Literature DB >> 22076602

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

Ferdinando Agresta1, Natalino Bedin.   

Abstract

Laparoscopy has rapidly emerged as the preferred surgical approach in a number of different diseases because it ensures correct diagnoses and appropriate treatment. The use of mini-instruments (5 mm or less in diameter) and, when possible, the reduction of the number of trocars used might be its natural evolution. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a gold standard technique. The aim of the present work is to illustrate the results of the prospective experience of minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy (5 mm MLC) performed at our institution. Between August 2005 and July 2010 a total of 932 patients (mean age 45 years) underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Amongst them, 887 (95.1%) were operated on with a 5 mm-three trocar approach and in the remaining 45 cases (4.8%) a 3 mm trocar was used. The primary endpoint was the feasibility rate of the techniques. Secondary endpoints were safety and the impact of the techniques on duration of laparoscopy. In two cases conversion to laparotomy was necessary. We needed to add a fourth-5 mm trocar in the 10.7% of the cases (95 patients) in the 5 mm MLC. There were two cases of redo-laparoscopy in this group due to bile leakage from the cystic duct in one case, and to bleeding from the gallbladder bed in the other. Minor occurrence ranged as high as 2.1% in the 5 mm-MLC group, while it was nil in the 3 mm-MLC patients. The present experience shows that the 5 mm-three trocars MLC is a safe, easy, effective and reproducible approach to gallbladder diseases. Such features make the technique a challenging alternative to conventional laparoscopy both in the acute and the scheduled setting. We consider the 3 mm-MLC approach suitable only in selected cases, young and thin patients, due to the fragility of the smaller instruments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22076602     DOI: 10.1007/s13304-011-0123-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Updates Surg        ISSN: 2038-131X


  40 in total

1.  Two-trocar laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a reproducible technique.

Authors:  D Lomanto; L De Angelis; V Ceci; G Dalsasso; J So; F M Frattaroli; R Muthiah; V Speranza
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 1.719

2.  What is the value of telerobotic technology in gastrointestinal surgery?

Authors:  A Perez; M J Zinner; S W Ashley; D C Brooks; E E Whang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-01-18       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Needlescopic appendectomy as a routine procedure: "Just because you can?" or "Just because you cannot?".

Authors:  W T Ng; C K Kong; S Tse; S K Hui; Y S Sze
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 1.719

4.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparative study.

Authors:  D Nio; W A Bemelman; O R C Busch; B C Vrouenraets; D J Gouma
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-01-14       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  [Minilaparoscopic appendectomy: which indications?].

Authors:  Luigi Francesco Ciardo; Ferdinando Agresta; Ivan Michelet; Natalino Bedin
Journal:  Chir Ital       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct

6.  An "all 5-mm ports" selective approach to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and anti-reflux surgery.

Authors:  Yesar El-Dhuwaib; Ayman M Hamade; M Eyad Issa; Basel M Balbisi; Ghalib Abid; Basil J Ammori
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 1.719

7.  Prospective randomized blinded trial of pulmonary function, pain, and cosmetic results after laparoscopic vs. microlaparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  W Schwenk; J Neudecker; J Mall; B Böhm; J M Müller
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Three-port microlaparoscopic cholecystectomy in 159 patients.

Authors:  P L Leggett; C D Bissell; R Churchman-Winn; C Ahn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-12-12       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Two-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  C M Poon; K W Chan; D W H Lee; K C Chan; C W Ko; H Y Cheung; K W Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-07-21       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Needlescopic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A prospective study of 60 patients.

Authors:  Pedro Henrique Oliveira Cabral; Ivan Tramujas da Costa e Silva; Janaína Vieira Melo; Felicidad Santos Gimenez; Celso Rômulo Barbosa Cabral; Ana Paula Calheiros de Lima
Journal:  Acta Cir Bras       Date:  2008 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.388

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: consensus conference-based guidelines.

Authors:  Ferdinando Agresta; Fabio Cesare Campanile; Nereo Vettoretto; Gianfranco Silecchia; Carlo Bergamini; Pietro Maida; Pietro Lombari; Piero Narilli; Domenico Marchi; Alessandro Carrara; Maria Grazia Esposito; Stefania Fiume; Giuseppe Miranda; Simona Barlera; Marina Davoli
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.445

2.  Micro-laparoscopic colectomy: initial experience.

Authors:  Christopher M Foglia; Stuart Blackwood
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  [Minilaparoscopy with 5 mm optics and 3 mm trocars].

Authors:  J Schmidt
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 0.955

4.  MINILAPAROSCOPIC APPENDECTOMY.

Authors:  Lúcio Américo Della Coletta; Bruno Ziade Gil; Renato Morato Zanatto
Journal:  Arq Bras Cir Dig       Date:  2016-03

5.  Systematic review of cystic duct closure techniques in relation to prevention of bile duct leakage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Aafke H van Dijk; Stijn van Roessel; Philip R de Reuver; Djamila Boerma; Marja A Boermeester; Sandra C Donkervoort
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-09-27
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.