BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a new advance wherein laparoscopic surgery is carried out through a single small incision hidden in the umbilicus. Advantages of this technique over standard laparoscopy are still under investigation. The objective of this study is to describe the short-term outcomes of SILS cholecystectomy in a single community-based institution. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database for all patients who underwent SILS cholecystectomy was carried out. Both true single-incision and dual-incision (training) cases were included in the analysis. Operative and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighty SILS cholecystectomies (4 dual incision and 76 single incision) were performed from May 30, 2008 to April 23, 2009 (indications: 48 stones, 20 cholecystitis, 11 biliary dyskinesia, and 1 polyp). Mean body mass index (BMI) was 26.5 kg/m(2) (range 17.3-39.1 kg/m(2)), mean operating room (OR) time was 69.5 min (range 29-126 min), mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 5 cc, and mean incision length was 1.6 cm. There were no open conversions, but there were six conversions to dual-port and three conversions to four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy due to poor visualization. Complications include three bile leaks managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous drainage (3.7%). Two leaks were from accessory ducts and one was from a cystic duct stump. Number of days of postoperative oral narcotic use was described as none in 11 patients (23%), minimal (1 day) in 21 patients (45%), moderate (1-3 days) in 6 patients (13%), and heavy (≥ 4 days) in 9 patients (19%), with mean follow-up of 4.7 months in 60 patients. CONCLUSION: SILS cholecystectomy is feasible, with acceptable morbidity. Although not directly compared in this study, postoperative recovery appears shorter than after standard laparoscopy, but more studies are needed.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a new advance wherein laparoscopic surgery is carried out through a single small incision hidden in the umbilicus. Advantages of this technique over standard laparoscopy are still under investigation. The objective of this study is to describe the short-term outcomes of SILS cholecystectomy in a single community-based institution. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database for all patients who underwent SILS cholecystectomy was carried out. Both true single-incision and dual-incision (training) cases were included in the analysis. Operative and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighty SILS cholecystectomies (4 dual incision and 76 single incision) were performed from May 30, 2008 to April 23, 2009 (indications: 48 stones, 20 cholecystitis, 11 biliary dyskinesia, and 1 polyp). Mean body mass index (BMI) was 26.5 kg/m(2) (range 17.3-39.1 kg/m(2)), mean operating room (OR) time was 69.5 min (range 29-126 min), mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 5 cc, and mean incision length was 1.6 cm. There were no open conversions, but there were six conversions to dual-port and three conversions to four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy due to poor visualization. Complications include three bile leaks managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and percutaneous drainage (3.7%). Two leaks were from accessory ducts and one was from a cystic duct stump. Number of days of postoperative oral narcotic use was described as none in 11 patients (23%), minimal (1 day) in 21 patients (45%), moderate (1-3 days) in 6 patients (13%), and heavy (≥ 4 days) in 9 patients (19%), with mean follow-up of 4.7 months in 60 patients. CONCLUSION: SILS cholecystectomy is feasible, with acceptable morbidity. Although not directly compared in this study, postoperative recovery appears shorter than after standard laparoscopy, but more studies are needed.
Authors: Erica R Podolsky; Steven J Rottman; Honesto Poblete; Stephanie A King; Paul G Curcillo Journal: J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 1.878
Authors: Sharona B Ross; Jonathan M Hernandez; Steffanie Sperry; Connor A Morton; Michelle Vice; Kenneth Luberice; Alexander S Rosemurgy Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2011-12-09 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Kamran Ahmed; Tim T Wang; Vanash M Patel; Kamal Nagpal; James Clark; Mariam Ali; Samer Deeba; Hutan Ashrafian; Ara Darzi; Thanos Athanasiou; Paraskevas Paraskeva Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-07-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mark Bignell; Andrew Hindmarsh; Haritharan Nageswaran; Bhavani Mothe; Andrew Jenkinson; David Mahon; Michael Rhodes Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-03-18 Impact factor: 4.584
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