TY - JOUR
T1 - PD21-03 COSMETIC IMPACT OF PORT VERSUS PORTLESS NEEEDLESCOPIC SURGERY-A PROSPECTIVE, RANDOMIZED, SINGLE-BLINDED STUDY
AU - Arenas, Javier L.
AU - Vassantachart, Janna
AU - Martin, Jacob
AU - Maldonado, Jonathan
AU - Lee, Michael
AU - Yeo, Alexander
AU - Lee, Albert
AU - Alsyouf, Muhannad
AU - Engebretsen, Steven
AU - Hill, Michael E.
AU - Olgin, Gaudencio
AU - Lightfoot, Michelle
AU - Li, Roger
AU - Baldwin, Dalton D.
PY - 2015/4
Y1 - 2015/4
N2 - INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The use of additional needlescopic instruments may restore triangulation that is lost with pure LESS and NOTES techniques, although the small size of these instruments may limit their functionality. When needlescopic tools are placed through a needlescopic port, the additional size of the port requires a larger more noticeable skin incision. Conversely, if the port is omitted the surgeon may insert a tool of larger diameter and greater functionality. However, if a tool is inserted without a port, the forces created with insertion and withdrawal of this instrument may result in skin shearing and epidermolysis that could worsen cosmesis. The purpose of this study was to characterize the cosmetic impact of needlescopic instrumentation used with and without a port. METHODS: 172 identical grids were tattooed onto the abdomens of female pigs. Grids were randomized to a 2.75mm needlescopic port through which a 2.25mm surgical tool was placed (n=80), a 2.75mm portless needlescopic instrument site (n=80), or a control group without any incisions (n=12). Instruments were manipulated identically for 180 minutes to simulate surgical shearing forces. Cosmesis was evaluated 4 weeks later by a blinded plastic surgeon using a Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). Sample size was calculated to a power of 0.80 to detect a 20% difference. Fisher's exact and Mann- Whitney tests were used, with p
AB - INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The use of additional needlescopic instruments may restore triangulation that is lost with pure LESS and NOTES techniques, although the small size of these instruments may limit their functionality. When needlescopic tools are placed through a needlescopic port, the additional size of the port requires a larger more noticeable skin incision. Conversely, if the port is omitted the surgeon may insert a tool of larger diameter and greater functionality. However, if a tool is inserted without a port, the forces created with insertion and withdrawal of this instrument may result in skin shearing and epidermolysis that could worsen cosmesis. The purpose of this study was to characterize the cosmetic impact of needlescopic instrumentation used with and without a port. METHODS: 172 identical grids were tattooed onto the abdomens of female pigs. Grids were randomized to a 2.75mm needlescopic port through which a 2.25mm surgical tool was placed (n=80), a 2.75mm portless needlescopic instrument site (n=80), or a control group without any incisions (n=12). Instruments were manipulated identically for 180 minutes to simulate surgical shearing forces. Cosmesis was evaluated 4 weeks later by a blinded plastic surgeon using a Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). Sample size was calculated to a power of 0.80 to detect a 20% difference. Fisher's exact and Mann- Whitney tests were used, with p
UR - http://www.jurology.com/article/S0022-5347(15)01743-7/abstract
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/878b8ee4-03f3-33b5-aa11-c5e994a5b532/
U2 - 10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.1432
DO - 10.1016/j.juro.2015.02.1432
M3 - Meeting abstract
VL - 193
JO - The Journal of Urology
JF - The Journal of Urology
IS - 4S
ER -