Letting Minimally Invasive Surgery Be Safe and Efficacious
Kerong Dai
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00029330-200808010-00003
2008-01-01
Abstract:The concept of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is thought to minimize damage and possible reactions of the surgical site and the whole body in order to achieve the same outcome as that achieved from conventional surgery. It does not simply make the incision small, instead emphasizes the protection of the surgical part and its environmental conditions in an attempt to minimize or, if not, avoid body reaction to surgery. This would decrease the amount of complications and shorten the time of recovery. Patients could be benefited from MIS for the operation itself is not only safer, but the patients can recover more quickly. Obviously it is exactly the ultimate goal of MIS. In short, MIS aims to achieve the best outcome with minimal costs. Arthroscopy, a method developed in the middle of the last century, could be regarded as a typical paradigm. The progress of MIS is of great significance in the orthopaedic field. This concept could bring about a number of innovations for orthopaedic surgery, including major changes in the usual procedures, development of instruments, and the adjustment of preoperative preparation and postoperative care. In addition, not only is the connotation of minimally invasive technique more extensive than that of endoscope, laparoscope, interventional therapy, and microsurgery, the forms of MIS vary with the advances made on imaging, informatics, and computer technology. Undoubtedly, the technique and safety involved in performing MIS will be further improved with the emergence of computer-aided and robotic surgery. The concept of MIS has also been widely adopted in the fields of traumatology and spine surgery. Recently, it has also been used in arthroplasty, a procedure which allows a smaller incision. The incision can be the shorter part of a standard one or a new but tiny incision. The characteristic of such approach not only refers to the small incision, but also to the fact that it does not transect any muscle, tendon or ligament, and that the operation is done with special instruments and skilled techniques. Its combination with navigation makes MIS safer and more accurate and reliable. The purpose of introducing MIS to arthroplasty is to try to reduce soft tissue damage through an improved approach and devices. This approach would result in less bleeding, less postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay, and better cosmetic appearance. However, despite these merits, MIS remains controversial because of the small group of patients, short-term follow-up, and lack of a controlled study based on a large number of clinical cases. Clinical studies even showed that in contrast to conventional surgery, MIS did not reduce blood transfusion by a smaller incision and that pain release and function recovery were not significant.1 Moreover, researchers think that the small incision prevents an adequate exposure of the operative field. This would make the protection of neurovascular structures and the judgment of implant location difficult, thereby increase the operative time. For these reasons, the advantages of MIS over the conventional approach have not yet been fully acknowledged.2 It is early to conclude whether or not MIS is superior to others. However, studies could prove that MIS is helpful to improve conventional surgery. The modification of incision will make the cut smaller, the improvement of instruments will reduce soft tissue damage, and the enhancement of rehabilitation after MIS will hasten the recovery. Rather than making MIS and conventional surgery mutually exclusive from each other, we should make them complementary in order to validate their advantages. With the application of MIS, however, new issues will be posted. Surgeons, experienced or less-experienced, will have to face the challenges of mastering new knowledge and techniques. Although MIS can lead to a safer and more accurate treatment, it can also bring about accidental injury if the techniques have faults or if the surgeon is not familiar with or not able to master the necessary skills. In any case, “minimal invasion” has been a recent trend in surgery. Although great progress has been made in the last 20 years, MIS is still considered to be in the infancy stage. It is thus necessary for surgeons to successively understand and improve MIS in their practice.