Literature DB >> 27582090

Is the fourth port routinely required for laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Our three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy experience.

A Ciftci1, M B Yazicioglu2, C Tiryaki2, H T Turgut2, O Subasi2, M Ilgoz2, O Civil2, S Y Yildiz2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There have been many changes in number and place of trocars that have been described, since the first laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), but, in fact, all authors agree that laparoscopic procedure is accepted as gold standard. However, four trocars use in standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy, it has been argued that the fourth port is not necessary for grasping fundus of gallbladder so as to expose Calot's triangle. The aim of this study is to establish the safety of three-trocar LC in symptomatic gallbladder disease and also to determine the ratio of technical requirements of the fourth trocar.
METHODS: Between August 2010 and January 2016, 291 cases were operated in Kocaeli Derince Education and Research Hospital, department of general surgery for symptomatic gallbladder disease with three-port LC, and their records were examined retrospectively.
RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty patients were female (75.6 %) and seventy one (24.4 %) were male. Two hundred and eighteen of two hundred and ninety-one cases (74.92 %) were operated with three- port LC in a secure way. In seventy-three cases (25.08 %), one more port was needed to use. Mean operative time was 33.76 ± 11:18 min. (15-90 min). In these cases, major complications, such as main bile duct injury or bile leakage, that may increase the mortality and morbidity, did not occur. Only in one case (0.34 %) postoperative bleeding was seen from the liver bed, which was required exploration.
CONCLUSION: We concluded that in experienced hand, LC with three ports is safe and feasible technique if it is not endanger the course of the surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Surgical technique; Three-port LC

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27582090     DOI: 10.1007/s11845-016-1493-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ir J Med Sci        ISSN: 0021-1265            Impact factor:   1.568


  17 in total

1.  Coelioscopic cholecystectomy. Preliminary report of 36 cases.

Authors:  F Dubois; P Icard; G Berthelot; H Levard
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Three-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Shaoliang Sun; Kehu Yang; Mingtai Gao; Xiaodong He; Jinhui Tian; Bin Ma
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Carl Langenbuch and the Lazarus Hospital: events and circumstances surrounding the first cholecystectomy.

Authors:  K J Hardy
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  1993-01

4.  Is fourth port really required in laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

Authors:  Mushtaq Chalkoo; Shahnawaz Ahangar; Abdul Munnon Durrani
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 0.656

5.  One, two, or three ports in laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

Authors:  Jaime Manuel Justo-Janeiro; Gustavo Theurel Vincent; Fernando Vázquez de Lara; René de la Rosa Paredes; Eduardo Prado Orozco; Luis G Vázquez de Lara
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec

Review 6.  Miniport versus standard ports for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; Kumarakrishnan Samraj; Rajarajan Ramamoorthy; Marwan Farouk; Giuseppe Fusai; Brian R Davidson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-03-17

7.  Bleeding complications in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Incidence, mechanisms, prevention and management.

Authors:  Robin Kaushik
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 1.407

8.  Advantages of minimal incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Nasser Sakran; David Goitein; Asnat Raziel; Dan Hershko; Amir Szold
Journal:  Isr Med Assoc J       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 0.892

9.  Three-port versus standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled clinical trial in a community-based teaching hospital in eastern Nepal.

Authors:  Manoj Kumar; Chandra Shekhar Agrawal; Rakesh Kumar Gupta
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2007 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

10.  Three-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute and chronic cholecystitis.

Authors:  Dhafir Al-Azawi; Nariman Houssein; Abu Bakir Rayis; Donal McMahon; Dermot J Hehir
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2007-06-13       Impact factor: 2.102

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  [Clinical value of alternative technologies to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy - single port, reduced port, robotics, NOTES].

Authors:  M Berlet; A Jell; D Bulian; H Friess; D Wilhelm
Journal:  Chirurgie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-02-28
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.