Literature DB >> 21858572

A retrospective wound review of standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: is there need for single-port laparoscopic surgery?

S J W Monkhouse1, E L Court, L A Beard, J Bunni, P Burgess.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to assess the satisfaction or otherwise of a proportion of the U.K. population who have undergone standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy within the past 18 months. The results should indicate whether there is potential demand for a new, improved approach to surgery.
METHODS: Patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy between October 2008 and October 2009 in two geographically separated general hospitals were identified from hospital databases. Notes were reviewed to confirm the technique and lack of conversion to an open procedure. Those who had immediate complications were excluded. A telephone questionnaire was conducted to answer questions related to long-term cosmetic and general satisfaction of the current procedure.
RESULTS: Of the patients surveyed, 93% were happy or extremely happy with the current procedure, 48% experienced some wound-related issues (pain, infection), and 65% of those were at the umbilicus (a possible reflection of location and retrieval site for gallbladder). Cosmesis was rated less important than hospital cleanliness and experience of the surgeon.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall satisfaction was high with the existing technique. The high rate of umbilical wound problems is an issue that will not be eradicated by introduction of single-port laparoscopic surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21858572     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-1863-2

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


  8 in total

1.  Critical appraisal of single port access cholecystectomy.

Authors:  M Rhodes
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 2.  Single-incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) in general surgery: a review of current practice.

Authors:  Farid Froghi; Mikael Hans Sodergren; Ara Darzi; Paraskevas Paraskeva
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 1.719

3.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  J L Cameron; T R Gadacz
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Single-port-access (SPA) cholecystectomy: a multi-institutional report of the first 297 cases.

Authors:  Paul G Curcillo; Andrew S Wu; Erica R Podolsky; Casey Graybeal; Namir Katkhouda; Alex Saenz; Robert Dunham; Steven Fendley; Marc Neff; Chad Copper; Marc Bessler; Andrew A Gumbs; Michael Norton; Antonio Iannelli; Rodney Mason; Ashkan Moazzez; Larry Cohen; Angela Mouhlas; Alex Poor
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-02-05       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Gallbladder carcinoma late metastases and incisional hernia at umbilical port site after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A Ciulla; G Romeo; G Genova; G Tomasello; G Agnello; Gaetano Cstronovo
Journal:  G Chir       Date:  2006-05

6.  Single-port cholecystectomy: small scar, short learning curve.

Authors:  Daniel Solomon; Robert L Bell; Andrew J Duffy; Kurt E Roberts
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-04-17       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  The feasibility of single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a pilot study of 20 cases.

Authors:  Prashanth P Rao; Sonali M Bhagwat; Abhay Rane; Pradeep P Rao
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.647

Review 8.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: single institution experience and literature review.

Authors:  Yasumitsu Hirano; Toru Watanabe; Tsuneyuki Uchida; Shuhei Yoshida; Kanae Tawaraya; Hideaki Kato; Osamu Hosokawa
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-01-14       Impact factor: 5.742

  8 in total
  6 in total

Review 1.  New minimally invasive approaches for cholecystectomy: Review of literature.

Authors:  Martin Gaillard; Hadrien Tranchart; Panagiotis Lainas; Ibrahim Dagher
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-10-27

2.  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

3.  Do height and weight affect the feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

Authors:  Hélène Meillat; David Jérémie Birnbaum; Régis Fara; Julien Mancini; Stéphane Berdah; Thierry Bège
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-03-11       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Conventional laparoscopy vs. single port surgery from a patient's point of view: influence of demographics and body mass index.

Authors:  Bernhard Dauser; Achim Görgei; Johannes Stopfer; Friedrich Herbst
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 1.704

5.  Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Great start and a long way to go.

Authors:  Pankaj K Garg
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.407

6.  Transvaginal/transumbilical hybrid--NOTES--versus 3-trocar needlescopic cholecystectomy: short-term results of a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Dirk Rolf Bulian; Jürgen Knuth; Nicola Cerasani; Axel Sauerwald; Rolf Lefering; Markus Maria Heiss
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 12.969

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.