Systems, devices and methods are provided for endoscopic procedures involving tissue manipulations beyond the capabilities of traditional endoscopic instruments. Embodiments of the systems include an elongated main body having a scope therethrough and at least one steerable tool arm which extends from the distal end of the main body. In preferred embodiments, the system includes two tool arms, each arm steerable to form a curve laterally outward which then bends laterally inward so that the arms form an angular shape. In addition, end effectors extend from the distal ends of each tool arm for use in manipulation of tissue. The angular shape brings the end effectors together in view of the scope for cooperative movements which are continuously visible by the surgeon. In addition, the tool arms may be steerable in any additional direction and may be rotateable to allow grasping, elevation and more complex manipulation of tissue.

Endoluminal tool deployment system

The European Hernia Society (EHS) is proud to present the EHS Guidelines for the Treatment of Inguinal Hernia in Adult Patients. The Guidelines contain recommendations for the treatment of inguinal hernia from diagnosis till aftercare. They have been developed by a Working Group consisting of expert surgeons with representatives of 14 country members of the EHS. They are evidence-based and, when necessary, a consensus was reached among all members. The Guidelines have been reviewed by a Steering Committee. Before finalisation, feedback from different national hernia societies was obtained. The Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument was used by the Cochrane Association to validate the Guidelines. The Guidelines can be used to adjust local protocols, for training purposes and quality control. They will be revised in 2012 in order to keep them updated. In between revisions, it is the intention of the Working Group to provide every year, during the EHS annual congress, a short update of new high-level evidence (randomised controlled trials [RCTs] and meta-analyses). Developing guidelines leads to questions that remain to be answered by specific research. Therefore, we provide recommendations for further research that can be performed to raise the level of evidence concerning certain aspects of inguinal hernia treatment. In addition, a short summary, specifically for the general practitioner, is given. In order to increase the practical use of the Guidelines by consultants and residents, more details on the most important surgical techniques, local infiltration anaesthesia and a patient information sheet is provided. The most important challenge now will be the implementation of the Guidelines in daily surgical practice. This remains an important task for the EHS. The establishment of an EHS school for teaching inguinal hernia repair surgical techniques, including tips and tricks from experts to overcome the learning curve (especially in endoscopic repair), will be the next step. Working together on this project was a great learning experience, and it was worthwhile and fun. Cultural differences between members were easily overcome by educating each other, respecting different views and always coming back to the principles of evidence-based medicine. The members of the Working Group would like to thank the EHS board for their support and especially Ethicon for sponsoring the many meetings that were needed to finalise such an ambitious project.

/pdf/european-hernia-society-guidelines-on-the-treatment-of-3gpmvq0mxo.pdf

European Hernia Society guidelines on the treatment of inguinal hernia in adult patients

https://www.gastroscan.ru/literature/pdf/acg02-gerd-treatment.pdf

Updated guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease

Worldwide, more than 20 million patients undergo groin hernia repair annually. The many different approaches, treatment indications and a significant array of techniques for groin hernia repair warrant guidelines to standardize care, minimize complications, and improve results. The main goal of these guidelines is to improve patient outcomes, specifically to decrease recurrence rates and reduce chronic pain, the most frequent problems following groin hernia repair. They have been endorsed by all five continental hernia societies, the International Endo Hernia Society and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. 
An expert group of international surgeons (the HerniaSurge Group) and one anesthesiologist pain expert was formed. The group consisted of members from all continents with specific experience in hernia-related research. Care was taken to include surgeons who perform different types of repair and had preferably performed research on groin hernia surgery. During the Group's first meeting, evidence-based medicine (EBM) training occurred and 166 key questions (KQ) were formulated. EBM rules were followed in complete literature searches (including a complete search by The Dutch Cochrane database) to January 1, 2015 and to July 1, 2015 for level 1 publications. The articles were scored by teams of two or three according to Oxford, SIGN and Grade methodologies. During five 2-day meetings, results were discussed with the working group members leading to 136 statements and 88 recommendations. Recommendations were graded as "strong" (recommendations) or "weak" (suggestions) and by consensus in some cases upgraded. In the Results and summary section below, the term "should" refers to a recommendation. The AGREE II instrument was used to validate the guidelines. An external review was performed by three international experts. They recommended the guidelines with high scores. 
The risk factors for inguinal hernia (IH) include: family history, previous contra-lateral hernia, male gender, age, abnormal collagen metabolism, prostatectomy, and low body mass index. Peri-operative risk factors for recurrence include poor surgical techniques, low surgical volumes, surgical inexperience and local anesthesia. These should be considered when treating IH patients. IH diagnosis can be confirmed by physical examination alone in the vast majority of patients with appropriate signs and symptoms. Rarely, ultrasound is necessary. Less commonly still, a dynamic MRI or CT scan or herniography may be needed. The EHS classification system is suggested to stratify IH patients for tailored treatment, research and audit. Symptomatic groin hernias should be treated surgically. Asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic male IH patients may be managed with "watchful waiting" since their risk of hernia-related emergencies is low. The majority of these individuals will eventually require surgery; therefore, surgical risks and the watchful waiting strategy should be discussed with patients. Surgical treatment should be tailored to the surgeon's expertise, patient- and hernia-related characteristics and local/national resources. Furthermore, patient health-related, life style and social factors should all influence the shared decision-making process leading up to hernia management. Mesh repair is recommended as first choice, either by an open procedure or a laparo-endoscopic repair technique. One standard repair technique for all groin hernias does not exist. It is recommended that surgeons/surgical services provide both anterior and posterior approach options. Lichtenstein and laparo-endoscopic repair are best evaluated. Many other techniques need further evaluation. Provided that resources and expertise are available, laparo-endoscopic techniques have faster recovery times, lower chronic pain risk and are cost effective. There is discussion concerning laparo-endoscopic management of potential bilateral hernias (occult hernia issue). After patient consent, during TAPP, the contra-lateral side should be inspected. This is not suggested during unilateral TEP repair. After appropriate discussions with patients concerning results tissue repair (first choice is the Shouldice technique) can be offered. Day surgery is recommended for the majority of groin hernia repair provided aftercare is organized. Surgeons should be aware of the intrinsic characteristics of the meshes they use. Use of so-called low-weight mesh may have slight short-term benefits like reduced postoperative pain and shorter convalescence, but are not associated with better longer-term outcomes like recurrence and chronic pain. Mesh selection on weight alone is not recommended. The incidence of erosion seems higher with plug versus flat mesh. It is suggested not to use plug repair techniques. The use of other implants to replace the standard flat mesh in the Lichtenstein technique is currently not recommended. In almost all cases, mesh fixation in TEP is unnecessary. In both TEP and TAPP it is recommended to fix mesh in M3 hernias (large medial) to reduce recurrence risk. Antibiotic prophylaxis in average-risk patients in low-risk environments is not recommended in open surgery. In laparo-endoscopic repair it is never recommended. Local anesthesia in open repair has many advantages, and its use is recommended provided the surgeon is experienced in this technique. 
General anesthesia is suggested over regional in patients aged 65 and older as it might be associated with fewer complications like myocardial infarction, pneumonia and thromboembolism. Perioperative field blocks and/or subfascial/subcutaneous infiltrations are recommended in all cases of open repair. Patients are recommended to resume normal activities without restrictions as soon as they feel comfortable. Provided expertise is available, it is suggested that women with groin hernias undergo laparo-endoscopic repair in order to decrease the risk of chronic pain and avoid missing a femoral hernia. Watchful waiting is suggested in pregnant women as groin swelling most often consists of self-limited round ligament varicosities. Timely mesh repair by a laparo-endoscopic approach is suggested for femoral hernias provided expertise is available. All complications of groin hernia management are discussed in an extensive chapter on the topic. Overall, the incidence of clinically significant chronic pain is in the 10-12% range, decreasing over time. Debilitating chronic pain affecting normal daily activities or work ranges from 0.5 to 6%. Chronic postoperative inguinal pain (CPIP) is defined as bothersome moderate pain impacting daily activities lasting at least 3 months postoperatively and decreasing over time. CPIP risk factors include: young age, female gender, high preoperative pain, early high postoperative pain, recurrent hernia and open repair. For CPIP the focus should be on nerve recognition in open surgery and, in selected cases, prophylactic pragmatic nerve resection (planned resection is not suggested). It is suggested that CPIP management be performed by multi-disciplinary teams. It is also suggested that CPIP be managed by a combination of pharmacological and interventional measures and, if this is unsuccessful, followed by, in selected cases (triple) neurectomy and (in selected cases) mesh removal. For recurrent hernia after anterior repair, posterior repair is recommended. If recurrence occurs after a posterior repair, an anterior repair is recommended. After a failed anterior and posterior approach, management by a specialist hernia surgeon is recommended. Risk factors for hernia incarceration/strangulation include: female gender, femoral hernia and a history of hospitalization related to groin hernia. It is suggested that treatment of emergencies be tailored according to patient- and hernia-related factors, local expertise and resources. Learning curves vary between different techniques. Probably about 100 supervised laparo-endoscopic repairs are needed to achieve the same results as open mesh surgery like Lichtenstein. It is suggested that case load per surgeon is more important than center volume. It is recommended that minimum requirements be developed to certify individuals as expert hernia surgeon. The same is true for the designation "Hernia Center". From a cost-effectiveness perspective, day-case laparoscopic IH repair with minimal use of disposables is recommended. The development and implementation of national groin hernia registries in every country (or region, in the case of small country populations) is suggested. They should include patient follow-up data and account for local healthcare structures. A dissemination and implementation plan of the guidelines will be developed by global (HerniaSurge), regional (international societies) and local (national chapters) initiatives through internet websites, social media and smartphone apps. 
An overarching plan to improve access to safe IH surgery in low-resource settings (LRSs) is needed. It is suggested that this plan contains simple guidelines and a sustainability strategy, independent of international aid. It is suggested that in LRSs the focus be on performing high-volume Lichtenstein repair under local anesthesia using low-cost mesh. Three chapters discuss future research, guidelines for general practitioners and guidelines for patients. 
The HerniaSurge Group has developed these extensive and inclusive guidelines for the management of adult groin hernia patients. It is hoped that they will lead to better outcomes for groin hernia patients wherever they live. More knowledge, better training, national audit and specialization in groin hernia management will standardize care for these patients, lead to more effective and efficient healthcare and provide direction for future research.

/pdf/international-guidelines-for-groin-hernia-management-3otlldvdxc.pdf

International guidelines for groin hernia management

A steerable, tendon-driven endoscope is described herein. The endoscope has an elongated body with a manually or selectively steerable distal portion and an automatically controlled, segmented proximal portion. The steerable distal portion and the segment of the controllable portion are actuated by at least two tendons. As the endoscope is advanced, the user maneuvers the distal portion, and a motion controller actuates tendons in the segmented proximal portion so that the proximal portion assumes the selected curve of the selectively steerable distal portion. By this method the selected curves are propagated along the endoscope body so that the endoscope largely conforms to the pathway selected. When the endoscope is withdrawn proximally, the selected curves can propagate distally along the endoscope body. This allows the endoscope to negotiate tortuous curves along a desired path through or around and between organs within the body.

Tendon-driven endoscope and methods of insertion

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine if laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy represents a viable alternative to the conventional repair and to assess whether a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing both procedures is warranted. METHODS: Three types of laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphies (transabdominal preperitoneal [TAPP], intraperitoneal onlay mesh [IPOM], and totally extraperitoneal [EXTRA]) were studied in a phase II design. Twenty-one investigators from 19 institutions participated. Approval from the local human research committee was required at each institution before patients could be enrolled. RESULTS: There were 686 patients with 869 hernias; 366 (42.1%) were direct, 414 (47.6%) were indirect, 22 (2.5%) were femoral, and 67 (7.7%) were combination hernias. The TAPP procedure was used for 562 hernias, the IPOM was used for 217 hernias, and the EXTRA was used for 87 hernias. Sixty-one patients had additional abdominal procedures performed at the time of laparoscopy without any adverse affects on their herniorrhaphies. The overall recurrence rate was 4.5%, with a minimum follow-up of 15 months. Complications were divided into the following three groups: 1) those related to laparoscopy, 2) those related to the patient, and 3) those related to the herniorrhaphy. Complications related to the laparoscopy occurred in 5.4% of patients; bleeding or abdominal wall hematomas occurred 31 times, (two patients required transfusion); one patient had bowel perforation, which was sutured laparoscopically; a bladder injury required laparotomy for management. Patient complications occurred in 6.7%. The majority involved the urinary tract (5.8%). Two patients required secondary abdominal procedures for adhesions, one for pain in the right lower quadrant and the other for adhesive small bowel obstruction. Postoperative myocardial infarction on day 5 resulted in the only operative mortality, for a rate of 0.1%. Complications related to the herniorrhaphy itself occurred in 17.1%. Most of these were minor, consisting of transient groin pain (3.5%), seroma (3.5%), transient leg pain (3.3%), hematoma (1.5%), or transient cord or testicular problems (0.9%). The incidence of leg pain decreased dramatically as surgeons became more familiar with the anatomy of the nerve supply to the groin when viewed laparoscopically. Ninety-three percent of patients were discharged within 24 hours of their operations. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy is an effective method to correct an inguinal hernia. It can be offered safely to patients undergoing other abdominal procedures. The TAPP, IPOM, and EXTRA procedures appear to be equally effective. A controlled randomized trial is needed to compare this procedure with conventional inguinal herniorrhaphy.

Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy. Results of a multicenter trial.

Transoral, flexible endoscopic suturing for treatment of GERD: a multicenter trial.

Apparatus and methods are disclosed for percutaneously providing a stabilized platform for performing endoscopic surgery. The disclosed instrumentation includes an endoscope, a fixation catheter, a loop suture, and a rigid mount. A loop end of the loop suture is inserted into the gastrointestinal lumen through the fixation catheter and encompasses the endoscope positioned within the gastrointestinal lumen. The thread end of the loop suture remains external of the patient and is tautly connected to the rigid mount to provide the desired stability to the endoscope for the performance of an endo-surgical operation. Distal to the stabilizing assembly, the endoscope has articulated joints for positioning the distal end of the endoscope in close proximity to the surgical site, and includes manipulator arms which extend beyond the distal face of the endoscope to facilitate access to the surgical site.

Stabilizing instrumentation for the performing of endoscopic surgical procedures

A reduced pressure delivery system for applying a reduced pressure to a tissue site is provided. The system includes a manifold having a plurality of flow channels. The manifold is configured to be placed adjacent the tissue site. A first conduit is in fluid communication with the flow channels of the manifold to deliver a reduced pressure to the flow channels. A second conduit is in fluid communication with the flow channels of the manifold and is operably connected to a valve. The valve selectively purges the second conduit with ambient air when the valve is positioned in an open position, and a controller is operably connected to the valve to place the valve in the open position for a selected amount of time at a selected interval during delivery of reduced pressure through the first conduit.

System and method for purging a reduced pressure apparatus during the administration of reduced pressure treatment

Background: Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy is controversial and deserves critical evaluation. Methods: In a randomized prospective study transabdominal preperitoneal laparoscopic herniorrhaphy (n= 24) was compared in patients to the tension-free Lichtenstein repair (n= 29) utilizing validated and reliable pain and activity assessment tools. The Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) was used to compare preoperative normal activity to postoperative activity. A Pain-O-Meter (visual analogue scale plus affective and sensory pain descriptors) assessed intensity of pain. The total pain assessment score and SIP were compared across time (postoperative day 1–42). Analgesic medication was used as a covariate. Results: The total pain score was less for laparoscopic herniorrhaphy but this did not reach statistical significance. Similarly, the SIP showed modest improvement for laparoscopic herniorrhaphy. No differences between groups were noted for morphine equivalents of administered analgesics or length of hospitalization. Conclusion: Further investigation of laparoscopic herniorrhaphy is warranted.

Douglas A. Cornet

Papers

Laparoscopic inguinal herniorrhaphy. Results of a multicenter trial.

Transoral, flexible endoscopic suturing for treatment of GERD: a multicenter trial.

Stabilizing instrumentation for the performing of endoscopic surgical procedures

System and method for purging a reduced pressure apparatus during the administration of reduced pressure treatment

An assessment of pain and return to normal activity: Laparoscopic herniorrhaphy vs open tension-free Lichtenstein repair