Minimally invasive surgery is a useful alternative to open repair for patients with nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). We aim to compare the clinical outcomes for three different minimally invasive techniques: hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS), total laparoscopic surgery (TLS), and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library were searched between January and March 2023. Cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two minimally invasive techniques were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcomes were mortality (in-hospital, 30-day, or 1-year) and reintervention rates (30-day or 1-year). Length of surgery, blood loss, transfusion volume, conversion to open surgery, major complication rates, length of hospital stay, and length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay were also evaluated. Eight cohort studies and one RCT were included comparing patients undergoing HALS (n = 500), TLS (n = 263), and EVAR (n = 438) for elective AAA repair. The TLS group had the highest rate of 30-day postoperative reinterventions (p = 0.00056), the longest surgical duration (p = 0.0311), and the highest rate of conversion to open surgery (p < 0.001). TLS was also associated with the most blood loss during surgery, the highest blood transfusion volumes, and the longest length of ICU stay, although these results did not reach statistical significance. Subgroup analysis revealed superior contemporary EVAR outcomes compared to TLS. Laparoscopic surgery (LAS) and EVAR have comparable mortality rates. However, LAS, particularly TLS, is significantly less efficacious than EVAR in terms of intraoperative conversions to open surgery and 30-day reintervention rates. Further controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm the evidence.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aims to compare hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and conventional open surgery (OS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) in terms of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, and to explore the safety, feasibility of HALS for CRC surgery.
METHODS: A systematic literature search with no limits was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Medline. The last search was performed on April 23, 2017. The outcomes of interests included intraoperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, length of incision, transfusion, and lymph nodes harvested), postoperative outcomes (length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, time to first flatus, time to first liquid diet, time to first soft diet, time to first bowel movement, postoperative complications, reoperation, ileus, anastomotic leakage, wound infection, urinary complication, pulmonary infection, and mortality).
RESULTS: Fifteen articles published between 2007 and 2017 with a total of 1962 patients with CRC were included in our meta-analysis. HALS was associated with longer operative time, less blood loss, smaller length of incision, shorter hospital days and postoperative hospital days, less time to first flatus, less wound infection, and less postoperative complications. There was no difference in blood transfusion, lymph node harvested, time to first liquid or soft diet, time to first bowel movement, reoperation, ileus, anastomotic leakage, pulmonary infection, urinary complications, or mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that HALS in CRC surgery improves cosmesis and results in better postoperative recovery outcomes by reducing postoperative complications and hospital days. Furthermore, a large randomized control study is warranted to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of those 2 techniques for CRC treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the safety and efficacy of hand-assisted laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (HALG) versus open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for gastric cancer.
METHODS: Chinese or English literature regarding comparison of HALG and ODG were collected by searching in databases (such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang database) between January 1996 and September 2016. The data of operative time, incision length, blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, time to flatus, hospital stay, postoperative complication morbidity and long-term outcomes were compared between the two procedures. Then funnel plot was used to evaluate publication bias and sensitivity analysis was used to evaluate the stability of the results. All these data analyses were performed using the Meta for or Meta package of R version 3.3.1.
RESULTS: A total of 7 studies with 835 patients (323 cases in HALG group and 512 cases in ODG group) were included. Compared with ODG, HALG had a longer operative time (WMD=28.93 minutes, 95%CI=9.59 to 48.28, Z=2.93, P=0.000), a shorter incision length (WMD=-10.31 cm, 95%CI=-14.01 to -6.62, Z=-5.47, P=0.000), less blood loss (WMD=-140.08 ml, 95%CI=-215.07 to -65.09, Z=-3.66, P=0.000), faster gastrointestinal recovery (WMD=-1.23 days, 95%CI=-1.89 to -0.56, Z=-3.62, P=0.000), shorter postoperative hospital stay (WMD=-3.24 days, 95%CI=-5.47 to -1.02, Z=-2.85, P=0.000). In subgroup analysis, 3 studies published before 2013 vs. 4 studies published afterwards, the number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD=-0.78, 95%CI=-2.05 to 0.50, Z=-1.19, P=0.235) and postoperative complication morbidity (RR=1.02, 95%CI=0.43 to 2.44, Z=0.05, P=0.961) did not differ significantly between two groups. Compared with ODG, the RR(95%CI) of ileus of HALG was 0.43 (0.07 to 2.82), but the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.383). One study reported the 5-year overall survival rates of HALG and ODG were 81.0% vs 67.5%, and the tumor recurrence rates were 7.1% vs 22%, respectively, but the differences were not statistically significant(all P>0.05). Sensitivity analysis showed that the above results were stable. The funnel plots of the lymph nodes and postoperative complication morbidity did not present significant publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS: HALG has the advantages of minimal invasiveness such as shorter incision length and quicker recovery. Furthermore, the short-term efficacy of HALG is similar to conventional open surgery. However, the long-term efficacy is lack of support from multicenter long-term follow-up results.

Primary splenic angiosarcoma (PSA) is an unusual and highly malignant vascular tumour with a high rate of metastatic. Moreover, the research on prognosis of the disease is poor. The epidemiology, etiology, clinical diagnosis and treatment of the disease remain challenging, because case reports of the disease are few in number. In accordance with other malignant tumors, PSA is very aggressive, and the majority of patients in which this disease is found are at an advanced stage. Almost all patients die within 12 mo of diagnosis irrespective of treatment. We report here a woman who had complained of upper bellyache and anorexia for 10 d. Magnetic resonance imaging showed enlargement of the spleen with multiple heterogeneous masses in the lower pole of the spleen. A hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy was performed which allowed histopathologic diagnosis. The patient was diagnosed with PSA and liver metastasis, and succumbed to the disease 35 d after surgery. The literature was finished combined with the clinical features, diagnosis and management of PSA.

The standard method of surgical treatment of end-stage renal failure is kidney transplantation. A laparoscopic method of organ retrieval from a living donor is currently preferred. The techniques of laparoscopic surgery include hand-assisted nephrectomy and \"pure\" laparoscopic nephrectomy. We present analysis of the literature data and our own data on the use of the advantages of each of the techniques. A case of complication associated with the use of hand-port from our own practice is described.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of performing right-sided, hand-assisted, laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) and compare with the results of left-sided surgeries in both donors and recipients.
METHODS: Between September 2006 and September 2013, 1000 consecutive patients underwent HALDN at our institution. Patient characteristics and the intraoperative or postoperative parameters of the donors and recipients were retrospectively evaluated. Preoperative data, including relative renal function, vascular anatomy, and parenchymal abnormalities, were evaluated to determine the reasons for harvesting the right kidney. Intraoperative and postoperative data, including pneumoperitoneum time, warm ischemia time, complications, chronic kidney disease stage, and graft function, were compared between donors and recipients who underwent right- and left-sided procurement.
RESULTS: Mean follow-up period was 21 months in donor and 42 months in recipient. Right-sided HALDN was performed on 421 patients (42.1%). The most common reasons for selecting the right kidney was reduced right kidney function (53.4%) followed by multiple left renal arteries (34.2%). None of 1000 patients required conversion to open surgery or developed major complications. Serum creatinine concentrations and chronic kidney disease stage at the last follow-up examinations were similar in donors. There were no significant differences in graft function and ureter-related complications between right- and left-sided kidneys at the last follow-up examination.
CONCLUSIONS: Right-side HALDN is a safe procedure. The donor side can be freely selected using HALDN to benefit both donors and recipients.

Autosomal dominant polycystic disease is a multisystem inherited condition affecting the kidneys and is an important cause of end-stage renal disease. Patients with autosomal dominant polycystic disease experience symptoms related to size and cystic nature of their kidneys, which can be difficult to manage. Traditionally, the only surgical option for management was open bilateral/unilateral native nephrectomy, which carried with it significant morbidity and mortality. Therefore, it was deemed unsafe and rarely performed. However, surgery for autosomal dominant polycystic disease has evolved rapidly with the advent of minimally invasive surgery and improved medical management of end-stage renal failure patients. Laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic techniques have been adopted and have demonstrated reduced morbidity. The timing of this intervention in relation to transplant is controversial and presents a major challenge in managing this patient population.

OBJECTIVE: The laparoscopic colectomy is avoided principally because of its technical difficulty, steep learning curve, and increased operative time. Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is an alternative technique that addresses these problems while preserving the short-term benefits of a laparoscopic colectomy. Our study was aimed to describe the characteristics of patients admitted due to left-sided colon and rectal cancer for HALS.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database was used to identify patients who underwent HALS at the Institute of Oncology, Vilnius University, from July 1, 2009, to October 1, 2012.
RESULTS: One hundred-three HALS colorectal resections were performed. The patients\' mean age was 64 ± 13.4 years. There were 46 male and 57 female patients. The body mass index was 27.3 ± 5.8 kg/m(2). Forty-three patients (41.8%) had experienced prior abdominal surgery. The mean HALS time was 105 minutes (range, 55-85 minutes). The conversion rate was 2.7% (3/103). The median of return of gastrointestinal function was 2.5 days (range, 2.2-4.5 days). The median length of hospital stay was 9 days. The postoperative complication and mortality rates were 10.7% and 0.97%, respectively. Four incisional hernias (3.9%) were seen at a mean follow-up of 7.0 ± 3.4 months. None of the patients had a trocar or a hand-port site recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: A HALS colorectal resection is a safe and effective technique, and it provides all the benefits of minimally invasive surgery.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic colorectal surgery remains one of the most challenging techniques to learn.
METHODS: The authors collected studies that have compared hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) and open surgery for the treatment of colorectal disease over the past 17 years. Data of interest for HALS and open surgery were subjected to meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Twelve studies that included 1,362 patients were studied. In total, 2.66% of HALS procedures were converted to laparotomy. Compared with the open surgery group, blood loss, rate of wound infection, and ileus in the HALS group decreased, and incision length, recovery of gastrointestinal function, and hospitalization period were shorter. There were no significant differences in operating time, hospitalization costs, mortality, and complications, including urinary tract infection, pneumonia, and anastomotic leak, between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: HALS has the advantages of minimal invasion, lower blood loss, shorter incision length, and faster recovery, and it can shorten the length of hospitalization without an increase in costs. The drawbacks are that a small number of patients who undergo HALS may need to be converted to laparotomy, and the oncologic safety and long-term prognosis are not clear.

OBJECTIVE: This review assesses the current status of laparoscopic liver resection.
BACKGROUND: The trend in laparoscopic liver resection has been moving from limited resections toward major hepatectomy. The surgical techniques for laparoscopic major hepatectomy include pure laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and laparoscopy-assisted methods. We performed a literature search and systematic review to assess the current status of laparoscopic major hepatectomy.
METHODS: Our literature review was conducted in Medline using the keywords \"laparoscopy\" or \"laparoscopic\" combined with \"liver resection\" or \"hepatectomy.\" Articles written in English containing more than 10 cases of laparoscopic major hepatectomy were selected.
CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-nine articles were selected for this review. The laparoscopic major hepatectomies achieved similar patient and economic outcomes compared with open liver resections in selected (noncirrhotic) patients. Surgeon experience with the techniques affected the results; thus, a learning period is mandatory. Of these 3 techniques, the pure laparoscopic method is suitable for experienced surgeons to achieve better cosmetic outcomes, whereas the hand-assisted laparoscopic method was associated with better perioperative outcomes; the laparoscopy-assisted method is used by surgeons for unique resections such as resection of cirrhotic livers, laparoscopic resection of tumors in unfavorable locations, and living donor hepatectomies. In addition, the laparoscopic major hepatectomy-specific, long-term oncologic outcomes remain to be addressed in future publications.