Literature DB >> 23276249

Mini-laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

Luís Filipe Abreu de Carvalho1, Kjell Fierens, Marc Kint.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported faster recoveries, lower pain scores, and superior cosmetic results after mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC). The purpose of this study was to perform a randomized controlled trial, comparing MLC with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis were randomized between the two groups: 23 having undergone LC and 18 MLC. The primary end point was postoperative pain, which was evaluated during the first 24 hours postoperatively, using the numerical rating scale. Patient satisfaction with the cosmetic result was evaluated after 1 month.
RESULTS: The two groups were comparable concerning age, sex, and body mass index. The median operating time (42 minutes versus 45 minutes; P=.386), complication rate, and duration of hospital stay (2 days; P=.611) were similar in both groups. The level of postoperative pain was analogous at every time. There was no difference in the analgesic requirements or cosmesis.
CONCLUSIONS: MLC showed similar results concerning postoperative pain and did not lead to a greater patient satisfaction with the cosmetic result, compared with LC. MLC did not take longer to perform, nor was it associated with major complications or a high conversion rate. MLC is a safe and feasible technique for the treatment of gallbladder disease in elective patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23276249     DOI: 10.1089/lap.2012.0349

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A        ISSN: 1092-6429            Impact factor:   1.878


  7 in total

1.  A SAGES technology and value assessment and pediatric committee evaluation of mini-laparoscopic instrumentation.

Authors:  Thom E Lobe; Lucian Panait; Giovanni Dapri; Peter M Denk; David Pechman; Luca Milone; Stefan Scholz; Bethany J Slater
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-08-19       Impact factor: 3.453

2.  Ultrasound-guided double-tract percutaneous cholecystostomy combined with a choledochoscope for performing cholecystolithotomies in high-risk surgical patients.

Authors:  Tao Wang; Tao Chen; Shu Zou; Ning Lin; Hong-yin Liang; Hong-tao Yan; Nan-lin Li; Li-ye Liu; Hao Luo; Qi Chen; Wei-hui Liu; Li-jun Tang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Laparoscopic, three-port and SILS cholecystectomy: a retrospective study.

Authors:  A Agrusa; G Romano; G Cucinella; G Cocorullo; S Bonventre; G Salamone; G Di Buono; G De Vita; G Frazzetta; D Chianetta; V Sorce; G Bellanca; G Gulotta
Journal:  G Chir       Date:  2013 Sep-Oct

4.  Hybrid Transvaginal NOTES and Mini-Laparoscopic Colectomy: Benefit Through Synergy.

Authors:  Jayson M Moloney; Philip S L Gan
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2016 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

5.  Minilaparoscopic over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy and appendectomy: is it worth it? A case series and review of literature.

Authors:  Davina Perini; Alessio Giordano; Tommaso Guagni; Stefano Cantafio
Journal:  J Surg Case Rep       Date:  2022-04-04

6.  The efficacy and safety of different kinds of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a network meta analysis of 43 randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Lun Li; Jinhui Tian; Hongliang Tian; Rao Sun; Quan Wang; Kehu Yang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Identification and categorisation of relevant outcomes for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease: in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set.

Authors:  Moira Cruickshank; Rumana Newlands; Jane Blazeby; Irfan Ahmed; Mohamed Bekheit; Miriam Brazzelli; Bernard Croal; Karen Innes; Craig Ramsay; Katie Gillies
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.692

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.