Medical Devices Group

  • Community
  • Webinars
  • Jobs
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Go Premium
« Back to Previous Page
like 8 comments  share
Rob Packard
Ship & Print Your FDA eCopy
February 2015
What is MIS? What is SILS?
2 min reading time

What is MIS?
Everyone that is a member of this subgroup knows that the acronym for minimally invasive surgery is “MIS”. Initially this term had a narrow definition that referred to laparoscopic surgical techniques involving a laparoscope, ports (umbilical and left/right quadrant ports) and various grasping devices to assist general surgeons in performing surgery inside the body without reaching their hand inside the body. Unfortunately, the term MIS has gradually been corrupted by marketing folks to also include less invasive techniques open techniques that involve inserting other not so small devices into the body through small incisions.

Benefits of MIS:
– Small Incisions
– Fewer Stitches
– A faster recovery for the patient
– Less pain
– Resuming normal activity faster
– Shorter hospital stays
– Reduction of postoperative morbidity
– Lower total cost of care to both the patient and insurance plan

What are the benefits of single-port laparoscopic surgery?
Single-port laparoscopic surgery is another innovation that may further improve surgical outcomes. SILS was first attempted more than 30 years ago, but SILS did not gain popularity until Podolsky, et al. reported on a single-port cholecystectomy procedure. There are multiple surgical devices available now for single-port procedures:

– Covidien’s SILS
– Advanced Surgical Concepts’ TriPort
– SurgiQuest’s AirSeal DFS
– Applied Medical’s GelPOINT

The greatest benefit of single-port surgery is improved cosmetics resulting from one surgical incision hidden in the umbilicus rather than several small abdominal scars. The benefits may also include:

– Less pain
– Reduction in complications related to trocar insertion
– Easier specimen removal through a single, larger incision
– Reduction in infection rates
– Elimination of epigastric vessel injury
– Decreased visceral organ herniation
– Easier fascia closure
– Decreased risk of herniation

The disadvantages are higher cost and technical difficulties of the procedure. There is also a lack of randomized, controlled trials comparing single-port laparoscopy with conventional multiple-port procedures.

If anyone is aware of recently published or unpublished studies, please share them with the group. I would also be interested to hear your general opinions on single-port techniques.

If you have any suggestions for future announcements to the group, please let me know by email (rob@13485cert.com) or you can fill in the suggestion box on my website: http://bit.ly/QA-RA-Suggestion-Box. You might also be interested in joining Joe Hage’s QA/RA Subgroup that I manage.

source: https://www.linkedin.com/groups/2526855/2526855-5973752647193239555

Marked as spam
Posted by Rob Packard
Asked on February 18, 2015 12:00 am
965 views
  • Follow
  • Unfollow
  • Report spam
like 8 comments  share

Meet your next client here. Join our medical devices group community.

Private answer
Ian Mor - MIS spokesperson online: MIS also stands for 'Make It Simple'. Established in 1995, MIS Implants Technologies Ltd. is a global leader in the development and production of advanced products and innovative solutions aimed to simplify dental implantology. Through our state-of-the-art production facilities, MIS offers a comprehensive range of cutting-edge dental implants, superstructures, tools and kits, as well as extensive solutions for oral restoration and health. MIS products are distributed in over 65 countries worldwide.
Marked as spam
like
  • Report spam
Private answer
As you pointed out, there is a lack of good data on single port surgery with most available literature presenting level III data. In the few RCTs and reviews I have seen, the data seems to suggest increased pain immediately post op, longer operative time (which should be considered given the adverse effects of prolonged anesthesia), and increased rate of hernia formation. Surgeons are wise to consider whether an improved cosmetic result is worth the potential complications of single port surgery and reduced ergonomics of operating through a single port. Granted, new instruments improve the ergonomics of the operation but at increased cost. Device manufacturers should consider the above when designing and marketing single access devices.

A couple of primary articles below:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00464-011-2028-z
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1072751513001828
Marked as spam
like
  • Report spam
Private answer
Rajas Sirvoicar SILS is the complicated version of a successful MIS procedure of Cholecystectomy. There is no difference in the prognosis for the patient. As far as cosmesis is concerned, a belly dancer who has undergone the procedure would be in a better position to comment.
Marked as spam
like
  • Report spam
Private answer
Trent Pierce MIS is Minimally Invasive Surgery-a sub-service line to laparoscopic surgery. SILS is Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery. Examples of SILS would be SILS donor nephrectomies or SILS colectomies. Essentially most of the procedure is performed laparoscopically, but the main portion of the procedure is done OUTSIDE of the abdominal cavity, through the SILS port, which can allow a hand to be inserted into the abdomen or stretched enough to removed a harvested kidney.
Marked as spam
like
  • Report spam
Private answer
Rob Packard Thank you for the great discussions and comments. Any suggestions for the next announcement?
Marked as spam
like
  • Report spam
Private answer
Janie Enright I agree with Daniel Hashimoto. SILS has not been fully embraced due to the ergonomics of the instruments and the increased pain in the umbilical area. Instead surgeons are turning to 2.3mm instruments. Smaller port sizes offer reduction in pain and better cosmesis and the instruments are ergonomically designed. An instrument can be inserted percutaneously anywhere in the procedure as well for additional retraction. A mix of 5mm and 2.3mm instruments can be used.
Marked as spam
1 like
  • Report spam
Private answer
Rajas Sirvoicar I believe a large section of surgeons should be able to adapt to new surgical technologies without compromising patient safety. Reducing the port diameter from 5 mm to 2.5 mm may not bring appreciable patient benefits, but the cost of manufacturing of the instruments go up substantially,they become more delicate and incidences of instrument jaw breakage increase many-fold.Such miniature technologies will coexist, but for specific procedures.Major resections using staplers will never go so tiny.
Marked as spam
like
  • Report spam
Private answer
Janie Enright Rajas the technology of today is advancing. instruments are extremely durable and offer many patient benefits The only drawback that we are working on is electrosurgical cababilitities
Marked as spam
like
  • Report spam
« Back to Previous Page
Ask a Question
Leave a Comment

We still use LinkedIn to access our site because it’s the only way to “pull in” your LinkedIn photo, name, and hyperlink to your profile page, all vital in building your professional network. When you log in using LinkedIn, you are giving LinkedIn your password, not me. I never see nor store your LinkedIn credentials.

Stay connected with us.

By signing up you are agreeing to our Privacy Policy.

Categories

  • Capital/Investment
    • Business Model
    • Funding
  • Careers
  • Design/Devel
    • Design
    • Development
    • Human Factors
    • Labeling
    • Material Selection
    • R&D
    • Trials and Post-Market
  • Featured
  • Industry
    • Announcements
    • Device Tax
    • Hospital and Health Care
    • Innovation
    • Medtech
  • LinkedIn, etc.
  • Markets
    • Africa
    • Americas
    • Asia
    • Australia
    • Europe
  • Regulating
    • CE Marking
    • EU
    • FDA
    • FDA/EU etc.
    • Notified Bodies
    • Quality
    • Regulatory
  • Selling
    • Distribution
    • Intellectual Property
    • Marketing/Sales
    • Reimbursement
  • Worth bookmarking!
Feature your job here.
logo

Companion to LinkedIn's 350,000 member community

  • Contact
  • Medical Device Marketing
  • In Memoriam
  • Medical Device Conference

The Medical Devices Group   |   Copyright © 2025 Terms, Conditions & Privacy

Medical Devices Group
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.