Literature DB >> 26328034

Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A non-randomized, age-matched single center trial.

Yoen Tk van der Linden1, Koop Bosscha1, Hubert A Prins1, Daniel J Lips1.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare the safety of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomies with standard four-port cholecystectomies.
METHODS: Between January 2011 and December 2012 datas were gathered from 100 consecutive patients who received a single-port cholecystectomy. Patient baseline characteristics of all 100 single-port cholecystectomies were collected (body mass index, age, etc.) in a database. This group was compared with 100 age-matched patients who underwent a conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the same period. Retrospectively, per- and postoperative data were added. The two groups were compared to each other using independent t-tests and χ(2)-tests, P values below 0.05 were considered significantly different.
RESULTS: No differences were found between both groups regarding baseline characteristics. Operating time was significantly shorter in the total single-port group (42 min vs 62 min, P < 0.05); in procedures performed by surgeons the same trend was seen (45 min vs 59 min, P < 0.05). Peroperative complications between both groups were equal (3 in the single-port group vs 5 in the multiport group; P = 0.42). Although not significant less postoperative complications were seen in the single-port group compared with the multiport group (3 vs 9; P = 0.07). No statistically significant differences were found between both groups with regard to length of hospital stay, readmissions and mortality.
CONCLUSION: Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has the potential to be a safe technique with a low complication rate, short in-hospital stay and comparable operating time. Single-port cholecystectomy provides the patient an almost non-visible scar while preserving optimal quality of surgery. Further prospective studies are needed to prove the safety of the single-port technique.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cholecystectomy; Feasibility; Laparoscopy; Minimal invasive; Safety; Single-port

Year:  2015        PMID: 26328034      PMCID: PMC4550841          DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v7.i8.145

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastrointest Surg


  30 in total

1.  Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Jun Ma; Maria A Cassera; Georg O Spaun; Chet W Hammill; Paul D Hansen; Shaghayegh Aliabadi-Wahle
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 2.  Meta-analysis of randomized trials on single-incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.

Authors:  Stavros A Antoniou; Oliver O Koch; George A Antoniou; Konstantinos Lasithiotakis; George E Chalkiadakis; Rudolph Pointner; Frank A Granderath
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2013-11-09       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  Successful total shift from multiport to single-port laparoscopic surgery in low anterior resection of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Say-June Kim; Byung-Jo Choi; Sang Chul Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-05-23       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Single-port cholecystectomy versus multi-port cholecystectomy: a prospective cohort study with 222 patients.

Authors:  Markus J Wagner; Hans Kern; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Jan Mehler; Michael H Schoenberg
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.352

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

6.  Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparison with the gold standard.

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

7.  Randomized clinical study for assessment of incision characteristics and pain associated with LESS versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Fernando Athayde Veloso Madureira; José Eduardo Ferreira Manso; Delta Madureira Fo; Antonio Carlos Garrido Iglesias
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-10-06       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Single-incision versus conventional laparoscopic appendectomy in 688 patients: a retrospective comparative analysis.

Authors:  Hung-Hua Liang; Chin-Sheng Hung; Weu Wang; Ka-Wai Tam; Chun-Chao Chang; Hui-Hsiung Liu; Ko-Li Yen; Po-Li Wei
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.089

9.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the obese: results with the traditional and fundus-first technique.

Authors:  Massimiliano Tuveri; Valentina Borsezio; Pietro Giorgio Calò; Fabio Medas; Augusto Tuveri; Angelo Nicolosi
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 1.878

10.  Randomized clinical trial of single-port, minilaparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  S Saad; V Strassel; S Sauerland
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  3 in total

1.  Single center cost analysis of single-port and conventional laparoscopic surgical treatment in colorectal malignant diseases.

Authors:  Yoen T K van der Linden; Johannes A Govaert; Marta Fiocco; Wouter A van Dijk; Daniel J Lips; Hubert A Prins
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2016-10-27       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  A Comparative Study of Needlescopic Grasper Assisted Single Incision versus Three-Port versus Pure Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Chai-Won Kim; Soo-Ho Lee; Kee-Hwan Kim
Journal:  J Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2019-12-15

3.  New advantageous tool in single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the needle grasper.

Authors:  Turgut Donmez; Sinan Uzman; Sina Ferahman; Suleyman Demiryas; Engin Hatipoglu; Server Sezgin Uludag; Dogan Yildirim
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2016-03-31       Impact factor: 1.195

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.