Literature DB >> 25114887

Four-channel single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a snake retractor: comparison between 3- and 4-channel SILC 4-channel single incision cholecystectomy.

Nak Song Sung1, In Seok Choi1, Ju Ik Moon1, Yu Mi Ra1, Sang Eok Lee1, Won Jun Choi1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is a widely used method of performing cholecystectomy. A common technique used in SILC is a 3-channel method. However, exposure of Calot's triangle is limited in conventional 3-channel SILC. Therefore, we herein report the adequacy and feasibility of 4-channel SILC using a snake retractor.
METHODS: Four hundred and fifteen SILC cases were performed between April 2010 and February 2013. We performed 326 SILC cases between April 2010 and September 2012 using the 3-channel method. We introduced a snake retractor for liver traction in October 2012, and 89 cases of 4-channel SILC using snake retractor have been performed since.
RESULTS: Thirty patients (9.2%) in the 3-channel SILC group, and 23 patients (25.8%) in the 4-channel SILC group, were treated with percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage insertion because of acute inflammation of the gallbladder (GB) before operation (P < 0.001). The mean operating time was 53.0 ± 25.8 minutes in the 3-channel SILC group and 51.9 ± 18.6 minutes in the 4-channel SILC group (P = 0.709). In the 3-channel SILC group, mean hospital stay was 3.0 ± 3.3 days whereas it was 2.6 ± 0.9 days in the 4-channel SILC group (P = 0.043). There were a total 9 cases (2.1%) of additional port usages, 6 cases (1.8%) in the 3-channel SILC group and 3 cases (3.4%) in the 4-channel SILC group (P = 0.411), due to cystic artery bleeding and bile leakage from gallbladder bed, but there were no open conversions.
CONCLUSION: Benign diseases of the GB can be operated on using SILC with the 4-channel method using a snake retractor.

Entities:  

Keywords:  4-channel; Cholecystectomy; Laparoscopy; Single incision

Year:  2014        PMID: 25114887      PMCID: PMC4127901          DOI: 10.4174/astr.2014.87.2.81

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res        ISSN: 2288-6575            Impact factor:   1.859


  21 in total

1.  Randomized clinical trial of single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: short-term operative outcomes.

Authors:  Zhan Guo Cao; Wang Cai; Ming Fang Qin; Hong Zhi Zhao; Ping Yue; Yang Li
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 1.719

2.  Transvaginal laparoscopically assisted endoscopic cholecystectomy: a hybrid approach to natural orifice surgery.

Authors:  Marc Bessler; Peter D Stevens; Luca Milone; Manish Parikh; Dennis Fowler
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2007-09-24       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Prospective randomized comparative study of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Eric C H Lai; George P C Yang; Chung Ngai Tang; Patricia C L Yih; Oliver C Y Chan; Michael K W Li
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 2.565

4.  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

Review 5.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  S Trastulli; R Cirocchi; J Desiderio; S Guarino; A Santoro; A Parisi; G Noya; C Boselli
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2012-11-12       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 6.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Thomas C Hall; Ashley R Dennison; Dilraj K Bilku; Matthew S Metcalfe; Giuseppe Garcea
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2012-07

Review 7.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Muhammad S Sajid; Nikhil Ladwa; Lorain Kalra; Kristian K Hutson; Krishna K Singh; Mazin Sayegh
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Laparo-endoscopic single site cholecystectomy versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a pilot randomized trial.

Authors:  Marco Maria Lirici; Andrea Domenico Califano; Pierluigi Angelini; Francesco Corcione
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2011-05-19       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the first 100 outpatients.

Authors:  Jose Erbella; Gary M Bunch
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using Konyang Standard Method.

Authors:  Jong Il Son; In Seok Choi; Ju Ik Moon; Yu Mi Ra; Sang Eok Lee; Won Jun Choi; Dae Sung Yoon
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 1.859

View more
  3 in total

1.  Risk factors for conversion to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Sung Gon Kim; Ju Ik Moon; In Seok Choi; Sang Eok Lee; Nak Song Sung; Ki Won Chun; Hye Yoon Lee; Dae Sung Yoon; Won Jun Choi
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2016-05-30       Impact factor: 1.859

2.  One-year experience with single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a single center: without the use of inverse triangulation.

Authors:  Yun Beom Ryu; Jung Woo Lee; Yo Han Park; Man Sup Lim; Ji Woong Cho; Jang Yong Jeon
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 1.859

3.  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

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.