Figure 1 Lap Pak (Seguro Surgical, Columbia, MD). Initial Experience With Lap Pak Five high-volume urologic oncology LDK378 surgeons affiliated with The Lahey Clinic (Burlington, MA), the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, PA) Vanderbilt University Medical Center (Nashville, TN), Cleveland Clinic (Celeveland,

OH), and the University of Chicago (Chicago, IL) agreed to test Lap Pak during radical cystectomies and urinary diversion. Prior to using the device, all surgeons had the opportunity to discuss its use with the engineer who developed the device. Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical The surgeons agreed to use the device on five cases. After completing the five cases, the surgeons were invited to complete a survey designed to capture several features of the device and its utility. Several of the surgeons completed the survey prior to a scheduled teleconference. Others completed the questionnaire

during the teleconference. The responses to the Lap Pak survey are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 Responses Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical to Lap Pak Survey The theoretical advantage of Lap Pak is to reduce the risk of retained foreign bodies (sponges, towels) Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical and to minimize trauma to the bowel secondary to abdominal packing with sponges or towels. One of the goals of the survey was to determine whether a group of experienced urologic oncology surgeons believed these were legitimate clinical opportunities of the device. Four (80%) of the surgeons evaluating the device thought that the potential for decreasing retained foreign bodies in the abdomen was a potential advantage of

Lap Pak and three surgeons (60%) indicated that decreasing trauma to the bowel was a legitimate Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical advantage. The three surgeons who expressed the opinion that Lap Pak offered the potential for decreasing trauma Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical to the bowel actually reported less bowel trauma associated with the use of Lap Pak. A second objective was to assess the performance of Lap Pak. Overall, three of the surgeons (60%) had an overall favorable impression of Lap Pak in terms of its performance during radical cystectomies. Two of the surgeons (40%) had a neutral impression of Lap Pak those and none of the surgeons expressed a negative impression. Three of the surgeons indicated they would use the current version of Lap Pak on all future abdominal cases that required abdominal packing. Overall, Lap Pak provided effective retraction of the abdominal contents in 75% of all cases investigated by the surgeons. The surgeons who did not have a favorable impression of Lap Pak used a Balfour retractor for exposure. It was also reported that the device was slightly more cumbersome to position in patients with very low and very high BMIs. The relationship between ease of use and BMI was not universally observed.