S Saad1, V Strassel, S Sauerland. 1. Department of General Surgery, Clinic Gummersbach, Academic Hospital University Cologne, Gummersbach, Germany. stefansaad@aol.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This three-armed randomized clinical trial, with blinding of patients and outcome assessors, tested the hypothesis that single-port (SP) and/or minilaparoscopic (ML) cholecystectomy are superior to conventional laparoscopic (CL) cholecystectomy. METHODS:Patients eligible for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to SP, ML or CL procedures. The primary outcome was pain measured on a visual analogue scale twice daily during the blinded period. Secondary outcomes included duration of operation, technical performance score, complications, quality of life, cosmesis and patient satisfaction. Postoperative follow-up lasted 1 year. RESULTS:A total of 105 patients were randomized, 35 in each group. One conversion from a SP to a CL technique was necessary in a patient with chronic cholecystitis. Pain intensity was similar in the three groups, both during the blinded period (day 0 to 3; P = 0·865) and over the whole 7-day evaluation period (P = 0·911). The presence of clinically relevant between-group differences was ruled out (95 per cent confidence interval + 1·0 to - 0·5 for difference in pain scores between SP and CL groups, and - 0·8 to + 0·6 between ML and CL groups). Operating time was significantly longer for SP and ML than for CL cholecystectomy (P = 0·001). Postoperative complications included injury to the diaphragm (1), choledocholithiasis (1), wound infection (5) and hernia (1), all after SP cholecystectomy (P = 0·001). Twelve-month follow-up was complete in 99 patients (94·3 per cent). Cosmesis as rated by patients was significantly better at 6 months after SP and ML procedures (P = 0·043), but no difference was observed at 12 months (P = 0·229). CONCLUSION:SP and ML cholecystectomy had no advantage over the CL approach in terms of postoperative outcome. REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00000302 (German Registry of Clinical Trials).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: This three-armed randomized clinical trial, with blinding of patients and outcome assessors, tested the hypothesis that single-port (SP) and/or minilaparoscopic (ML) cholecystectomy are superior to conventional laparoscopic (CL) cholecystectomy. METHODS:Patients eligible for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to SP, ML or CL procedures. The primary outcome was pain measured on a visual analogue scale twice daily during the blinded period. Secondary outcomes included duration of operation, technical performance score, complications, quality of life, cosmesis and patient satisfaction. Postoperative follow-up lasted 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were randomized, 35 in each group. One conversion from a SP to a CL technique was necessary in a patient with chronic cholecystitis. Pain intensity was similar in the three groups, both during the blinded period (day 0 to 3; P = 0·865) and over the whole 7-day evaluation period (P = 0·911). The presence of clinically relevant between-group differences was ruled out (95 per cent confidence interval + 1·0 to - 0·5 for difference in pain scores between SP and CL groups, and - 0·8 to + 0·6 between ML and CL groups). Operating time was significantly longer for SP and ML than for CL cholecystectomy (P = 0·001). Postoperative complications included injury to the diaphragm (1), choledocholithiasis (1), wound infection (5) and hernia (1), all after SP cholecystectomy (P = 0·001). Twelve-month follow-up was complete in 99 patients (94·3 per cent). Cosmesis as rated by patients was significantly better at 6 months after SP and ML procedures (P = 0·043), but no difference was observed at 12 months (P = 0·229). CONCLUSION:SP and ML cholecystectomy had no advantage over the CL approach in terms of postoperative outcome. REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00000302 (German Registry of Clinical Trials).
Authors: Michael Clerveus; Antonio Morandeira-Rivas; Carlos Moreno-Sanz; Maria Luz Herrero-Bogajo; Joaquin Salvelio Picazo-Yeste; Gloria Tadeo-Ruiz Journal: World J Surg Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 3.352