Literature DB >> 16512468

Minilaparoscopic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomised controlled trial.

Aman Gupta1, U K Shrivastava, Praveen Kumar, Deepa Burman.   

Abstract

Since its introduction in 1987, the technique of cholecystectomy has continued to undergo evolution. Surgeons have reduced the port size and number or both to achieve improvement in postoperative pain control, rapid return to activity and better cosmetic results. Therefore, this study was done to compare the standard 4 port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with the 3 port laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a 5 mm telescope instead of 10 mm telescope (mini laparoscopic cholecystectomy - MLC). Forty patients were randomised to each group. Mean operating time, intraoperative and postoperative complications, mean period to resume walking, eating and return to normal activities and mean hospital stay were similar in the two groups. The level of postoperative pain was significantly lower in the MLC group. Patients who underwent MLC required a significantly lower dose of analgesics. In conclusion mini laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a feasible and safe procedure with less postoperative pain and better cosmesis and without increased complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16512468

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trop Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0250-636X


  9 in total

1.  Evaluation of invasiveness in single-site laparoscopic colectomy, using "the PainVision™ system" for quantitative analysis of pain sensation.

Authors:  Masayuki Hiraki; Ichiro Takemasa; Mamoru Uemura; Naotsugu Haraguchi; Junichi Nishimura; Taishi Hata; Tsunekazu Mizushima; Hirofumi Yamamoto; Yuichiro Doki; Masaki Mori
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Three-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Shaoliang Sun; Kehu Yang; Mingtai Gao; Xiaodong He; Jinhui Tian; Bin Ma
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  A comparison of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional three-port laparoscopic appendectomy: from the diagnosis to the hospital cost.

Authors:  Seung Min Baik; Kyung Sook Hong; Yong Il Kim
Journal:  J Korean Surg Soc       Date:  2013-07-25

Review 4.  Is smaller necessarily better? A systematic review comparing the effects of minilaparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy on patient outcomes.

Authors:  Rory McCloy; Delia Randall; Stephan A Schug; Henrik Kehlet; Christian Simanski; Francis Bonnet; Frederic Camu; Barrie Fischer; Girish Joshi; Narinder Rawal; Edmund A M Neugebauer
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: a preliminary experience.

Authors:  Elie Chouillard; Arnaud Dache; Adriana Torcivia; Nada Helmy; Ivan Ruseykin; Andrew Gumbs
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Low-Friction Minilaparoscopy Outperforms Regular 5-mm and 3-mm Instruments for Precise Tasks.

Authors:  Wood A Firme; Gustavo L Carvalho; Diego L Lima; Vladmir Goldstein de Paula Lopes; Isabelle D Montandon; Flavio Santos Filho; Phillip P Shadduck
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

7.  The efficacy and safety of different kinds of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a network meta analysis of 43 randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Lun Li; Jinhui Tian; Hongliang Tian; Rao Sun; Quan Wang; Kehu Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Is mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy any better than the gold standard?: A comparative study.

Authors:  Haris R Shaikh; Asad Abbas; Salik Aleem; Miqdad R Lakhani
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2017 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.407

9.  Identification and categorisation of relevant outcomes for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease: in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set.

Authors:  Moira Cruickshank; Rumana Newlands; Jane Blazeby; Irfan Ahmed; Mohamed Bekheit; Miriam Brazzelli; Bernard Croal; Karen Innes; Craig Ramsay; Katie Gillies
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.