Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5193_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
65 Мб
Скачать
354
I. H. Ozata and E. Balık
connection between the system and the operating table. This enables the surgeon to dynamically position the patient while doing the operation.
Surgical Technique Using theDa Vinci Platform
The Veress technique serves as a standard method for establishing pneumoperito­neum in minimally invasive surgical procedures. In robotic surgery (Video 26.1 for robotic right hemicolectomy), a conguration involving four robotic trocars and one assistant trocar is commonly employed to facilitate the robotic approach. The stra­tegic placement of ports to the left of the midline is typically preferred to optimize
Fig. 26.1 Operation room conguration
26 Right Hemicolectomy
355
the surgical workspace and provide maximal access for the robotic instruments dur­ing the procedure (Fig.26.2). This port arrangement allows for enhanced maneuver­ability and precision in performing right hemicolectomy using the da Vinci Xi robotic platform, ensuring efcient and effective completion of the surgical intervention.
The AirSeal® system is a trocar without valves that enables a stable pneumoperi­toneum and ongoing removal of smoke during surgical procedures. This technology has been associated with enhanced visualization, decreased abdominal pressures, and subsequently, a decrease in cardiopulmonary complications, ileus, and postop­erative pain [10].
On the other hand, table motion technology in robotic surgery improves surgical precision and efciency by enabling better maneuverability and positioning during procedures. This integration allows surgeons to easily modify the orientation and alignment of the robotic arms and instruments, thereby improving overall dexterity and range of motion during surgery.
The abdominal cavity is systematically examined upon entry, dividing the assess­ment into four quadrants for a thorough evaluation. Simultaneously, a comprehen­sive assessment is conducted on the liver surface and peritoneum to detect any abnormalities (Fig.26.3). The colon and omentum are repositioned over the falci­form ligament to improve exposure and access. This maneuver improves the clarity and ease of access to the right colon. The small bowel is then moved to the left lower quadrant. This repositioning enables the accurate identication of the ileocolic ped­icle, a crucial step in robotic right hemicolectomy.
The robotic cart is positioned to approach the patient from the right side in an orientation. The system utilizes automatic targeting to align the robotic arms opti­mally, enhancing their range of motion and reducing the chance of collisions. This feature directs the camera toward the patient’s anatomy. The 30° robotic endoscope is inserted through Port 2, situated above the umbilicus (Fig.26.4). The initial robotic arm is outtted with either monopolar curved scissors or a robotic vessel
Fig. 26.2 Placement of the ports
356
Fig. 26.3 Liver surface and peritoneum
I. H. Ozata and E. Balık
sealing device. The third robotic arm uses a fenestrated bipolar instrument, and the fourth arm employs a Cadiere grasper for tissue manipulation. An 8–10mm assis­tant port is used to hold gauze or instruments such as the suction irrigator or a lapa­roscopic bowel grasper. To enhance visibility in challenging situations, consider adding a 5-mm assistant port to the surgical eld.
In a medial-to-lateral technique, arm 4 is used to retract the terminal ileum/ cecum to elevate and apply tension to the ileocolic pedicle. The peritoneum below the ileocolic pedicle is incised using a fenestrated monopolar grasper in arm 1 and a bipolar scissor in arm 3 while holding the fatty tissue containing the vessels (Fig.26.5). This maneuver exposes the vascular pedicle for dissection, followed by the dissection, ligation, and division of the vessels (Fig.26.6). Following the dissec- tion, the superior mesenteric vein is observed with the presence of clips, as well as the middle colic vein with attached clips (Fig.26.7). The submesenteric dissection begins directly beneath the mesenteric opening. The dissection process is ongoing following the embryologic planes, revealing the retroperitoneal structures such as the duodenum, head of the pancreas, gonadal vessels, and right ureter (Fig.26.8). The dissection extends sideways to the abdominal wall, downward to the sacral promontory, and upward revealing the duodenum and head of the pancreas (Fredet fascia-anterior duodenopancreatic fascia). The identication of the pancreatic and colic branches of the gastrocolic trunk of Henle is conrmed (Fig.26.9).
The dissection will proceed along the superior mesenteric vein until reaching the middle colic vein. In a standard right colectomy, the right branch of the middle colic pedicle is tied off and cut. If present, the right colic artery is tied off. Ligation of any additional vessel structures, such as the right colic vein in the mesentery of the right colon, is performed. The mesentery is separated into the transverse colon (Fig. 26.10). A gauze is positioned as a marker to be located horizontally. The omentum is separated from the distal transverse colon, allowing access to the lesser sac, and then included in the specimen side. Omentectomy, the partial or complete removal of the omentum, is a surgical option that may be considered during right
26 Right Hemicolectomy
357
ab cd
e
fgh
j
i
Fig. 26.4 Robotic arms and instruments. (a) Monopolar curved scissors (b) Monopolar hook (c) Maryland bipolar forceps. (d) Fenestrated bipolar forceps. (e) Medium-large clip applier. (f) Large clip applier (g) Vessel sealer (h) Tip-up fenestrated grasper. (i) Large needle driver. (j) SureForm® stapler
358
Fig. 26.5 Ileocolic pedicle in mesenterium
Fig. 26.6 Ileocolic pedicle originating from the superior mesenteric vein
I. H. Ozata and E. Balık
Fig. 26.7 Superior mesenteric vein with clips and middle colic vein with attached clips
26 Right Hemicolectomy
Fig. 26.8 Right ureter and right gonadal vein
Fig. 26.9 Duodenum and gastrocolic trunk
359
Fig. 26.10 Separation of mesentery
hemicolectomy for colon tumors, depending on factors such as the location of the tumor, the extent of the disease, and preoperative radiologic ndings. The transverse colon is repositioned to the cephalic side, and the remaining omental and colonic attachments are cut. This dissection is made easier by the prior submesenteric dissection, which involves detecting the landmark gauze.
360
I. H. Ozata and E. Balık
The cecum, appendix, and terminal ileum are freed by cutting the peritoneal attachments in the right lower quadrant. The mesentery of the terminal ileum is cut about 10cm prior to ileocecal valve reaching the small intestine wall. Robotic sta­pler is used to divide the terminal ileum and the transverse colon. Arterial blood supply is controlled by administering indocyanine green intravenously and examin­ing the terminal ileum and transverse colon using Firey® mode (Fig.26.11).
The Firey® system, which is incorporated into the da Vinci surgical platform, employs near-infrared light to observe the absorption of indocyanine green (ICG) by tissues. This technology enables the immediate and accurate identication of important landmarks during surgical procedures, using image guidance enhancing the precision and accuracy [11]. The Firey® technology utilizes ICG uorescence imaging to enhance the visualization of crucial anatomical structures. This aids sur­geons in detecting minute and imperceptible lesions, as well as guiding procedures like central lymph node mapping and identifying regions with inadequate blood circulation during surgical operations.
A side-to-side anastomosis is created using isoperistaltic technique. An enter­otomy incision is made in the terminal ileum and the transverse colon, and robotic stapler, SureForm®, is then inserted which uses SmartFire technology to monitor tissue compression before and during ring. Typically, the wider jaw of the stapler is inserted into the colon, followed by bringing the ileum over and inserting the narrower stapler jaw (Fig.26.12). SureForm® is red to create the
Fig. 26.11 Firey® mode with indocyanine green
Fig. 26.12 Colon and ileum with SureForm® stapler
26 Right Hemicolectomy
Fig. 26.13 Suturing intestinal opening
361
anastomosis, and the intestinal opening is then closed with a continuous suture (Fig.26.13). Pfannenstiel incision is made and the specimen is removed using a wound protector. Next, the wound protector is sealed, the process of introducing gas into the abdomen is resumed, a thorough examination of the abdomen is conducted to ensure there is no bleeding, and the ports are taken out while being directly observed in low pressure. The decision to utilize drains in surgical pro­cedures, lacking substantial evidence, typically relies on the surgeon’s expertise and approach.
Recovery After theSurgery
Postoperative discharge following colorectal surgery is a critical component of patient care that requires careful consideration to ensure patient safety and promote the best possible recovery. Criteria for discharge commonly include factors like tolerance of oral nutrition, effective pain management, bowel recovery, and auton­omy in daily living activities as stated by Biondi etal. [12]. Biomarkers such as C-reactive protein and procalcitonin have been suggested as early indicators of sep­tic complications and dehiscence, aiding in a safe hospital discharge [13, 14]. Early discharge has been associated with positive patient experiences and enhanced recovery. However, it is crucial to weigh the benets of early discharge against the risks of readmission and postoperative complications [15, 16]. Therefore, a compre- hensive assessment of patient recovery, compliance with enhanced recovery proto­cols, and individual risk factors is essential in determining the appropriate timing for discharge after surgery.
After colorectal surgery, patients undergo a period of recovery and adapta­tion to resume their usual daily routines and quality of life. Research has empha­sized the inuence of colorectal surgery on patients’ well-being, underscoring the signicance of monitoring postoperative complications and quality of life results. Understanding the physical, emotional, and social components of life following colorectal surgery is essential for healthcare professionals to assist patients in their recovery process and improve their postoperative health.
362
I. H. Ozata and E. Balık

Conclusion

Robotic right hemicolectomy represents the highest achievement in minimally invasive surgical methods for treating colon cancer. It provides improved accu­racy, less damage to the body, and faster recovery, all while following oncologic principles. This approach not only adheres to the highest standard of complete mesocolic excision but also offers benets such as reduced risk of infection and enhanced surgical outcomes. The success of this procedure relies heavily on the preparation, positioning of the patient, and recovery phases. This emphasizes the signicance of conducting a thorough preoperative assessment and providing comprehensive postoperative care. With advancements in technology and increas­ing surgeon expertise, robotic surgery offers the potential to enhance the treat­ment of colon cancer by maximizing patient advantages and advancing surgical techniques.

References

1. Wang C, Gao Z, Shen K, Shen Z, Jiang K, Liang B, etal. Safety, quality and effect of com­plete mesocolic excision vs non-complete mesocolic excision in patients with colon cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Color Dis. 2017;19(11):962–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/
codi.13900.
2. Bertelsen C, Gundestrup A, Olsen A, Bols B, Ingeholm P, Kleif J.Association between plane of mesocolic dissection and recurrence after complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colon cancer: a cohort study. Color Dis. 2023;25(7):1392–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.16551.
3. Trilling B, Delattre F, Faucheron J.Comment on “efcacy and safety of complete mesocolic excision in patients with colon cancer: three-year results from a prospective, nonrandom­ized, double-blind, controlled trial”. Ann Surg. 2020;274(6):e788–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/
sla.0000000000004403.
4. Aziz M, El-Deen A, Hasanien A, Attia A, Hafez A.Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation for right colonic cancer (feasibility & safety). Minia J Med Res. 2020;31(1):262–7. https://doi.org/10.21608/mjmr.2022.221517.
5. Tribuzi A, Marzano M, Paolini C, Bencini L, Marino M, Coratti A.Robotic extended right colectomy with complete mesocolic excision. Color Dis. 2020;22(11):1807. https://doi.
org/10.1111/codi.15246.
6. Ng KT, Tsia AKV, Chong VYL.Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for colorec­tal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. World J Surg. 2019;43(4):1146–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268- 018- 04896- 7.
7. Childers R, Lipsett PA, Pawlik TM.Informed consent and the surgeon. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208(4):627–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.12.012.
8. Castagneto-Gissey L, Russo MF, Casella-Mariolo J, Serao A, Marcellinaro R, D'Andrea V, Carlini M, Casella G. The role of antibiotic prophylaxis in anastomotic leak prevention during elective colorectal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized con­trolled trials. Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland). 2023;12(2):397. https://doi.org/10.3390/
antibiotics12020397.
9. Anderson DR, Morgano GP, Bennett C, Dentali F, Francis CW, García D, etal. American soci­ety of hematology 2019 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: prevention of venous thromboembolism in surgical hospitalized patients. Blood Adv. 2019;3(23):3898–944.
https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000975.
26 Right Hemicolectomy
10. Razdan S, Üçpınar B, Okhawere K, Badani KK.The role of airseal in robotic urologic sur­gery: a systematic review. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech. 2023;33(1):21–31. https://doi.
org/10.1089/lap.2022.0153.
11. Koerner C, Rosen S.How robotics is changing and will change the eld of colorectal surgery. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2019;11(10):381–7. https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v11.i10.381.
12. Biondi A, Mele MC, Agnes A, Lorenzon L, Cintoni M, Rinninella E, et al. Feasibility of discharge within 72 hours of major colorectal surgery: lessons learned after 5 years of institu­tional experience with the eras protocol. BJS Open. 2022;6(1) https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/
zrac002.
13. Ortega-Deballon P, Radais F, Facy O, d’Athis P, Masson D, Charles P, etal. C-reactive protein is an early predictor of septic complications after elective colorectal surgery. World J Surg. 2010;34(4):808–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268- 009- 0367- x.
14. Giaccaglia V, Salvi PF, Antonelli M, Nigri G, Pirozzi F, Casagranda B, etal. Procalcitonin reveals early dehiscence in colorectal surgery. Ann Surg. 2016;263(5):967–72. https://doi.
org/10.1097/sla.0000000000001365.
15. Jakobsson J, Idvall E, Wann-Hansson C.Patient-reported recovery after enhanced colorectal cancer surgery: a longitudinal six-month follow-up study. Int J Color Dis. 2014;29(8):989–98.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384- 014- 1939- 2.
16. Azevedo J, Mendes CRS, Lima MLD, Pessoa JCSDP, Julião GPS, Perez RO, etal. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery and discharge within 24 h—who is at risk for readmission? Color Dis. 2021;23(10):2714–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.15791.
363