Urology. 2009;73(6):1279.

    Google Scholar 

  11. White WM, Goel RK, Swartz MA, et al. Single port laparoscopic abdominal sacral colpopexy: initial experience and comparative outcomes. Urology. 2009;74(5):1008–12.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gill IS, Canes D, Aron M, et al. Single port transumbilical (E-NOTES) donor nephrectomy. J Urol. 2008;180:637–41.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Stein RJ, White WM, Goel RK, et al. Robotic laparoendoscopic single-site surgery using GelPort as the access platform. Eur Urol. 2010;57(1):132–6.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 2008 Medical Innovation Summit Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. November 10–12, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fahlenkamp D, Rassweiler J, Fornara P, et al. Complications of laparoscopic procedures in urology: experience with 2,407 procedures at 4 German centers. J Urol. 1999;162:765–70.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Vallancien G, Cathelineau X, Baumert H, et al. Complications of transperitoneal laparoscopic surgery in urology: review of 1,311 procedures at a single center. J Urol. 2002;168:23–6.

    Google Scholar 

  17. White WM, Haber GP, Goel RK, et al. Single port urologic surgery: single center experience with the first 100 cases. Urology. 2009;74(4):801–4.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Irwin BH, Berger A, Tracy CR, et al. Factors leading to conversion from single port to conventional laparoscopy: a multi-institutional study. J Urol. 2009;181:531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Desai MM, Berger A, Aron M, et al. Single-Port Transvesical Enucleation of the Prostate (STEP): clinical experience. J Urol. 2009;181:699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaouk JH, Goel RK. Single-port laparoscopic and robotic partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2009;55(5):1163–9.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kaouk JH, Goel RK, Haber GP, et al. Single-port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Urology. 2008;72:10.1190–3.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Desai MM, Stein R, Rao P, et al. Embryonic natural orifice transumbilical endoscopic surgery (E-NOTES) for advanced reconstruction: initial experience. Urology. 2009;73:182–7.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Aron M, Canes D, Desai MM, et al. Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. BJU Int. 2008;103:516–21.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ponsky LE, Cherullo EE, Sawyer M, et al. Single access site laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: initial clinical experience. J Endourol. 2008;22:663–6.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Rane A, Ahmed S, Kommu SS, et al. Single-port ‘scarless’ laparoscopic nephrectomies: the United Kingdom experience. BJU Int. 2009;104(2):230–3.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jihad H. Kaouk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

White, W.M., Goel, R.K., Kaouk, J.H. (2010). Complications of Single Port Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery. In: Ghavamian, R. (eds) Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-60761-676-4_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-60761-675-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-60761-676-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics