Jun-Wen Qu1, Cheng Xin1, Gui-Yang Wang1, Zhi-Qing Yuan1, Ke-Wei Li2. 1. Department of Biliary- Pancreatic Surgery, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Shanghai 200127, China. 2. Department of Biliary- Pancreatic Surgery, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, No. 160, Pujian Road, Shanghai 200127, China. Electronic address: likewei@renji.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Single-incision laparoscopic surgery has emerged as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the clinical setting. Limited information is available on the possibility of performing single-incision laparoscopic surgery as an ambulatory procedure. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus conventional LC in an ambulatory setting. METHODS: Ninety-one patients were randomized to SILC (n = 49) or LC (n = 42). The success rate, operative duration, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, total cost, complications, pain score, vomiting, and cosmetic satisfaction of the two groups were then compared. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the operative time (46.89 ± 10.03 min in SILC vs. 37.24 ± 10.23 min in LC; P < 0.001). As compared with LC, SILC was associated with lower total costs (8012.28 ± 752.67 RMB vs. 10258.91 ± 1087.63 RMB; P < 0.001) and better cosmetic satisfaction (4.94 ± 0.24 vs. 4.74 ± 0.54; P = 0.031). There were no significant differences between-group in terms of general data, success rate, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, complications, pain score, and vomiting (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Ambulatory SILC is safe and feasible for selected patients. The advantages of SILC as compared with LC are improved cosmetic satisfaction and lower total costs.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Single-incision laparoscopic surgery has emerged as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the clinical setting. Limited information is available on the possibility of performing single-incision laparoscopic surgery as an ambulatory procedure. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus conventional LC in an ambulatory setting. METHODS: Ninety-one patients were randomized to SILC (n = 49) or LC (n = 42). The success rate, operative duration, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, total cost, complications, pain score, vomiting, and cosmetic satisfaction of the two groups were then compared. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the operative time (46.89 ± 10.03 min in SILC vs. 37.24 ± 10.23 min in LC; P < 0.001). As compared with LC, SILC was associated with lower total costs (8012.28 ± 752.67 RMB vs. 10258.91 ± 1087.63 RMB; P < 0.001) and better cosmetic satisfaction (4.94 ± 0.24 vs. 4.74 ± 0.54; P = 0.031). There were no significant differences between-group in terms of general data, success rate, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, complications, pain score, and vomiting (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory SILC is safe and feasible for selected patients. The advantages of SILC as compared with LC are improved cosmetic satisfaction and lower total costs.