Comparing a novel wide field of view laparoscope with conventional laparoscope while performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Abstract

The limited 70° field of view (FoV) used in standard laparoscopy necessitates maneuvering the laparoscope to view the ports, follow the surgical tools, and search for a target region. Complications related to events that take place outside the FoV are underreported. Recently, a novel laparoscopic system (SurroundScope, 270Surgical) was reported to dramatically expand the FoV from 70 to 270°. This study focuses on differences in performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the SurroundScope compared to the standard laparoscope. Forty-four laparoscopic surgeries were performed and video recorded. A subanalysis of 21 Cholecystectomies was performed and compared to 21 Cholecystectomies, performed with the standard laparoscope during the study period by the same surgeon. No accidental or intraoperative adverse events occurred when using the SurroundScope. Subanalysis of 21 Cholecystectomies revealed shorter fog/smoke cleaning times using the SurroundScope compared to the standard scope (1.45 ± 5.08 sec vs. 54.95 ± 137.77 sec, p = 0.0454). Furthermore, operations performed with the SurroundScope had a shorter trocar placement duration (85.0 ± 40.9 sec vs. 111.3 ± 70.5 sec; p = 0.077), shorter time to achieve critical view of safety (9.5 ± 4.14 min vs. 15.8 ± 11.87 min; p = 0.015), and shorter procedure duration (31.9 ± 10.4 min vs. 42.9 ± 22 min; p = 0.025). In post-operative evaluations, the surgeon noted that tools could be continuously followed and ports were visible without camera manipulation. Also, the surgeon agreed that the procedure could be better planned due to the wide FoV and that surgical workflow was improved. Furthermore, the surgeon agreed that the procedure was safer using the SurroundScope. Initial results demonstrate the advantages of the SurroundScope over standard laparoscopy. By expanding the FoV, visualization is improved, the procedure is more efficient, significantly shorter and most important, patient safety, per surgeons' testimonials is improved. Further investigation to quantify these benefits in a larger group of patients and among various surgical procedures should be considered.