Miami, FL (November 14, 2016)–The Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons (SLS) will now provide its members who have Apple or Android technology with its journal research in minimally invasive surgery via a new app called JSLS Anywhere.

Smartphones have been shown to offer significant benefits for health care providers in terms of improved communication and ready access to guidelines and data. SLS is betting that having new research at the touch of a link will be popular among its members.

“I can access, download, share and send JSLS research quickly, and that could be important if it’s something related to what I’m doing,” says Dr. Larry Glazerman, obstetrician-gynecologist, who was a part of the focus group to test the new technology. “I believe we need to pick and choose what we add to desktop carefully—but this is one app I’m happy to have.”

Busy surgeons will now be able to access its research with or without internet access JSLS research on planes, public transport, and in all corners of the hospital.

Today’s smartphone users in the U.S. spend an average of four-and-a-half hours a day on their phones alone. While traveling by air, the majority of air passengers will have at least one electronic device with them while they fly, and busy surgeons are no exception, with mobile phones and pads having become an integral part of the physician’s life. They are commonly used for personal and professional scheduling, accessing medical information, drug information and emails. SLS is responding to both these trends, by digitizing its journal, JSLS.

“The bottom line is that we want to save our surgeons time, says Dr. Paul Wetter, founder and chairman of the society. “The average busy surgeon needs to be able to access our research quickly and conveniently in today’s healthcare environment. JSLS Anywhere provides a convenience that has been made possible by Apple technology.”

SLS’ new product also debuts at a time when adopting the electronic option in order to have less environmental impact is becoming more of a trend, too. Electronic journaling is easier on the environment, as no paper, inks or distribution are required.

JSLS
Under the editorial leadership of Michael S. Kavic, MD., JSLS is a peer-reviewed, Index Medicus journal first published in January 1997. It is available on line with 100% open access for download from PubMedCentral, and is also free for members.

The Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons (SLS)
The Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons (SLS), a 501(c)(3) organization, is the nation’s leading group of multi-specialty surgeons, including general surgery, urology, OB-GYN and others, SLS advocates for minimally invasive surgery and improved surgical outcomes for all these specialties. It is a voluntary, nonprofit membership organization of over 5,000 surgeons. www.sls.org

Michael Kavic, MD, a hernia surgeon and editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic Surgeons, is calling on practicing surgeons, surgical educators and medical device manufacturers to re-evaluate their approach to inguinal hernia repair, recommending less reliance on synthetic mesh repair as the go-to method for repairing inguinal hernias.

In a presentation at Minimally Invasive Surgery Week, Dr. Kavic called the incidence of chronic pain after mesh hernia repair a “potential time bomb for the surgical community and medical device suppliers.

“The surgical community, as well as the industry that garners huge profits from the use of synthetic materials, must address this troubling issue,” said Dr. Kavic, professor emeritus of surgery at Northeast Ohio Medical University and a leader in the field of hernia surgery. “The evidence is mounting that mesh, which was generally thought—and promoted—to be inert, now appears not to be so.”

An extended version of his speech was published in the July-September edition of the Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons (20[3]. pii: e2016.00081).

However, other surgeons disagree with Dr. Kavic’s arguments, saying he both amplifies the extent of chronic pain after hernia repair and simplifies the causes.

“The number of people with chronic debilitating pain is around [4%] to 6% so I don’t think this qualifies as an epidemic,” said Guy Voeller, MD, a professor of surgery at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center, in Memphis. “While it may not be an epidemic, it is certainly an important issue and I agree with Dr. Kavic in that respect. I think we were always focused on recurrence rates prior to mesh introduction. I don’t think that we really looked at pain. It doesn’t mean it didn’t occur prior to mesh introduction and it doesn’t mean that mesh-based repairs are the cause.”

Synthetic mesh repair became the standard of care because it solved the problem of high recurrence rates. But an unintended and unforeseen consequence of mesh repair is chronic postoperative pain, Dr. Kavic pointed out.

In 2001, Dutch researchers who surveyed adults who underwent inguinal herniorrhaphy reported that more than 25% of patients experienced pain in their groin one year after surgery and 11% reported pain that was interfering with work or leisure activity (Ann Surg 2001;233:1-7). Ten years later, a German study reported a 16.5% incidence of chronic pain six months after mesh repair (Ann Surg 2011;254:163-168). Nevertheless, a wide range of pain incidence, from 0% to 45%, has been reported in studies, with a broad range of definitions, making it difficult to know the true incidence of chronic pain.

Approximately 800,000 inguinal hernia repairs are performed each year in the United States. Since 2000, repairs not using mesh have represented less than 10% of groin hernia repair techniques.

If one in 10 patients experience debilitating pain after a mesh hernia repair, millions of patients could be affected worldwide, Dr. Kavic noted in an interview following his presentation.

“I don’t think this is a matter of Chicken Little saying the sky is falling. The science is pretty good to show there’s a problem with chronic pain and the reason for the chronic pain is the mesh itself and the behavior of it. This could be far-reaching in its consequences.”

Dr. Kavic noted that the cause of chronic pain is not well understood, but he cited research led by Robert Bendavid, MD, a surgeon and senior consultant at Canada’s Shouldice Clinic, in Toronto, where hernia surgeons do not use mesh. Dr. Bendavid has linked chronic pain to nerve ingrowth into the mesh. He and his colleagues reported that the degree of mesh innervation was significantly higher in patients who required mesh removal for pain than in patients who had mesh excised for recurrence (Hernia 2016;20:357-365). The finding was based on an analysis of 33 hernia meshes: 17 were excised because of severe pain, two for combined pain and recurrence, and 14 sampled during revision for recurrence without pain.

Dr. Bendavid and his co-authors noted that neither triple neurectomy nor careful nerve preservation—often recommended for the prevention of chronic pain—eliminated pain after hernia repair. “Perhaps because we have forgotten that nerves, in response to some evolutionary mechanism, tend to regenerate, undergo changes imposed by prosthetic elements and architecture, mimicking entrapment and compartment syndromes,” they wrote.

Mesh shrinkage, loss of pliancy and increasing rigidity may also be contributing factors, Dr. Bendavid’s group reported in an earlier study (Int J Clin Med 2014;5:799-810).

But these arguments oversimplify the cause of chronic pain, according to other hernia surgeons. Dr. Voeller points out that randomized studies in Europe have directly compared Shouldice repair with a Lichtenstein repair, and found less pain (Langenbecks Arch Surg 2004;389:361-365). He cited a number of studies that indicate mesh repairs are associated with less chronic pain than nonmesh repair, including a randomized clinical trial with a 10-year follow-up that showed mesh repair was equal to nonmesh repair with regard to long-term persistent pain and discomfort interfering with daily activity (Surgery 2007;142:695-698). The EU Hernia trialists (Hernia 2002;6:130-136) and a Cochrane review (Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;4:CD002197) also reported lower rates of persisting pain after mesh repair.

“If you look at the clinical data, laparoscopic repairs, when they are done properly, definitely had less chronic pain, and it’s a mesh-based repair,” Dr. Voeller said.

He said the study from the Shouldice Clinic that looked at nerve fibers in explanted mesh was too small to conclude nerve ingrowth causes chronic pain. “You can’t make that jump.” He added, “You’ll never be able to have chronic pain as a never event with hernia repair. There are too many variables, including the surgeon’s ability, patient characteristics and techniques of repair.”

Shirin Towfigh, MD, a surgeon at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, in Los Angeles, and the Beverly Hills Hernia Center, in California, believes Dr. Bendavid’s research “partially” explains the epidemic of chronic pain after hernia repair. She attributes long-term pain to the presence of mesh, as well as poor surgical technique and misunderstanding of anatomy.

“All efforts by industry were to maximize ease of repair, basically making it idiot-proof. The marketing was focused on fast surgery, small incisions, etc.,” she said. “The result was little attention to the delicate anatomy of the groin and lack of adequate training on all of these new [meshes] that were sprouting. I personally feel this is the main reason for the increase in mesh-related chronic pain,” she said.

Patients with chronic pain generally have meshomas, nerve injury, nerve entrapment, erosion or obstruction of the spermatic cord, Dr. Towfigh said.

William Hope, MD, president of Americas Hernia Society and a hernia surgeon at New Hanover Regional Medical Center, in Wilmington, N.C., believes the cause and the solution to chronic pain lies somewhere between the positions of Drs. Kavic and Voeller.

“To me, mesh and technique may contribute to chronic pain, but I do not think the problem is that simple and is likely multifactorial that we don’t completely understand yet,” Dr. Hope said.

It’s hard to know what the incidence of chronic pain was prior to mesh repair, as historically surgeons did a poor job of assessing patients’ long-time pain, he said. “We are recognizing it more. Chronic pain is a problem. I’m not sure ‘massive’ is the right word but it is a ‘difficult’ problem.”

He agrees with recently updated inguinal hernia guidelines published by the European Hernia Society that state the use of mesh has significantly decreased hernia recurrence rates and “at present is likely the best option we have available.”

But he feels surgeons rely too much on mesh as a go-to technique. “I think education is important and one of the main problems, at least in the U.S., is there are very few surgeons and training programs that are performing nonmesh/tissue repairs, so younger surgeons are not learning these techniques or the anatomy.”

Dr. Kavic asked surgical educators to change their approach to teaching hernia repair, calling for more emphasis on anatomic knowledge and physiologic function of the groin. Trainees should be required to perform a minimum number of pure tissue hernia repairs, as well as mesh repairs, he said.

He said all surgeons who offer hernia repair need to be able to complete the operation both open and laparoscopically, with and without mesh. They need to stay updated on the latest findings on mesh outcomes and mesh materials, he said. “They need to understand the risks and talk to their patients about the risks.” He also said, “Surgeons need to get involved with their institutions and their device companies. It comes down to all of us.”

Source: General Surgery News

NEW YORK – The next big advance in gynecologic minimally invasive surgery could be the wider adoption of minilaparoscopy using newer, frictionless instruments.

Minilaparoscopy is commonly used in cholecystectomy, but is making inroads in gynecology. Minilaparoscopy performed with the newer, smaller instruments is especially well suited for fertility procedures and endometriosis surgery, according to Dr. Gustavo Carvalho, a pioneer in minilaparoscopy. Gynecologists are using minilaparoscopy successfully in hysterectomy as well, but the mini-instruments are not strong enough to survive many hysterectomies, he added.

“Traditional laparoscopy is suited for brutal procedures, such as hysterectomy, but minilap is better for delicate procedures requiring precise, tiny instruments,” Dr. Carvalho said at the meeting.

Despite the promise of utilizing the newer instruments, many surgeons have misconceptions about them.

“This is partly related to instruments used in older procedures called minilap. But after they try it with these newer instruments and learn how to do it, they actually prefer it for many procedures,” Dr. Carvalho, an associate professor of general surgery at Pernambuco University, Recife, Brazil, said in an interview.

Dr. Carvalho debunked the following “myths” about minilaparoscopy:

1. Single-port laparoscopy is cosmetically superior to minilaparoscopy. That’s not the case, Dr. Carvalho said. The few published papers on this subject compared single-port laparoscopy with older, high-friction instruments for minilaparoscopy, he said.

2. Minilaparoscopy should not be performed on obese patients. That’s false, Dr. Carvalho said. “Using newer instruments, we can move around better and see better for delicate operations in obese patients, but surgeons need special training,” he said.

3. Patients don’t want minilaparoscopy. The only published paper looking at patient preference did not offer patients minilaparoscopy with the newer instruments, Dr. Carvalho said. He and his colleagues plans to publish a paper based on research showing that 47% of patients prefer minilaparoscopy, compared with 27% who preferred single-port procedures. “There is a role for single-port procedures,” he added.

4. Minilaparoscopy hurts more than single-port laparoscopy. “No one can prove that minilap hurts less, but it is obvious and intuitive that smaller trocars and instruments cause less pain,” Dr. Carvalho said. “Surgeons want randomized trials, but they won’t be done because this is obvious.”

5. Surgeons lose dexterity and precision with minilaparoscopy. In new research that will be published in the Journal of the Society Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, Dr. Caravalho and his colleagues demonstrate that newer minilaparoscopy instruments are better than larger instruments for delicate tasks. In this study, 22 medical students and 22 surgical residents were given one gross task and three delicate tasks to perform randomly with a 3-mm frictionless trocar, a 3-mm high-friction trocar, and a 5-mm trocar. The larger instruments were significantly better for the gross task, while the smaller instruments were significantly better for the delicate tasks, Dr. Carvalho said. “This study shows the utility of precise, delicate instruments for delicate procedures,” he said.

Dr. Caravalho reported that he is an unpaid consultant for Karl Storz on the development of minilaparoscopic low-friction trocars.

Source: Ob.Gyn. News