BACKGROUND: Recent technological advances in single-incision platforms have allowed many general surgeons to add single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) to their armamentarium. However, adopting new surgical technologies comes at a cost to the patient and the surgeon. This study compared retrospective case-matched SILC and traditional multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MILC) to evaluate the effects of SILC on perioperative outcomes and patient cost. METHODS: The study compared 50 patients who underwent SILC with a case-matched population of individuals who underwent traditional MILC. The SILC technique was performed using one of three commercially available single-incision platforms currently used for single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) cholecystectomies. All the SILS platforms were placed in a 2-cm supraumbilical incision. All statistical analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel 2008 for Macintosh, with statistical significance determined by a p value of 0.05 or less. RESULTS: The average operative time was 42 min for the SILC group and 45 min for the MILC group. The difference was not statistically significant. Similarly, the average estimated blood loss was 14 ml for the SILC group and 11 ml for the MILC group. Again, the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, the body mass index (BMI) did not differ statistically between the SILC group (28.4 kg/m(2)) and the MILC group (32.2 kg/m(2)). The average patient cost was $18,447 for SILC and $17,701 for MILC, yielding a cost difference of $746. This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: At the authors' institution, SILS cholecystectomy was performed with blood loss, operating room time, and cost equal to that for MILC. Further research is necessary to assess the economic feasibility of SILC and the trade-off of cost with the improved cosmesis, decreased pain, greater patient satisfaction, reduced postoperative analgesic requirement, and faster return to work to determine the overall value and superiority of SILC compared with MILC.
BACKGROUND: Recent technological advances in single-incision platforms have allowed many general surgeons to add single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) to their armamentarium. However, adopting new surgical technologies comes at a cost to the patient and the surgeon. This study compared retrospective case-matched SILC and traditional multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MILC) to evaluate the effects of SILC on perioperative outcomes and patient cost. METHODS: The study compared 50 patients who underwent SILC with a case-matched population of individuals who underwent traditional MILC. The SILC technique was performed using one of three commercially available single-incision platforms currently used for single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) cholecystectomies. All the SILS platforms were placed in a 2-cm supraumbilical incision. All statistical analyses were performed using Microsoft Excel 2008 for Macintosh, with statistical significance determined by a p value of 0.05 or less. RESULTS: The average operative time was 42 min for the SILC group and 45 min for the MILC group. The difference was not statistically significant. Similarly, the average estimated blood loss was 14 ml for the SILC group and 11 ml for the MILC group. Again, the difference was not statistically significant. Moreover, the body mass index (BMI) did not differ statistically between the SILC group (28.4 kg/m(2)) and the MILC group (32.2 kg/m(2)). The average patient cost was $18,447 for SILC and $17,701 for MILC, yielding a cost difference of $746. This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: At the authors' institution, SILS cholecystectomy was performed with blood loss, operating room time, and cost equal to that for MILC. Further research is necessary to assess the economic feasibility of SILC and the trade-off of cost with the improved cosmesis, decreased pain, greater patient satisfaction, reduced postoperative analgesic requirement, and faster return to work to determine the overall value and superiority of SILC compared with MILC.
Authors: Steven E Hodgett; Jonathan M Hernandez; Connor A Morton; Sharona B Ross; Michael Albrink; Alexander S Rosemurgy Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-11-22 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Sigi Joseph; B Todd Moore; G Brent Sorensen; John W Earley; Fengming Tang; Phil Jones; Kimberly M Brown Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-04-13 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Jonathan M Hernandez; Connor A Morton; Sharona Ross; Michael Albrink; Alexander S Rosemurgy Journal: Am Surg Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 0.688