Literature DB >> 20174950

Different pain scores in single transumbilical incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

Evangelos C Tsimoyiannis1, Konstantinos E Tsimogiannis, George Pappas-Gogos, Charalampos Farantos, Nikolaos Benetatos, Paraskevi Mavridou, Adamantia Manataki.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The attempt to further reduce operative trauma in laparoscopic cholecystectomy has led to new techniques such as natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS). These new techniques are considered to be painless procedures, but no published studies investigate the possibility of different pain scores in these new techniques versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In this randomized control study, we investigated pain scores in SILS cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients (34 women and 6 men) were randomly assigned to two groups. In group A (n = 20) four-port classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed. Patients in group B (n = 20) underwent SILS cholecystectomy. In all patients, preincisional local infiltration of ropivacaine around the trocar wounds was performed. Infusion of ropivacaine solution in the right subdiaphragmatic area at the beginning of the procedure plus normal saline infusion in the same area at the end of the procedure was performed in all patients as well. Shoulder tip and abdominal pain were registered at 2, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h postoperatively using visual analog scale (VAS).
RESULTS: Significantly lower pain scores were observed in the SILS group versus the classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy group after the first 12 h for abdominal pain, and after the first 6 h for shoulder pain. Total pain after the first 24 h was nonexistent in the SILS group. Also, requests for analgesics were significantly less in the SILS group, while no difference was observed in incidence of nausea and vomiting between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: SILS cholecystectomy, as well as the invisible scar, has significantly lower abdominal and shoulder pain scores, especially after the first 24 h postoperatively, when this pain is nonexistent. (Registration Clinical Trial number: NTC00872287, www.clinicaltrials.gov ).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20174950     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-010-0887-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  15 in total

1.  ASGE/SAGES Working Group on Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery. October 2005.

Authors:  D Rattner; A Kalloo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  A primer on natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: building a new paradigm.

Authors:  Michael F McGee; Michael J Rosen; Jeffrey Marks; Raymond P Onders; Amitabh Chak; Ashley Faulx; Victor K Chen; Jeffrey Ponsky
Journal:  Surg Innov       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.058

3.  Preincisional and intraperitoneal ropivacaine plus normal saline infusion for postoperative pain relief after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized double-blind controlled trial.

Authors:  George Pappas-Gogos; Konstandinos E Tsimogiannis; Nicolaos Zikos; Konstantinos Nikas; Adamantia Manataki; Evangelos C Tsimoyiannis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: surgery without a visible scar.

Authors:  R Tacchino; F Greco; D Matera
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-09-25       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Pain intensity following laparoscopy.

Authors:  M Korell; F Schmaus; T Strowitzki; S G Schneeweiss; H Hepp
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc       Date:  1996-10

6.  Multi-regional local anesthetic infiltration during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients receiving prophylactic multi-modal analgesia: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study.

Authors:  T Bisgaard; B Klarskov; V B Kristiansen; T Callesen; S Schulze; H Kehlet; J Rosenberg
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 5.108

7.  Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed with mini-instruments.

Authors:  L Sarli; D Iusco; S Gobbi; C Porrini; M Ferro; L Roncoroni
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Preincisional local infiltration of levobupivacaine vs ropivacaine for pain control after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  P Papagiannopoulou; H Argiriadou; M Georgiou; B Papaziogas; E Sfyra; F Kanakoudis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-10-28       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  NOTES transvaginal cholecystectomy: preliminary clinical application.

Authors:  R Zorron; L C Maggioni; L Pombo; A L Oliveira; G L Carvalho; M Filgueiras
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-11-20       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Intraperitoneal normal saline infusion for postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  E C Tsimoyiannis; P Siakas; A Tassis; E T Lekkas; H Tzourou; M Kambili
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.352

View more
  126 in total

1.  Review of 100 cases of single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Eun Jung Koo; Soon Hwa Youn; Yang Hyun Baek; Young Hoon Roh; Hong Jo Choi; Young Hoon Kim; Ghap Joong Jung
Journal:  J Korean Surg Soc       Date:  2012-02-27

2.  Patient views through the keyhole: new perspectives on single-incision vs. multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Jennifer Hey; Keith John Roberts; Gareth J Morris-Stiff; Giles J Toogood
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2012-02-13       Impact factor: 3.647

3.  Is there still any role for minilaparoscopic-cholecystectomy? A general surgeons' last five years experience over 932 cases.

Authors:  Ferdinando Agresta; Natalino Bedin
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2011-11-11

4.  Fundus-first transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a cholangiogram: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Ameet G Patel; B Murgatroyd; K Carswell; A Belgaumkar
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Comparison of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and fourth-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Guanxiong Ye; Yong Qin; Shengqian Xu; Chengjun Wu; Shi Wang; Debiao Pan; Xinmei Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-05-15

6.  Transumbilical SILC Using Conventional Laparoscopic Instruments-Initial Experience in a Resource-Limited Setting.

Authors:  Mumtaz Wani; Muddassir Shahdhar; Umar Sheikh
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2013-07-12       Impact factor: 0.656

7.  Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparison of surgical port performance in a surgical simulator with novices.

Authors:  Bernadette Brown-Clerk; Adam E de Laveaga; Chad A LaGrange; Laura M Wirth; Bethany R Lowndes; M Susan Hallbeck
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs. conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Pankaj Garg; Jai Deep Thakur; Mahak Garg; Geetha R Menon
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-05-12       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Single-incision vs three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for complicated and uncomplicated acute cholecystitis.

Authors:  Shu-Hung Chuang; Pai-Hsi Chen; Chih-Ming Chang; Chih-Sheng Lin
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Comparison between single-incision and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective trial of the Club Coelio.

Authors:  Philippe Hauters; Sylvain Auvray; Jean Luc Cardin; Marc Papillon; Jean Delaby; André Dabrowski; Dominique Framery; Alain Valverde; Raphaël Rubay; Frank Siriser; Philippe Malvaux; Jacques Landenne
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.