Literature DB >> 23230556

Clinical results between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective case-matched analysis in single institution.

Gum O Jung1, Dong Eun Park, Kwon Mook Chae.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to compare single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) with respect to clinical outcomes.
METHODS: Patients with less than a 28 body mass index (BMI) and a benign gall bladder disease were enrolled in this study. From January 2011 to February 2012, 30 consecutive patients who underwent SILC were compared with 30 patients who underwent CLC during the same period. In this study, all operations were performed by one surgeon. In each group, patient characteristics and perioperative data were collected.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the preoperative characteristics. There was no significant difference in the postoperative laboratory result (alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase), number of conversion and complication cases, and length of hospital stay. The operation time was significantly longer in the SILC group (78.5 ± 17.8 minutes in SILC group vs. 34.9 ± 5.75 minutes in CLC group, P < 0.0001). The total nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug usage during perioperative period showed significantly higher in SILC groups (162 ± 51 mg in the SILC group vs. 138 ± 30 mg in the CLC group), but there was no statistically significant difference in opioid usage between two groups. The postoperative pain score was significantly higher in the SILC group at second, third, and tenth postoperative day. Satisfaction of postoperative wound showed superiority in SILC group.
CONCLUSION: SILC seems to be an acceptable alternative to CLC with acceptable results. However, it is not enough to propose any real benefits of SILC when compared with CLC in terms of operation time and postoperative pain.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Cosmetic outcomes; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Year:  2012        PMID: 23230556      PMCID: PMC3514480          DOI: 10.4174/jkss.2012.83.6.374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Korean Surg Soc        ISSN: 1226-0053


  19 in total

1.  Comparison of cosmetic outcome between single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an objective study.

Authors:  Pankaj Garg; Jai Deep Thakur; Navin C Raina; Garima Mittal; Mahak Garg; Vikas Gupta
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 1.878

2.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy learning curve experience seen in a single institution.

Authors:  Elyssa J Feinberg; Emmanuel Agaba; Michelle L Feinberg; Diego Camacho; Pratibha Vemulapalli
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.719

3.  Randomized clinical trial of laparoendoscopic single-site versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  P Bucher; F Pugin; N C Buchs; S Ostermann; P Morel
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy : scarless cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Tae Ho Hong; Young Kyoung You; Keun Ho Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a surgeon's initial experience with 56 consecutive cases and a review of the literature.

Authors:  Kurt E Roberts; Daniel Solomon; Andrew J Duffy; Robert L Bell
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-12-05       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  G Navarra; E Pozza; S Occhionorelli; P Carcoforo; I Donini
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  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

8.  Single-incision multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: things to overcome.

Authors:  Hyung-Joon Han; Sae-Byeol Choi; Wan-Bae Kim; Sang-Yong Choi
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2011-01

9.  Erich Mühe and the rejection of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (1985): a surgeon ahead of his time.

Authors:  G S Litynski
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  1998 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

10.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial evaluation of a large series of patients.

Authors:  Homero Rivas; Esteban Varela; Daniel Scott
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-12-25       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  10 in total

1.  Dual-incision laparoscopic spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Eun Young Kim; Young Kyoung You; Dong Goo Kim; Soo Ho Lee; Jae Hyun Han; Sung Kyun Park; Gun Hyung Na; Tae Ho Hong
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2015-02-27       Impact factor: 1.859

2.  Triple, double- and single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective study.

Authors:  Mehmet Zafer Sabuncuoglu; Mehmet Fatih Benzin; Tugrul Cakir; Isa Sozen; Aylin Sabuncuoglu
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2014-10-15

3.  A multicenter study of initial experience with single-incision robotic cholecystectomies (SIRC) demonstrating a high success rate in 465 cases.

Authors:  Anthony Gonzalez; Christian Hernandez Murcia; Rey Romero; Ernesto Escobar; Pedro Garcia; Gail Walker; Michelle Gallas; Eugene Dickens; Bruce McIntosh; William Norwood; Keith Kim; Jorge Rabaza; Don Parris
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-11-05       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for single-incision cholecystectomy: an updated systematic review.

Authors:  Weier Wang; Xiaodong Sun; Fangqiang Wei
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-04-22

5.  Transumbilical scarless surgery with thoracic trocar: easy and low-cost.

Authors:  Ibrahim Uygun; Mehmet Hanifi Okur; Bahattin Aydogdu; Mehmet Serif Arslan; Hasan Cimen; Selcuk Otcu
Journal:  J Korean Surg Soc       Date:  2013-05-28

6.  Comparison of outcomes after single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in relation to patient body mass index.

Authors:  Eun Jeong Jang; Young Hoon Roh; Chan Joong Choi; Min Chan Kim; Kwan Woo Kim; Hong Jo Choi
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2014 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

7.  Single-Port Laparoscopic and Robotic Cholecystectomy in Obesity (>25 kg/m2).

Authors:  Eun Jeong Jang; Young Hoon Roh; Chang Moo Kang; Dong Kyun Kim; Ki Jae Park
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2019 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.172

8.  Randomized controlled trial of single incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy with long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Denis Klein; Atakan Görkem Barutcu; Dino Kröll; Maik Kilian; Johann Pratschke; Roland Raakow; Jonas Raakow
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2020-06-29       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  Risk factors for prolonged operative time in single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Seong Uk Cheon; Ju Ik Moon; In Seok Choi
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 1.859

10.  The comparison of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Ugur Deveci; Umut Barbaros; Mahmut Sertan Kapakli; Manuk Norayk Manukyan; Selçuk Simşek; Abut Kebudi; Selçuk Mercan
Journal:  J Korean Surg Soc       Date:  2013-11-26
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.