Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Ann Coloproctol : Annals of Coloproctology

OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Search

Page Path
HOME > Search
7 "Soo Yeun Park"
Filter
Filter
Article category
Keywords
Publication year
Authors
Editorial
Multimodal analgesia for postoperative pain: pursuing liberation from pain, not redemption
Soo Yeun Park
Ann Coloproctol. 2024;40(3):189-190.   Published online June 12, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2024.00304.0043
  • 2,042 View
  • 153 Download
PDF
Video
Video clip
Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with aortocaval lymphadenectomy, and pelvic peritoneum partial resection for ascending colon cancer
Hannah Kim, An Na Seo, Soo Yeun Park
Ann Coloproctol. 2023;39(3):283-286.   Published online February 9, 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2022.00780.0111
  • 2,665 View
  • 114 Download
  • 1 Web of Science
  • 1 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDFSupplementary Material
The aim of this video is to present the procedural details of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with aortocaval (infrarenal aortic bifurcation) lymphadenectomy, partial resection of the pelvic peritoneum (peritoneal carcinomatosis index, 3), and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in a patient who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy for stage IVc colorectal cancer. The total operation time was 290 minutes, and the patient was discharged on a postoperative day 13 without any complications. No postoperative complications occurred until postoperative day 60. The pathological stage of the tumor was determined to be T3N2bM1c. The pelvic peritoneal nodule was pathologically confirmed as a metastatic lesion. Among the 12 harvested aortocaval lymph nodes, 6 were metastatic lymph nodes. The minimally invasive approach was safe and feasible in this highly selected patient with colon cancer, aortocaval lymph nodes, and peritoneal metastases.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Clinical Effectiveness of Fluorescence Lymph Node Mapping Using ICG for Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: A Prospective Case–Control Study
    Gyung Mo Son, Mi Sook Yun, In Young Lee, Sun Bin Im, Kyung Hee Kim, Su Bum Park, Tae Un Kim, Dong-Hoon Shin, Armaan M. Nazir, Gi Won Ha
    Cancers.2023; 15(20): 4927.     CrossRef
Editorial
Benign GI diease, Inflammatory bowel disease
Surgical Treatment of Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Crohn Disease: A Long Way to Go to Identify the Optimal Method
Soo Yeun Park
Ann Coloproctol. 2020;36(4):207-208.   Published online August 31, 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2020.07.03
  • 2,854 View
  • 88 Download
PDF
Original Articles
Clinical Outcomes of a Redo for a Failed Colorectal or Coloanal Anastomosis
In Teak Woo, Jun Seok Park, Gyu-Seog Choi, Soo Yeun Park, Hye Jin Kim, In Kyu Park
Ann Coloproctol. 2018;34(5):259-265.   Published online October 31, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2018.05.04
  • 4,746 View
  • 131 Download
  • 12 Web of Science
  • 13 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose
Redo surgery in patients with a persistent anastomotic failure (PAF) is a rare procedure, and data about this procedure are lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes of redo surgery in such patients.
Methods
Patients who underwent a redo anastomosis for PAF from January 2004 to November 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. Data from a prospective colorectal database were analyzed. Success was defined as the combined absence of any anastomosis-related complications and a stoma at the last follow-up.
Results
A total of 1,964 patients who underwent curative surgery for rectal cancer during this study period were included. Among them, 32 consecutive patients underwent a redo anastomosis for PAF. Thirteen patients of those 32 had major anastomotic dehiscence with a pelvic sinus, 12 had a recto-vaginal fistula, and 7 had anastomosis stenosis. There were no postoperative deaths. The median operation time was 255 minutes (range, 80–480 minutes), and the median blood loss was 80 mL (range, 30–1,000 mL). The overall success rate was 78.1%, and the morbidity rate was 40.6%. Multivariable analyses showed that the primary tumor height at the lower level was the only statistically significant risk factor for redo surgery (P = 0.042; hazard ratio, 2.444).
Conclusion
In our experience, a redo anastomosis is a feasible surgical option that allows closure of a stoma in nearly 80% of patients. Lower tumor height (<5 cm from the anal verge) is the only independent risk factor for nonclosure of defunctioning stomas after primary rectal surgery.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Long-term Complications of Laparoscopic or Robotic Lateral Pelvic Node Dissection After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
    Hye Jin Kim, Gyu-Seog Choi, Jun Seok Park, Soo Yeun Park, Seung Ho Song, Sung Min Lee, Min Hye Jeong, Seung Hyun Cho
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Outcomes of redo for failed colorectal or coloanal anastomoses: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ricardo Purchio Galletti, Gabriel Andrade Agareno, Lucas de Abreu Sesconetto, Rafael Benjamim Rosa da Silva, Rafael Vaz Pandini, Lucas Soares Gerbasi, Victor Edmond Seid, Sérgio Eduardo Alonso Araujo, Francisco Tustumi
    Annals of Coloproctology.2023; 39(5): 375.     CrossRef
  • Turnbull-Cutait Pull-Through Procedure Is an Alternative to Permanent Ostomy in Patients with Complex Pelvic Fistulas
    Olga A. Lavryk, Carla F. Justiniano, Bethany Bandi1, Crinuta Floruta, Scott R. Steele, Tracy L. Hull
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Dealing with Complications of Colorectal Surgery Using the Transanal Approach—When and How?
    K. Talboom, P. J. Tanis, W. A. Bemelman, R. Hompes
    Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2022; 35(02): 155.     CrossRef
  • Multimodal treatment of colorectal postsurgical leaks: long-term results of the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) application
    Damiano CHIARI, Carlotta LA RAJA, Benedetto MANGIAVILLANO, Paolo VERONESI, Marco PLATTO, Walter ZULIANI
    Minerva Surgery.2022;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Re-do laparoscopic esophagojejunostomy for anastomotic stenosis after laparoscopic total gastrectomy in gastric cancer
    Dai Manaka, Sayuri Konishi, Hideo An, Kiyotaka Kawaguchi, Machi Yoneda, Masashi Fushitani, Takano Ota, Michina Morioka, Yusuke Okamura, Atsushi Ikeda, Naoya Sasaki, Shinya Hamasu, Ryuta Nishitai
    Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery.2022; 407(7): 3133.     CrossRef
  • Redo-laparoscopy in the management of complications after laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical outcomes
    P. Fransvea, G. Costa, L. D’Agostino, G. Sganga, A. Serao
    Techniques in Coloproctology.2021; 25(4): 371.     CrossRef
  • Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery: An Effective Approach for Patients Who Require Redo Pelvic Surgery for Anastomotic Failure
    Susanna S. Hill, Cristina R. Harnsberger, Sue J. Hahn, Paul R. Sturrock, Jennifer S. Davids, Karim Alavi, Justin A. Maykel
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2021; 64(3): 349.     CrossRef
  • Re-Operative Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review
    Constantine Halkias, Athanasios Zoikas, Zoe Garoufalia, Michalis K. Konstantinidis, Argyrios Ioannidis, Steven Wexner
    Journal of Clinical Medicine.2021; 10(7): 1447.     CrossRef
  • Second redo surgery after two consecutive failures of a colorectal or coloanal anastomosis: is it reasonable?
    Camélia Labiad, Marie Monsinjon, Massimo Giacca, Yves Panis
    International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2021; 36(9): 2057.     CrossRef
  • Treatment Modalities for Anastomotic Leakage in Rectal Cancer Surgery
    Deborah S. Keller, K. Talboom, C.P.M van Helsdingen, Roel Hompes
    Clinics in Colon and Rectal Surgery.2021; 34(06): 431.     CrossRef
  • Optimal strategies of rectovaginal fistula after rectal cancer surgery
    In Teak Woo, Jun Seok Park, Gyu-Seog Choi, Soo Yeun Park, Hye Jin Kim, Hee Jae Lee
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2019; 97(3): 142.     CrossRef
  • Safety of coloanal/ileoanal anastomosis during cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for peritoneal carcinomatosis: results of 20 consecutive patients
    Ozgul Duzgun, Murat Kalin
    Journal of International Medical Research.2019; 47(10): 4911.     CrossRef
Comparison of Surgical Skills in Laparoscopic and Robotic Tasks Between Experienced Surgeons and Novices in Laparoscopic Surgery: An Experimental Study
Hye Jin Kim, Gyu-Seog Choi, Jun Seok Park, Soo Yeun Park
Ann Coloproctol. 2014;30(2):71-76.   Published online April 25, 2014
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2014.30.2.71
  • 3,576 View
  • 50 Download
  • 39 Web of Science
  • 35 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose

Robotic surgery is known to provide an improved technical ability as compared to laparoscopic surgery. We aimed to compare the efficiency of surgical skills by performing the same experimental tasks using both laparoscopic and robotic systems in an attempt to determine if a robotic system has an advantage over laparoscopic system.

Methods

Twenty participants without any robotic experience, 10 laparoscopic novices (LN: medical students) and 10 laparoscopically-experienced surgeons (LE: surgical trainees and fellows), performed 3 laparoscopic and robotic training-box-based tasks. This entire set of tasks was performed twice.

Results

Compared with LN, LEs showed significantly better performances in all laparoscopic tasks and in robotic task 3 during the 2 trials. Within the LN group, better performances were shown in all robotic tasks compared with the same laparoscopic tasks. However, in the LE group, compared with the same laparoscopic tasks, significantly better performance was seen only in robotic task 1. When we compared the 2 sets of trials, in the second trial, LN showed better performances in laparoscopic task 2 and robotic task 3; LE showed significantly better performance only in robotic task 3.

Conclusion

Robotic surgery had better performance than laparoscopic surgery in all tasks during the two trials. However, these results were more noticeable for LN. These results suggest that robotic surgery can be easily learned without laparoscopic experience because of its technical advantages. However, further experimental trials are needed to investigate the advantages of robotic surgery in more detail.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Laparoscopic but not open surgical skills can be transferred to robot‐assisted surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
    Mona W. Schmidt, Carolyn Fan, Karl F. Köppinger, Leon P. Schmidt, Anna Brechter, Eldrige F. Limen, Johannes A. Vey, Matthes Metz, Beat P. Müller‐Stich, Felix Nickel, Karl‐Friedrich Kowalewski
    World Journal of Surgery.2024; 48(1): 14.     CrossRef
  • Transferring laparoscopic skills to robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review
    Karishma Behera, Matthew McKenna, Laurie Smith, Gerard McKnight, James Horwood, Michael M. Davies, Jared Torkington, James Ansell
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2024;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Looking to the Future; Veterinary Robotic Surgery
    Nicole J. Buote
    Veterinary Clinics of North America: Small Animal Practice.2024; 54(4): 735.     CrossRef
  • Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors of the Stomach: Is There Any Advantage of Robotic Resections? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Carlo Alberto Schena, Andrea-Pierre Luzzi, Vito Laterza, Belinda De Simone, Filippo Aisoni, Paschalis Gavriilidis, Fausto Catena, Federico Coccolini, Francesca Morciano, Fausto Rosa, Francesco Marchegiani, Nicola de’Angelis
    Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques.2024; 34(7): 603.     CrossRef
  • Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic short- and long-term outcomes in complete mesocolic excision for right-sided colonic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Pedja Cuk, Mohamad Jawhara, Issam Al-Najami, Per Helligsø, Andreas Kristian Pedersen, Mark Bremholm Ellebæk
    Techniques in Coloproctology.2023; 27(3): 171.     CrossRef
  • Force-based assessment of tissue handling skills in simulation training for robot-assisted surgery
    A. Masie Rahimi, Sem F. Hardon, E. Willuth, F. Lang, Caelan M. Haney, Eleni A. Felinska, Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski, Beat P. Müller-Stich, Tim Horeman, F. Nickel, Freek Daams
    Surgical Endoscopy.2023; 37(6): 4414.     CrossRef
  • The future of robotics in the treatment of abdominal wall hernias: A narrative review
    Estella Y Huang, Daniel Chung, Bryan J Sandler, Garth R Jacobsen, Santiago Horgan, Ryan C Broderick
    International Journal of Abdominal Wall and Hernia Surgery.2023; 6(2): 81.     CrossRef
  • Transfer of skills between laparoscopic and robot-assisted surgery: a systematic review
    Pia Iben Pietersen, Peter Hertz, Rikke Groth Olsen, Louise Birch Møller, Lars Konge, Flemming Bjerrum
    Surgical Endoscopy.2023; 37(12): 9030.     CrossRef
  • Short-term and long-term efficacy in robot-assisted treatment for mid and low rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Huiming Wu, Renkai Guo, Huiyu Li
    International Journal of Colorectal Disease.2023;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is superior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the initial training for surgical novices in an ex vivo porcine model: a randomized crossover study
    E. Willuth, S. F. Hardon, F. Lang, C. M. Haney, E. A. Felinska, K. F. Kowalewski, B. P. Müller-Stich, T. Horeman, F. Nickel
    Surgical Endoscopy.2022; 36(2): 1064.     CrossRef
  • Minimally invasive pelvic exenteration for gynaecological malignancy: A single-centre case series and review of the literature
    Rebecca Karkia, Anil Tailor, Patricia Ellis, Thumuluru Madhuri, Andrea Scala, James Read, Matthew Perry, Krishna Patil, Adam Blackburn, Simon Butler-Manuel, Jayanta Chatterjee
    European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology.2022; 274: 56.     CrossRef
  • Patient-Related Functional Outcomes After Robotic-Assisted Rectal Surgery Compared With a Laparoscopic Approach: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Julie Flynn, Jose T. Larach, Joseph C.H. Kong, Peadar S. Waters, Jacob J. McCormick, Satish K. Warrier, Alexander Heriot
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2022; 65(10): 1191.     CrossRef
  • Transfer of open and laparoscopic skills to robotic surgery: a systematic review
    Baldev Chahal, Abdullatif Aydın, Mohammad S. Ali Amin, Kelly Ong, Azhar Khan, Muhammad Shamim Khan, Kamran Ahmed, Prokar Dasgupta
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2022; 17(4): 1207.     CrossRef
  • Robotic training for medical students: feasibility of a pilot simulation curriculum
    Anya L. Greenberg, Shareef M. Syed, Adnan Alseidi, Patricia S. O’Sullivan, Hueylan Chern
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2022; 17(3): 1029.     CrossRef
  • Can video games enhance surgical skills acquisition for medical students? A systematic review
    Arnav Gupta, Bishoy Lawendy, Mitchell G. Goldenberg, Ethan Grober, Jason Y. Lee, Nathan Perlis
    Surgery.2021; 169(4): 821.     CrossRef
  • Robotic gastrointestinal surgery: learning curve, educational programs and outcomes
    Charles C. Vining, Kinga B. Skowron, Melissa E. Hogg
    Updates in Surgery.2021; 73(3): 799.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery for Endometrial and Cervical Cancer
    C. Uwins, H. Patel, G. Prakash Bhandoria, S. Butler-Manuel, A. Tailor, P. Ellis, J. Chatterjee
    Clinical Oncology.2021; 33(9): e372.     CrossRef
  • Robotic and Endoscopic Approaches to Head and Neck Surgery
    Andrew J. Holcomb, Jeremy D. Richmon
    Hematology/Oncology Clinics of North America.2021; 35(5): 875.     CrossRef
  • The learning curve in robotic colorectal surgery compared with laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a systematic review
    Julie Flynn, José Tomás Larach, Joseph C. H. Kong, Peadar S. Waters, Satish K. Warrier, Alexander Heriot
    Colorectal Disease.2021; 23(11): 2806.     CrossRef
  • Robotics vs Laparoscopy—Are They Truly Rivals?
    Natalie Liu, Jacob A. Greenberg
    JAMA Surgery.2020; 155(5): 388.     CrossRef
  • Robotic radical hysterectomy for stage 1B1 cervical cancer: A case series of survival outcomes from a leading UK cancer centre
    Hersha Patel, Kavitha Madhuri, Thomas Rockell, Rugaia Montaser, Patricia Ellis, Jayanta Chatterjee, Simon Butler‐Manuel, Anil Tailor
    The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery.2020;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • A multi-modal approach to cognitive training and assistance in minimally invasive surgery
    Tina Vajsbaher, Tim Ziemer, Holger Schultheis
    Cognitive Systems Research.2020; 64: 57.     CrossRef
  • Systematic review and meta‐analysis of robotic versus open hepatectomy
    Daniel J. Wong, Michelle J. Wong, Gi Hong Choi, Yao Ming Wu, Paul B. Lai, Brian K. P. Goh
    ANZ Journal of Surgery.2019; 89(3): 165.     CrossRef
  • Objective assessment of robotic suturing skills with a new computerized system: A step forward in the training of robotic surgeons
    Caleb Busch, Ryu Nakadate, Munenori Uemura, Satoshi Obata, Takahiro Jimbo, Makoto Hashizume
    Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery.2019; 12(4): 388.     CrossRef
  • Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic major liver resection: analysis of outcomes from a single center
    Mike Fruscione, Ryan Pickens, Erin H. Baker, Allyson Cochran, Adeel Khan, Lee Ocuin, David A. Iannitti, Dionisios Vrochides, John B. Martinie
    HPB.2019; 21(7): 906.     CrossRef
  • Soft Robotics in Minimally Invasive Surgery
    Mark Runciman, Ara Darzi, George P. Mylonas
    Soft Robotics.2019; 6(4): 423.     CrossRef
  • Is the Caribbean ready for robotics?
    Jorge Rabaza
    International Journal of Surgery.2019; 72: 3.     CrossRef
  • Robot-assisted cholecystectomy is a safe but costly approach: A national database review
    Bhavani Pokala, Laura Flores, Priscila R. Armijo, Vishal Kothari, Dmitry Oleynikov
    The American Journal of Surgery.2019; 218(6): 1213.     CrossRef
  • Does Previous Laparoscopic Experience Influence Basic Robotic Surgical Skills?
    Marcelo Pimentel, Renan Desimon Cabral, Márcio Machado Costa, Brasil Silva Neto, Leandro Totti Cavazzola
    Journal of Surgical Education.2018; 75(4): 1075.     CrossRef
  • Visuospatial abilities and fine motor experiences influence acquisition and maintenance of fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery (FLS) task performance
    Cuan M. Harrington, Patrick Dicker, Oscar Traynor, Dara O. Kavanagh
    Surgical Endoscopy.2018; 32(11): 4639.     CrossRef
  • Distraction and proficiency in laparoscopy: 2D versus robotic console 3D immersion
    Steven Kim, Audriene May, Heidi Ryan, Adnan Mohsin, Shawn Tsuda
    Surgical Endoscopy.2017; 31(11): 4625.     CrossRef
  • Outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic repair of small-sized ventral hernias
    Y. Julia Chen, Desmond Huynh, Scott Nguyen, Edward Chin, Celia Divino, Linda Zhang
    Surgical Endoscopy.2017; 31(3): 1275.     CrossRef
  • 3D straight-stick laparoscopy versus 3D robotics for task performance in novice surgeons: a randomised crossover trial
    Fevzi Shakir, Haider Jan, Andrew Kent
    Surgical Endoscopy.2016; 30(12): 5380.     CrossRef
  • Da Vinci© Skills Simulator™: is an early selection of talented console surgeons possible?
    Mark Meier, Kevin Horton, Hubert John
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2016; 10(4): 289.     CrossRef
  • Comparison of the learning curves and frustration level in performing laparoscopic and robotic training skills by experts and novices
    Carlo C. Passerotti, Felipe Franco, Julio C. C. Bissoli, Bruno Tiseo, Caio M. Oliveira, Carlos A. O. Buchalla, Gustavo N. C. Inoue, Arzu Sencan, Aydin Sencan, Rogerio Ruscitto do Pardo, Hiep T. Nguyen
    International Urology and Nephrology.2015; 47(7): 1075.     CrossRef
Initial Clinical Experience with Robotic Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Advanced Rectal Cancer
Ju-A Park, Gyu-Seog Choi, Jun Seok Park, Soo Yeun Park
J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2012;28(5):265-270.   Published online October 31, 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2012.28.5.265
  • 4,545 View
  • 64 Download
  • 32 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose

This study was conducted to evaluate the technical feasibility and safety of robotic extended lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLD) in patients with advanced low rectal cancer.

Methods

A review of a prospectively-collected database at Kyungpook National University Medical Center from January 2011 to November revealed a series of 8 consecutive robotic LPLD cases with a preoperative diagnosis of lateral node metastasis. Data regarding patient demographics, operating time, perioperative blood loss, surgical morbidity, lateral lymph node status, and functional outcome were analyzed.

Results

In all eight patients, the procedures were completed without conversion to open surgery. The mean operative time of extended pelvic node dissection was 38 minutes (range, 20 to 51 minutes), the mean number of lateral lymph nodes harvested was 4.1 (range, 1 to 13), and 3 patients (38%) were found to have lymph node metastases. Postoperative mortality and morbidity were 0% and 25%, respectively, but, there was no LPLD-related morbidity. The mean hospital stay was 7.5 days (range, 5 to 12 days).

Conclusion

Robotic LPLD is safe and feasible, with the advantage of being a minimally invasive approach. Further large-scale studies comparing robotic and conventional surgery with long-term follow-up evaluation are needed to confirm these findings.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision with lateral lymph node dissection for advanced rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Mohamed Ali Chaouch, Mohammad Iqbal Hussain, Adriano Carneiro da Costa, Alessandro Mazzotta, Bassem Krimi, Amine Gouader, Eddy Cotte, Jim Khan, Hani Oweira, Tsutomu Kumamoto
    PLOS ONE.2024; 19(5): e0304031.     CrossRef
  • The role of lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in advanced rectal cancer: a review of current evidence and outcomes
    Gyu-Seog Choi, Hye Jin Kim
    Annals of Coloproctology.2024; 40(4): 363.     CrossRef
  • Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic-assisted extended mesorectal excision: a comprehensive meta-analysis and systematic review of perioperative and long-term outcomes
    Ahmed Abdelsamad, Mohammed Khaled Mohammed, Aya Sayed Ahmed Said Serour, Ibrahim Khalil, Zeyad M. Wesh, Laila Rashidi, Mike Ralf Langenbach, Florian Gebauer, Khaled Ashraf Mohamed
    Surgical Endoscopy.2024; 38(11): 6464.     CrossRef
  • Short-term outcomes of 47 selective laparoscopic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer: A retrospective study
    Xiajuan Xue, Shuijie Lin, Qunzhang Zeng, Yincong Guo
    Medicine.2024; 103(43): e39684.     CrossRef
  • Robot-assisted lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with advanced rectal cancer: a single-center experience of 65 cases
    Eon Bin Kim, Yong Sik Yoon, Min Hyun Kim, Young Il Kim, Jong Lyul Lee, Chan Wook Kim, In Ja Park, Seok-Byung Lim, Chang Sik Yu, Jin Cheon Kim
    Journal of Robotic Surgery.2023; 17(4): 1697.     CrossRef
  • Robotic pelvic side‐wall dissection and en‐bloc excision for locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer: outcomes on feasibility and safety
    Naradha Lokuhetty, José Tomás Larach, Amrish K. S. Rajkomar, Helen Mohan, Peadar S. Waters, Alexander G. Heriot, Satish K. Warrier
    ANZ Journal of Surgery.2022; 92(9): 2185.     CrossRef
  • Optimizing outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery with robotic platforms
    Se-Jin Baek, Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Seon-Hahn Kim
    Surgical Oncology.2022; 43: 101786.     CrossRef
  • Standardized Step-by-step Technique Using Surgical Landmarks in Robotic Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection
    Jung Hoon Bae, Wooree Koh, Hyun Ho Kim, Yoon Suk Lee
    Annals of Coloproctology.2021; 37(1): 58.     CrossRef
  • Optimizing outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery with robotic platforms
    Se-Jin Baek, Guglielmo Niccolò Piozzi, Seon-Hahn Kim
    Surgical Oncology.2021; 37: 101559.     CrossRef
  • Long-term clinical outcomes of total mesorectal excision and selective lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for advanced low rectal cancer: a comparative study of a robotic versus laparoscopic approach
    S. H. Song, G.-S. Choi, H. J. Kim, J. S. Park, S. Y. Park, S.-M. Lee, J. A. Choi, H. A. Seok
    Techniques in Coloproctology.2021; 25(4): 413.     CrossRef
  • Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Patients With Rectal Cancer: A Single-Center Experience and Literature Review
    Min Chul Kim, Jae Hwan Oh
    Annals of Coloproctology.2021; 37(6): 382.     CrossRef
  • Robotic surgery for colorectal disease: review of current port placement and future perspectives
    Jong Lyul Lee, Hassan A. Alsaleem, Jin Cheon Kim
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2020; 98(1): 31.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic and robotic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer
    Ryota Nakanishi, Tomohiro Yamaguchi, Takashi Akiyoshi, Toshiya Nagasaki, Satoshi Nagayama, Toshiki Mukai, Masashi Ueno, Yosuke Fukunaga, Tsuyoshi Konishi
    Surgery Today.2020; 50(3): 209.     CrossRef
  • Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Operative Technique and Review of the Literature
    Hidetoshi Katsuno, Tsunekazu Hanai, Koji Masumori, Yoshikazu Koide, Keigo Ashida, Hiroshi Matsuoka, Yosuke Tajima, Tomoyoshi Endo, Masahiro Mizuno, Yeongcheol Cheong, Kotaro Maeda, Ichiro Uyama
    Journal of the Anus, Rectum and Colon.2020; 4(1): 14.     CrossRef
  • Lateral pelvic lymph node dissection in the management of locally advanced low rectal cancer: Summary of the current evidence
    Mootaz Elhusseini, Emad H. Aly
    Surgical Oncology.2020; 35: 418.     CrossRef
  • Radiation Therapy Dose Escalation to Clinically Involved Pelvic Sidewall Lymph Nodes in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
    Pehr E. Hartvigson, Smith Apisarnthanarax, Stephanie Schaub, Stacey Cohen, Greta Bernier, Wui-Jin Koh, Edward Y. Kim
    Advances in Radiation Oncology.2019; 4(3): 478.     CrossRef
  • Robotic rectal surgery in Korea: Analysis of a nationwide registry
    Se‐Jin Baek, Jung‐Myun Kwak, Jin Kim, Seon‐Hahn Kim, Sungsoo Park
    The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery.2018;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • Selective lateral pelvic lymph node dissection: a comparative study of the robotic versus laparoscopic approach
    Hye Jin Kim, Gyu-Seog Choi, Jun Seok Park, Soo Yeun Park, Hee Jae Lee, In Taek Woo, In Kyu Park
    Surgical Endoscopy.2018; 32(5): 2466.     CrossRef
  • Oncological outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open lateral lymph node dissection for locally advanced low rectal cancer
    Tomohiro Yamaguchi, Yusuke Kinugasa, Akio Shiomi, Hiroyasu Kagawa, Yushi Yamakawa, Akinobu Furutani, Shoichi Manabe, Yusuke Yamaoka, Hitoshi Hino
    Surgical Endoscopy.2018; 32(11): 4498.     CrossRef
  • Learning Curve of Robotic Rectal Surgery With Lateral Lymph Node Dissection: Cumulative Sum and Multiple Regression Analyses
    Kazushige Kawai, Keisuke Hata, Toshiaki Tanaka, Takeshi Nishikawa, Kensuke Otani, Koji Murono, Kazuhito Sasaki, Manabu Kaneko, Shigenobu Emoto, Hiroaki Nozawa
    Journal of Surgical Education.2018; 75(6): 1598.     CrossRef
  • Long-term oncological outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision of mid–low rectal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy
    Dae Ro Lim, Sung Uk Bae, Hyuk Hur, Byung Soh Min, Seung Hyuk Baik, Kang Young Lee, Nam Kyu Kim
    Surgical Endoscopy.2017; 31(4): 1728.     CrossRef
  • Optimal treatment strategies for clinically suspicious lateral pelvic lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer
    Hye Jin Kim, Gyu-Seog Choi, Jun Seok Park, Soo Yeun Park, Seung Hyun Cho, Soo Jung Lee, Byung Woog Kang, Jong Gwang Kim
    Oncotarget.2017; 8(59): 100724.     CrossRef
  • Robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open lateral lymph node dissection for advanced lower rectal cancer
    Tomohiro Yamaguchi, Yusuke Kinugasa, Akio Shiomi, Hiroyuki Tomioka, Hiroyasu Kagawa
    Surgical Endoscopy.2016; 30(2): 721.     CrossRef
  • Technical feasibility of laparoscopic extended surgery beyond total mesorectal excision for primary or recurrent rectal cancer
    Takashi Akiyoshi
    World Journal of Gastroenterology.2016; 22(2): 718.     CrossRef
  • Surgical management of extra-regional lymph node metastasis in colorectal cancer
    Mahdi H. Albandar, Min Soo Cho, Sung Uk Bae, Nam Kyu Kim
    Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy.2016; 16(5): 503.     CrossRef
  • Robotic-assisted lateral lymph node dissection for lower rectal cancer: short-term outcomes in 50 consecutive patients
    Hiroyasu Kagawa, Yusuke Kinugasa, Akio Shiomi, Tomohiro Yamaguchi, Syunsuke Tsukamoto, Hiroyuki Tomioka, Yushi Yamakawa, Sumito Sato
    Surgical Endoscopy.2015; 29(4): 995.     CrossRef
  • Minimally Invasive Techniques for an Intersphincteric Resection and Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Rectal Cancer
    Jung Wook Huh
    Annals of Coloproctology.2014; 30(4): 163.     CrossRef
  • Minimally Invasive Surgery for Rectal Cancer
    Matthew Crapko, James Fleshman
    Annals of Surgical Oncology.2014; 21(1): 173.     CrossRef
  • Robotic and laparoscopic pelvic lymph node dissection for rectal cancer: short-term outcomes of 21 consecutive series
    Sung Uk Bae, Avanish P. Saklani, Hyuk Hur, Byung Soh Min, Seung Hyuk Baik, Kang Young Lee, Nam Kyu Kim
    Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research.2014; 86(2): 76.     CrossRef
  • Robotics in general surgery: An evidence‐based review
    Se‐Jin Baek, Seon‐Hahn Kim
    Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery.2014; 7(2): 117.     CrossRef
  • Robotic-Assisted Abdominoperineal Resection With Obturator Lymph Node Dissection
    Kevin R. Kasten, Jean V. Joseph, Todd D. Francone
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2014; 57(11): 1329.     CrossRef
  • Current Status and Future Perspectives of Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer
    Hidetoshi Katsuno, Koutarou Maeda, Tsunekaze Hanai, Harunobu Sato, Koji Masumori, Yoshikazu Koide, Hiroshi Matsuoka, Miho Shiota, Tomoyoshi Endo, Shinji Matsuoka, Kohei Hatta, Masahiro Mizuno, Kunihiro Tohyama
    Nippon Daicho Komonbyo Gakkai Zasshi.2013; 66(10): 982.     CrossRef
Single-incision Laparoscopic Surgery for Appendiceal Mucoceles: Safety and Feasibility in a Series of 16 Consecutive Cases
Ki Bum Park, Jun Seok Park, Gyu-Seog Choi, Hye Jin Kim, Soo Yeun Park, Jong Pil Ryuk, Won Ho Choi, You Seok Jang
J Korean Soc Coloproctol. 2011;27(6):287-292.   Published online December 31, 2011
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2011.27.6.287
  • 5,482 View
  • 34 Download
  • 15 Citations
AbstractAbstract PDF
Purpose

The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, and oncological outcomes of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic surgery in patients with an uncomplicated appendiceal mucocele.

Methods

A review of a prospectively collected database at the Kyungpook National University Hospital from January 2006 to September 2010 revealed that a series of 16 consecutive patients underwent single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for an appendiceal mucocele. Data regarding patient demographics, operating time, conversion, surgical morbidity, lateral lymph node status, and mid-term oncologic result were analyzed.

Results

The reported series consisted of 7 women (50%) and 9 men with a mean age of 61.6 years (range, 41 to 88 years). The mean operative time was 66.8 minutes (range, 33 to 150 minutes). Perioperative mortality and morbidity were 0% and 6.2%, respectively. Recovery after the procedure was rapid, and the mean hospital stay was 6.8 days (range, 3 to 22 days). Pathology revealed 12 lesions compatible with a mucinous cystadenoma and four others compatible with benign cystic tumors. All surgical margins were clear. In one case, an extra port had to be placed, and another case required conversion from SILS to a standard open laparotomy immediately after identification of the tumor because of a micro-perforation with focal mucin collection. With a median follow-up of 28.7 months, no re-admission or tumor recurrence, such as pseudomyxoma peritonei, was noted in 14 patients.

Conclusion

A single-port laparoscopic mucocelectomy should be safe and feasible and has the advantage of being a minimally invasive approach. Prospective controlled studies comparing SILS and conventional open surgery, with long-term follow-up evaluation, are needed to confirm the author's initial experience.

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by  
  • Single-incision laparoscopic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery for appendiceal mucocele: a series of 116 patients
    Ho Seung Kim, Han-Gil Kim, Seung Yoon Yang, Yoon Dae Han, Hyuk Hur, Byung Soh Min, Kang Young Lee, Nam Kyu Kim, Min Soo Cho
    Surgical Endoscopy.2022; 36(1): 244.     CrossRef
  • Mucinous appendiceal neoplasm: A case report
    Alexandru Chirca, Lucian Negreanu, Andreea Iliesiu, Radu Costea
    World Journal of Clinical Cases.2021; 9(7): 1728.     CrossRef
  • Actinomycosis of the Appendix Mimicking Cecal Tumor Treated by Single-Port Laparoscopic Approach
    In Soo Cho, Sung Uk Bae, Hye Ra Jung, Kyung Sik Park, Woon Kyung Jeong, Seong Kyu Baek
    Annals of Coloproctology.2021; 37(2): 125.     CrossRef
  • Surgical Outcomes of Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery for Appendiceal Mucinous Neoplasm
    In Jun Yang, Minseol Seo, Heung-Kwon Oh, Jeehye Lee, Jung Wook Suh, Duck-Woo Kim, Sung-Bum Kang
    Annals of Coloproctology.2021; 37(4): 239.     CrossRef
  • Appendiceal Mucocele - A Review of Literature with a Case Report
    Berislav Vekic, Rade Markovic, Aleksandar Cvetkovic, Bojan Stojanovic, Marko Spasic, Nenad Markovic, Mladen Pavlovic, Dusica Petrovic, Bojan Milosevic, Jasna Jevdjic, Maja Vulovic, Dalibor Jovanovic, Slobodanka Mitrovic
    Serbian Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research.2021;[Epub]     CrossRef
  • The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Appendiceal Neoplasms
    Sean C. Glasgow, Wolfgang Gaertner, David Stewart, Jennifer Davids, Karim Alavi, Ian M. Paquette, Scott R. Steele, Daniel L. Feingold
    Diseases of the Colon & Rectum.2019; 62(12): 1425.     CrossRef
  • Safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for appendiceal mucocele: a multicenter study
    Tae Kyu Kim, Jun Ho Park, Jeong Yeon Kim, Byung Chun Kim, Byung Mo Kang, Soo Kee Min, Jong Wan Kim
    Surgical Endoscopy.2018; 32(11): 4408.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic ileocecal resection can be applied for appendiceal cancer with an ileal fistula: A case report
    Junko Mukohyama, Yasuo Sumi, Kiyonori Kanemitsu, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Masashi Yamamoto, Shingo Kanaji, Yoshiko Matsuda, Kimihiro Yamashita, Takeru Matsuda, Taro Oshikiri, Tetsu Nakamura, Satoshi Suzuki, Yoshihiro Kakeji
    International Journal of Surgery Case Reports.2018; 52: 120.     CrossRef
  • Minimally invasive appendectomy for resection of appendiceal mucocele: Case series and review of the literature
    Sonia T. Orcutt, Daniel A. Anaya, Mokenge Malafa
    International Journal of Surgery Case Reports.2017; 37: 13.     CrossRef
  • Diagnosis and Treatment of Mucinous Appendiceal Neoplasm Presented as Acute Appendicitis
    Ioannis Kehagias, Apollon Zygomalas, Georgios Markopoulos, Thanasis Papandreou, Pantelis Kraniotis
    Case Reports in Oncological Medicine.2016; 2016: 1.     CrossRef
  • Recommendations in the management of epithelial appendiceal neoplasms and peritoneal dissemination from mucinous tumours (pseudomyxoma peritonei)
    P. Barrios, F. Losa, S. Gonzalez-Moreno, A. Rojo, A. Gómez-Portilla, P. Bretcha-Boix, I. Ramos, J. Torres-Melero, R. Salazar, M. Benavides, T. Massuti, E. Aranda
    Clinical and Translational Oncology.2016; 18(5): 437.     CrossRef
  • Laparoscopic approach to mucocele of appendiceal mucinous cystadenoma: feasibility and short-term outcomes in 24 consecutive cases
    Ki-Jae Park, Hong-Jo Choi, Sung-Heun Kim
    Surgical Endoscopy.2015; 29(11): 3179.     CrossRef
  • Cholecystectomy: evolution of laparoscopic approach
    I. V. Mikhin, Yu. V. Kuhktenko, M. B. Doronin
    Endoskopicheskaya khirurgiya.2015; 21(1): 42.     CrossRef
  • IV. Les recommandations

    Journal de Chirurgie Viscérale.2014; 151(6): S15.     CrossRef
  • Distinguishing between acute appendicitis and appendiceal mucocele: is this possible preoperatively?
    B. Saylam, C. E. Güldoğan, F. Coşkun, V. Vural, B. Çomçalı, M. Tez
    European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery.2013; 39(5): 523.     CrossRef
  • FirstFirst
  • PrevPrev
  • Page of 1
  • Next Next
  • Last Last

Ann Coloproctol : Annals of Coloproctology Twitter Facebook
TOP