Laparoscopic

Before surgery, patients will be evaluated by an anesthesiologist at the anesthesia clinic and informed in detail about the study. Patients who do not wish to participate in the study will absolutely not be included, and this will not affect the patients' treatment process in any way. The anesthesia method to be applied to patients who agree to participate in the study will not differ from routine anesthesia application. In other words, no additional medication, procedure, or different anesthesia method will be applied to patients within the scope of the study. After the surgery is completed, patients will be monitored in the recovery room and during their hospital stay. During this monitoring, it will be observed and recorded whether patients have complaints such as sore throat, cough, or hoarseness.

Endometrial cancer is one of the most common gynecological malignancies worldwide. Surgical staging is the cornerstone of management and traditionally performed via laparotomy. However, minimally invasive surgery, particularly laparoscopy, has emerged as an effective alternative with potential benefits in reducing postoperative morbidity. This study aims to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open (laparotomy) surgical staging in patients with endometrial cancer in low-resource settings. Primary aim: To compare early postoperative recovery after surgical staging for early-stage endometrial cancer between laparoscopic and open approaches, assessed primarily by time to ambulation. • Secondary aim: To compare intraoperative outcomes (operative time, blood loss, lymph node yield), postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification), quality of recovery (QoR-15), length of hospital stay, same day discharge(SDD), discrepancy between preoperative curettage pathology and final histopathology, delay in initiation of adjuvant therapy, one-year disease-free survival, direct hospital costs between both approaches, and quality of life using EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Given the limited resources and variations in surgical expertise in low-resource settings, this study seeks to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of laparoscopy compared to laparotomy. The findings may help guide clinical decision-making and optimize surgical approaches in similar healthcare environments.

This prospective randomized non-inferiority study will be conducted to compare the analgesic anti-emetic effects of intravenous ondansetron versus perineural ondansetron in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

Laparoscopic nephrectomy is a surgical technique to excise a diseased kidney. It's a minimally invasive technique, so when compared to open surgery, it can mean significantly less post-operative pain, shorter hospital stay, earlier return to work and daily life activities, a more favourable cosmetic result and outcomes similar to that of open surgery. Recently, advanced laparoscopic surgery has targeted older and high risk patients for general anesthesia; in these patients, regional anesthesia offers several advantages with improved patient satisfaction. Compared with alternative anesthetic techniques, epidural anesthesia may reduce the risks of venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, pneumonia, respiratory depression and renal failure. The aim of this study is to compare the conventional general anesthetic technique to the regional anesthesia for laparoscopic nephrectomy, in modified lateral decubitus position using low-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

Currently, there are three main methods for endoscopic esophagojejunostomy: circular, linear, and hand-sewn anastomosis, but no universally accepted optimal approach has been established. Hand-sewn anastomosis relies on advanced endoscopic suturing skills, making it technically demanding and only performed in a limited number of hospitals. Linear anastomosis is simple to perform and the most widely used in clinical practice. However, it requires resection of a longer segment of the distal esophagus and may struggle to ensure adequate margins for high-positioned tumors or unclear resection boundaries. Circular anastomosis is a classic method. Its end-to-side approach preserves more esophageal length, making it suitable for high-positioned tumors without the need to close a common opening. Various techniques (e.g., the reverse-puncture method and the Orvil™ transoral anvil technique) have been reported. However, due to challenges such as purse-string suturing, complex anvil placement, and restricted stapler maneuverability, widespread adoption remains difficult. Prof. Du Jianjun's team innovatively employed endoscopic purse-string forceps and a multifunctional sealing ring to achieve circular anastomosis, demonstrating preliminary technical advantages. This study further explores its feasibility and short-term outcomes in totally endoscopic total gastrectomy.

This proposed study is a single-center, double blind, parallel group RCT comparing the use of low (10 mm Hg) versus standard pressure (15 mm Hg) pneumoperitoneum at the time of benign gynecologic laparoscopic surgery. Patients will be randomized to the control group (standard pressure) or the intervention group (low pressure) and surgeons will be blinded to the study pressure. Data on post-operative recovery and pain scores will be recorded for each patient.

Reduced port laparoscopic gastrectomy has been adopted in clinical. The safety and outcome of reduced port laparoscopic gastrectomy has not been systematically evaluated. The investigators sought to compare the short and long-term outcome of patients with gastric cancer who underwent reduced port gastrectomy with patients underwent traditional laparoscopic gastrectomy

Inguinal hernia is one of the most common types of abdominal hernias. Laparoscopic hernioplasty of inguinal hernia is a good alternative to traditional open repairs even in simple unilateral primary inguinal hernia in terms of decrease post operative pain and complications with comparable recurrence rates.Two techniques are described in laparoscopic hernioplasty and have been extensively studied in randomised trials. The totally extraperitoneal (TEP) approach is more widely used than the transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) approach. In this study we will compare between the results of mesh fixation and non fixation as regard operative and postoperative data.

Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most aggressive malignant neoplasms with poor outcomes. Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is the only curative treatment for PC. Minimally invasive surgery has been progressively developed, first with the advent of hybrid-laparoscopy and recently with the total laparoscopy surgeries, but a number of issues are currently being debated, including the superiority between total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (TLPD)and the open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). Studies comparing these two surgery techniques are merging and randomized controlled trials (RCT) are lacking but clearly required. Methods/design: TJDBPS07 is a multicenter prospective, randomized controlled, trial comparing TLPD and OPD in pancreatic cancers. A total of 200 patients with pancreatic cancer underwent PD will be randomly allocated to the TLPD group or OPD group with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pattern. The trial's aim is to exploring the overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS) and quality of life. The duration of the entire trial is seven years including prearrangement, a presumably five-year follow-up and analyses. Discussion: Despite the fact there are several RCTs comparing minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (MIPD) and Open approach or LPD versus OPD. This trial will be the first comparing TLPD and OPD in a large multicenter setting. TJDBPS01 trial is hypothesized to assess whether TLPD has superiority over OPD in recovery and other aspects.