Skip to main content
Download PDF

Transumbilical single-site two incision laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pediatric hypertrophic pyloric stenosis

BMC Surgery volume 22, Article number: 218 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

A new novel technique for the treatment of pediatric hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (HPS), transumbilical single-site laparoscopic pyloromyotomy with a single instrument (TUSSLP), was introduced. TUSSLP was compared with the transabdominal three-site laparoscopic pyloromyotomy (TATSLP) procedure.

Methods

Patients with HPS who underwent TUSSLP and TATSLP between January 2016 and September 2020 were assigned to group A and group B, respectively. The descriptive variables, perioperative clinical characteristics and postoperative follow-up results were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the 2 groups. The primary outcome of this study was the rate of switching to conventional pyloromyotomy.

Results

Sixty-four patients were enrolled in this study. Of these patients, 29 (22 males, 7 females, 54.4 ± 22.6 days) who received TUSSLP were assigned to group A. The remaining 35 (28 males, 7 females, 54.5 ± 27.6 days) who received TATSLP were assigned to group B. The data of preoperative patient variables were comparable between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). The mean operative time (ORT) was 28.1 ± 5.6 min in group A, which was not significantly different from 25.8 ± 3.1 min in group B (P = 0.25). The other perioperative features were not significantly different between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). During follow-up (39.1 ± 14.7 m in group A and 35.4 ± 16.1 m in group B, P = 0.51), no significant difference was observed in the overall incidence of vomiting between the 2 groups (P = 0.26).

Conclusions

TUSSLP is a feasible and reliable minimally invasive method for HPS. It has the advantages of an improved cosmetic appearance. The postoperative follow-up results of TUSSLP are comparable with those of TATSLP.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (HPS) is a common cause of vomiting during the neonatal period, with an incidence of approximately 2 per 1000 live births[1]. In patients with HPS, symptoms usually occur between 3 and 8 weeks of life, with forceful or projectile nonbilious vomiting after feeding. Patients may suffer from weight loss, dehydration and alkalosis [2]. Demian et al. showed that only 5.8% of infants diagnosed with HPS were less than 14 days old. Patients presenting in the first 2 weeks of life had a significantly higher positive family history for HPS than infants who presented with HPS after day 14 of life [3]. In addition to the early presentation of HPS, late presentation of HPS at the 14th week of life has been reported in the literature as a rare event [4].

The first laparoscopic pyloromyotomy (LP) procedure was reported in 1990 by Alain et al. [5]. With the advancement of laparoscopic instrumentation for infants, this technique has gained popularity [6,7,8,9,10]. Compared with laparotomy, LP has a shorter hospital stay, lower morbidity and lower risk of major wound-related complications. However, placing three trocars through a small umbilicus can have the disadvantage of conflicting instruments, so only a few pediatric centers can handle this technique [11, 12]. In addition, incomplete pyloromyotomy and mucosal perforation have been reported in patients receiving LP. In the majority of the centers, traditional LP is performed using a retractable pyloromyotomy knife for incision of the hypertrophied pylorus. Most recently, the use of a hook with electrocautery was reported with excellent outcomes [13]. Since January 2017, we have attempted a novel procedure of transumbilical single-site laparoscopic pyloromyotomy with a single instrument (TUSSLP) through only two incisions around the umbilical ring. In this report, we described the distinct features of TUSSLP.

Materials and method

Design and study population

This was a retrospective study of patients with HPS who underwent TUSSLP and transabdominal three-site laparoscopic pyloromyotomy (TATSLP) between January 2016 and September 2020. Approval was obtained from the West China Hospital of Sichuan University Institutional Review Board (NO. 2016-118). All procedures followed the research protocols approved by Sichuan University and West China Hospital of Sichuan University and were conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Written informed consent was provided by the patients’ parents for their clinical records to be used in this study.

The diagnosis of HPS was based on the history, palpation of a hypertrophied pyloric muscle and ultrasonography. Patients’ parents were given the option to choose the treatment (either TUSSLP or TATSLP). The inclusion criteria were as follows: patients with clinically confirmed HPS and patients who received either TUSSLP or TATSLP. The exclusion criteria were as follows: patients with comorbidities and patients who failed to attend the follow-up. The patients receiving TUSSLP and TATSLP were assigned to group A and group B, respectively.

Study outcomes

The data of perioperative patient characteristics and postoperative follow-up results were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the 2 groups. The primary outcome of this study was the rate of switching to conventional pyloromyotomy. Secondary outcomes included operative time (ORT), duration of anesthesia, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. We hypothesized that patients receiving TUSSLP might have a comparable rate of switching to conventional pyloromyotomy and postoperative complications with those receiving TATSLP.

Surgical technique

The TUSSLP procedure

In the TUSSLP procedure, the patient was placed in a supine position with a monitor at the patient’s head. The operator stood on the left side of the patient’s feet, and the camera assistant stood on the other side. A 5 mm incision was made through the right rim of the umbilical ring with the open Hasson technique to establish the pneumoperitoneum at a pressure of 6–8 mmHg with a flow rate of 3–6 L/min. A 5 mm incision was made at the right rim of the umbilical ring for a 5 mm trocar and a 30° laparoscope. The second 3 mm incision was made at the left rim of the umbilical ring for a 3 mm trocar and the related 3 mm instruments. (Fig. 1). Laparoscopy was started by inspection of the pyloric olivary mass and further confirmed the diagnosis. The needle swaged with 4–0 Vicryl thread punctured into the peritoneal cavity at the left upper quadrant and right lower quadrant of the abdominal wall leaving the thread end outside. Under control with the laparoscopic needle holder only, the needle snaped the superior and inferior margins of the pyloric tube and pierced back to the outside abdominal wall from the position of entering the peritoneal cavity individually. Two percutaneous sutures were introduced separately to hold the pylorus in place. The pyloric canal could be secured firmly by simultaneously tensioning both external thread ends at the left upper quadrant and right lower quadrant of the abdominal wall. The nonvascular area on the anterior wall of the pyloric tube was cut longitudinally with a monopolar electric hook through the 3 mm trocar at the left rim of the umbilical ring. Then, 3 mm Maryland forceps were used to fully divide the wound of pyloric muscle to make the mucous membrane completely bulge (Fig. 2). Fifty milliliters of air was slowly injected into the gastric tube, and a few drops of saline were poured through the port to check for any inadvertent mucosal injury. If not, the air was evacuated. After confirming that there was no active bleeding from the edge of the pylorus muscle, the instruments were removed and pneumoperitoneum was exsufflated. The incisions on the bilateral umbilical rim were closed with 5–0 absorbable thread (Fig. 3).

Fig. 1
figure 1

A 5 mm incision was made at the right rim of the umbilical ring for a 5 mm trocar and a 30° laparoscope. The second 3 mm incision was made at the left rim of the umbilical ring for a 3 mm trocar and the related 3 mm instruments

Full size image
Fig. 2
figure 2

The Maryland forceps were used to divide the wound of pyloric muscle fully to make the mucous membrane completely bulge

Full size image
Fig. 3
figure 3

The two incisions (right 5 mm, left 3 mm) on the bilateral rim of the umbilical ring were closed with 5-0 Vicryl thread

Full size image

The procedure of TATSLP

In the TATSLP procedure, the patient position was the same as that in the TUSSLP procedure. A 3 mm incision was made through the center of the umbilicus with the open Hasson technique to establish the pneumoperitoneum at a pressure of 6–8 mmHg with a flow rate of 3–6 L/min. A 5 mm trocar and a 30° laparoscope were introduced into the peritoneal cavity. Under laparoscopy, the two 3 mm trocars were placed in the bilateral upper quadrant of the abdominal wall. Laparoscopy was started by inspection of the pyloric olivary mass and confirmed the diagnosis. Through the trocar on the right upper quadrant of the abdominal wall, the undamaged forceps were placed at the ear of the pyloric tube to catch the duodenum. Through the trocar on the left upper quadrant of the abdominal wall, the pyloric knife was inserted. From the end of the duodenum to the stomach, the nonvascular area on the anterior wall of the pyloric tube was cut longitudinally. Then, the Maryland forceps were used to fully separate the wound of pyloric muscle to make the mucous membrane completely bulge. The remaining surgical steps were the same as those in the TUSSLP procedure.

The postoperative feeding regimen

The protocol of the postoperative feeding regimen was the same for each group. Feeds were started at 8 h postoperatively. The initial feeding was 20 mL of water; if this was well tolerated, the infant could have 50 mL 2 h later and formula feeding 2 h later. When vomiting occurred, the next feeding was omitted and was resumed 6 h later at the same dose. The baby was adequately discharged after 24 h of ad libitum feeding. All episodes of vomiting were recorded.

Data collection and statistical analysis

First, all patients were analyzed for their perioperative clinical features by reviewing the medical charts. Second, the follow-up data were collected using a telephone questionnaire or the last visit to our outpatient clinic according to the medical files.

We used descriptive statistics to compare characteristics between the two groups: frequencies with percentages for qualitative variables and means with SD for continuous variables. Comparisons of characteristics were constructed with Student’s t test for continuous variables where appropriate and Fisher’s exact test or a chi-square test for categorical variables. The software applied for statistical calculation was IBM SPSS 22.0 for Windows 10.0 (IBM Corp.) A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Data on perioperative patient characteristics

There were 74 patients with HPS who received TUSSLP or TATSLP between January 2016 and September 2020. Ten patients were excluded from the study. Of them, 7 patients had comorbidities (in the TUSSLP group, 3 patients had inguinal hernia and 1 patient had malrotation; in the TATSLP group, 2 patients had inguinal hernia and 1 patient had cryptorchidism), and 3 patients were lost to follow-up (1 patient in the TUSSLP group and 2 patients in the TATSLP group). The remaining 64 cases were enrolled in this study. Of them, 29 patients receiving TUSSLP were assigned to group A (22 males, 7 females, 54.4 ± 22.6 days), and 35 patients receiving TATSLP were assigned to group B (28 males, 7 females, 52.5 ± 27.6 days). The preoperative patient variables, including age, sex, weight, pyloric muscle thickness and length measured by ultrasonography, and the duration of symptoms were not significantly different between the 2 groups (P > 0.05) (Table 1).

Table 1 Preoperative patient characteristics
Full size table

During the operation, most patients did well in both groups. There was 1 case in group A and 2 cases in group B who switched to conventional pyloromyotomy due to mucosal perforation (2 patients) and duodenal injury (1 patient). The mucosal perforations and duodenal injury were emphasized intraoperatively and were managed by an umbilical open procedure. The ORT was 28.1 ± 5.6 min in group A, which was not significantly different from 25.8 ± 3.1 min in group B (P = 0.25). The other perioperative patient characteristics, including the duration of anesthesia and intraoperative complications (mucosal perforation, duodenal injury), were not significantly different between the 2 groups (P > 0.05) (Table 2).

Table 2 Intra- and postoperative patient characteristics
Full size table

Postoperative results

The response rate for the telephone questionnaire or clinic interview for the patients enrolled in this study was 95.5%, including 29/30 patients in group A (96.7%) and 35/37 patients in group B (94.6%). The data of 3 patients (1 after TUSSLP, 2 after TATSLP) who had incorrect phone numbers or no family member was contactable for the telephone or clinical interview were not collected.

The follow-up time was 39.1 ± 14.7 months in group A and 35.4 ± 16.1 months in group B (P = 0.51). The postoperative complications, including wound infection, wound dehiscence, revision of pyloromyotomy, time to full feeding, and postoperative length of stay, were not significantly different between the 2 groups (P > 0.05) (Table 2). The overall incidence of vomiting was also not significantly different between the 2 groups (15 versus 23, P = 0.26). All the vomiting symptoms of patients among the 2 groups disappeared after conservative treatment.

Discussion

With the emergence of scarless operations involving the abdominal wall, single-site umbilical LP has also been reported [12, 14,15,16]. However, single-site umbilical LP is difficult to perform in newborns and has a high probability of severe complications, such as mucosal perforation and recurrent obstruction [17]. Therefore, single site umbilical laparoscopy has not been greatly reported in recent years. Based on many years of experience with TATSLP, the TUSSLP procedure was developed to overcome many difficulties with transumbilical single-site LP. Here, we present our first 29 cases of HPS who underwent TUSSLP. The majority of patients in our study had the expected excellent outcomes associated with this disease. We found that the TUSSLP procedure is a feasible and reliable minimally invasive method for patients with HPS.

HPS usually presents at 2 to 6 weeks of age in previous healthy infants. Increased awareness of HPS is required for early diagnosis and prompt treatment to prevent potential complications, although there is evidence suggesting that duration of the symptoms (e.g., vomiting duration) at presentation did not have a significant impact on postoperative outcomes. Our patients (mean ages, 50–52 days) were older than those patients reported in a previous study (mean ages, 30–40 days) [2, 18]. The delayed diagnosis of our patients may be due to the unawareness of HPS before referral. We were not surprised to find that our patients had a long duration of preoperative vomiting. Preoperative weight may have a significant impact on mucosal perforation and weight loss. Aurélien et al. proposed that low weight might be correlated with a lower amount of workspace for laparoscopy [18].

Kozlov et al. [19] suggested that an endoscope longer than the other instruments could help the assistant’s hands out of the operator working space, and the angulation of the optical axis of at least 30° provides an offset, rather than inline, view of the pylorus. To resolve the problems above, we developed the TUSSLP procedure, in which the LP was performed through two incisions around the umbilical ring. The pyloric canal can be firmly secured and fully exposed by simultaneously tensioning both external thread ends at the left upper quadrant and right lower quadrant of the abdominal wall [13, 20].

Common perioperative complications after pyloromyotomy include incomplete pyloromyotomy and mucosal perforation [8, 21,22,23]. In the present study, satisfactory TUSSLP results were achieved in our patients. Our findings were consistent with other published series that reported an incidence of incomplete myotomy of 2% to 8% [8, 9, 13] and mucosal perforation of 1.3 to 5.0% [8, 24]. Our overall conversion rate of 4.7% was comparable to those reported by previous studies [2]. The conversions in our study series were due to mucosal perforations and duodenal injury. This relatively higher conversion rate might be attributed to the learning time and complete technique acquisition of LP. Oomen et al. demonstrated that the procedure acquirement for LP reveals a trend toward the reduction of postoperative complications after 35 procedures, suggesting that the first 35 patients might reflect the learning curve [23]. There is also evidence suggesting that the LP procedure has a steep learning curve for novices [25,26,27], especially in the management of TUSSLP for the first 10–20 cases [26]. Thus, surgical teaching using simulators for residents or younger consultants is highly advisable, and it could in fact be deemed to be crucial for the safe performance of LP [28].

In the literature, wound infection, fascial dehiscence and omental herniation are frequently reported postoperative complications. Previous studies found that there were no significant differences in the postoperative complication rate between open and laparoscopic pyloromyotomy [18, 21]. In the present study, no severe postoperative complications were documented in either of the approaches. The overall postoperative complication rate of LP in our cohort was 7.8%, which was comparable to that in previous studies [8, 21, 23]. When comparing the rate of the most common postoperative complication, our results are equivalent to others, with a rate of 4.7% for wound infection in our cases. None of our patients had incisional hernias or inflammatory scars, both of which can be seen in open pyloromyotomy. During the follow-up, the overall incidence of vomiting after TUSSLP was not significantly different from that after TATSLP. The vomiting subsided without requiring any further medication. Our total vomiting rate is relatively high compared to others. However, many authors did not report postoperative vomiting in their studies. A possible cause of the relatively high vomiting rate is that the age at the time of operation in our cohort was higher than that in others. We cannot exclude referral or selection bias as the reason for this phenomenon.

Limitations of the current study should be admitted. First, this was a retrospective study with a single-center design. The study site is a tertiary referral center, adding potential selection bias toward more severe patients. Second, the 10 cases of HPS excluded from the study might reverse the results of the statistical comparison between the 2 groups. Although this study provided standard items for comparison between two procedures, it mostly affected comparison of the cosmetic, which resulted in favor of TUSSLP. Third, due to the small number of patients included in the study, we could not perform a risk analysis for complications. Further studies on a larger number of cases may be required for more accurate conclusions.

Conclusion

We conclude that there are no differences between the TUSSLP and TATSLP techniques in terms of the ORT, perioperative complications, conversion to open pyloromyotomy, time to resumption of feeding, duration of hospitalization and postoperative follow-up results. Although TUSSLP surgery is complex and demanding, it is still regarded as a valid alternative to the classic TATSLP procedure with identical clinical results and better esthetic appearances for an experienced surgeon. The TUSSLP procedure is a feasible and reliable minimally invasive method for HPS in well-trained hands.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Peeters B, Benninga MA, Hennekam RC. Infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis–genetics and syndromes. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;9(11):646–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zampieri N, Corato V, Scire G, Camoglio FS. Hypertrophic Pyloric stenosis: 10 years’ experience with standard open and laparoscopic approach. Pediatr Gastroenterol Hepatol Nutr. 2021;24(3):265–72.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Demian M, Nguyen S, Emil S. Early pyloric stenosis: a case control study. Pediatr Surg Int. 2009;25(12):1053–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Pogorelic Z, Cagalj IC, Zitko V, Nevescanin A, Krzelj V. Late-onset hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in a 14-weeks-old full term male infant. Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2019;62(2):82–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Alain JL, Grousseau D, Terrier G. Extra-mucosa pylorotomy by laparoscopy. Chir Pediatr. 1990;31(4–5):223–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Costanzo CM, Vinocur C, Berman L. Postoperative outcomes of open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. J Surg Res. 2018;224:240–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Huang WH, Zhang QL, Chen L, Cui X, Wang YJ, Zhou CM. The safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open surgery for congenital hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in infants. Med Sci Monit. 2020;26: e921555.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Ismail I, Elsherbini R, Elsaied A, Aly K, Sheir H. Laparoscopic vs. open pyloromyotomy in treatment of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Front Pediatr. 2020;8:426.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kethman WC, Harris AHS, Hawn MT, Wall JK. Trends and surgical outcomes of laparoscopic versus open pyloromyotomy. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(7):3380–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Siddiqui S, Heidel RE, Angel CA, Kennedy AP Jr. Pyloromyotomy: randomized control trial of laparoscopic vs open technique. J Pediatr Surg. 2012;47(1):93–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Muensterer OJ, Adibe OO, Harmon CM, Chong A, Hansen EN, Bartle D, Georgeson KE. Single-incision laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: initial experience. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(7):1589–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yu LJ, Wu XJ, Mao SK, Li SM, Luo CF. The application of pyloric chisel in the treatment of hypertrophic pyloric stenosis by single-site umbilical laparoscopic pyloromyotomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2019;29(2):282–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pogorelic Z, Zelic A, Jukic M, Llorente Munoz CM. The safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic pyloromyotomy using 3-mm electrocautery hook versus open surgery for treatment of hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in infants. Children (Basel). 2021;8(8):78.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Li B, Chen WB, Wang SQ, Wang YB. Single-site umbilical laparoscopic pyloromyotomy in neonates less than 21-day old. Surg Today. 2015;45(1):29–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yu LJ, Su BL, Shan WY, Luo CF, Shu Q. Single-site umbilical laparoscopic pyloromyotomy using a pyloric electrocoagulation chisel combined with a left-handed main operation for congenital hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2020;30(11):1248–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vahdad MR, Nissen M, Semaan A, Klein T, Palade E, Boemers T, Troebs RB, Cernaianu G. Can a simplified algorithm prevent incomplete laparoscopic pyloromyotomy? J Pediatr Surg. 2015;50(9):1544–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Muensterer OJ. Single-incision pediatric Endosurgical (SIPES) versus conventional laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: a single-surgeon experience. J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;14(6):965–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Binet A, Klipfel C, Meignan P, Bastard F, Cook AR, Braik K, Le Touze A, Villemagne T, Robert M, Ballouhey Q, et al. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a survey of 407 children. Pediatr Surg Int. 2018;34(4):421–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kozlov Y, Novogilov V, Podkamenev A, Rasputin A, Weber I, Solovjev A, Yurkov P. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for pyloric stenosis. Pediatr Surg Int. 2012;28(4):347–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sathya C, Wayne C, Gotsch A, Vincent J, Sullivan KJ, Nasr A. Laparoscopic versus open pyloromyotomy in infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pediatr Surg Int. 2017;33(3):325–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lunger F, Staerkle RF, Muff JL, Fink L, Holland-Cunz SG, Vuille-Dit-Bille RN. Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pyloric stenosis-a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Surg Res. 2022;274:1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van den Bunder F, van Heurn E, Derikx JPM. Comparison of laparoscopic and open pyloromyotomy: Concerns for omental herniation at port sites after the laparoscopic approach. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):363.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Oomen MW, Hoekstra LT, Bakx R, Ubbink DT, Heij HA. Open versus laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on major complications. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(8):2104–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Hall NJ, Eaton S, Seims A, Leys CM, Densmore JC, Calkins CM, Ostlie DJ, St Peter SD, Azizkhan RG, von Allmen D, et al. Risk of incomplete pyloromyotomy and mucosal perforation in open and laparoscopic pyloromyotomy. J Pediatr Surg. 2014;49(7):1083–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Arul GS, Moni-Nwinia W, Soccorso G, Pachl M, Singh M, Jester I. Getting it right first time: implementation of laparoscopic pyloromyotomy without a learning curve. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2021;103(2):130–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Binet A, Bastard F, Meignan P, Braik K, Le Touze A, Villemagne T, Morel B, Robert M, Klipfel C, Lardy H. Laparoscopic pyloromyotomy: a study of the learning curve. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2018;28(3):238–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kaba M, Karadag CA, Demir M, Sever N, Unal A, Akin M, Dokucu AI. Our experience with laparoscopic pyloromyotomy in patients with infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. Sisli Etfal Hastan Tip Bul. 2020;54(3):333–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Ballouhey Q, Micle L, Grosos C, Robert Y, Binet A, Arnaud A, Abbo O, Lardy H, Longis B, Bréaud J, et al. A simulation model to support laparoscopic pyloromyotomy teaching. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2018;28(6):760–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Contribution to the field statement

Infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis (HPS) is a common cause of vomiting during the neonatal period. HPS has an incidence of approximately 2/1000 live births. With the advancement of laparoscopic instrumentation for infants, laparoscopic pyloromyotomy has gained popularity. In this study, we presented our first 29 cases of HPS who underwent transumbilical single-site laparoscopic pyloromyotomy with a single instrument (TUSSLP). We interpreted its technical challenges and solutions. We found that TUSSLP was a feasible and reliable minimally invasive method for HPS. TUSSLP had the advantages of an improved cosmetic appearance. The postoperative follow-up results of TUSSLP were comparable with those of the transabdominal three-site laparoscopic pyloromyotomy procedure.

Funding

This work was supported by the Key Project in the Science & Technology Program of Sichuan Province (Grant Numbers 2022YFS0233, 2022YFS0225 and 2019YFS0322), the Project of ‘0 to 1’ of Sichuan University (Grant Number 2022SCUH0033), and the 1·3·5 Project for Disciplines of Excellence Clinical Research Incubation Project, West China Hospital of Sichuan University (Grant Numbers 2019HXFH056, 2020HXFH048 and ZYJC21060).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Yi Ji and Xiaoqin Lai contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University. #37 Guo-Xue-Xiang, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China

    Yi Ji & Zhicheng Xu

  2. Day Surgery Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China

    Xiaoqin Lai

  3. West China School of Nursing, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China

    Xiaoqin Lai

  4. China International Emergency Medical Team (Sichuan), Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China

    Xiaoqin Lai

Authors
  1. Yi Ji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiaoqin Lai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhicheng Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ZCX designed the study. YJ, XQL and ZCX collected data and managed its quality. YJ, XQL and ZCX performed the statistical analysis and drafted the manuscript. All authors participated in data interpretation. YJ and ZCX contributed substantially to its revision. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhicheng Xu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study involved human participants and was approved by the ethics committee of West China Hospital (NO. 2016–118). The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice guidelines. Parents of the enrolled children were informed about the study upon admission and provided written informed consent.

Consent for publication

Written informed consent for publication of this study was obtained from the patients’ parents. Copies of the signed informed consent forms are available for review by the Series Editor of BMC Pediatrics.

Competing interests

The authors have disclosed that they do not have any potential conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ji, Y., Lai, X. & Xu, Z. Transumbilical single-site two incision laparoscopic pyloromyotomy for pediatric hypertrophic pyloric stenosis. BMC Surg 22, 218 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-022-01672-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-022-01672-2

Keywords

BMC Surgery

ISSN: 1471-2482

Contact us