OBJECTIVE: The authors devised a minimally invasive technique for cholecystectomy via microceliotomy that provides safety attainable with the open conventional approach and postoperative results comparable to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has evolved as a minimally invasive outpatient procedure. Patients can return rapidly to preoperative status with minimal postoperative morbidity and pain, and the small scar size is cosmetically desirable. Unfortunately, there are reports of serious intraoperative complications, including injury to blood vessels, bowel, and the bile ducts, caused by failure to identify structures properly. The conventional cholecystectomy technique currently is relegated to patients on whom the laparoscopic procedure cannot be performed. METHODS: Cholecystectomy was performed through a 3-cm transverse high subxiphoid incision in the "minimal stress triangle." The location, anterior to Calot's triangle, was critical in providing a direct vertical view of the biliary ducts during dissection. Direct view cholecystectomy was performed using endoscopic instruments without pneumoperitoneum. Postoperative data were compared with both laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy results. RESULTS: Using the microceliotomy technique in the ambulatory setting, cholecystectomy was performed successfully in 99.3% (N = 143) of cases. Biliary leakage beyond the third postoperative day was caused by failure of clips or obstruction to bile flow. The postoperative morbidity, acceptability of scar, and analgesic requirements compare favorably with other techniques. Microceliotomy is cost effective. Portal hypertension is a contraindication for this procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The microceliotomy approach offers a viable, safe, and cost-effective alternative to the laparoscopic technique for cholecystectomy, especially when facilities for laparoscopy are not available or when the laparoscopic procedure cannot be performed.
OBJECTIVE: The authors devised a minimally invasive technique for cholecystectomy via microceliotomy that provides safety attainable with the open conventional approach and postoperative results comparable to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has evolved as a minimally invasive outpatient procedure. Patients can return rapidly to preoperative status with minimal postoperative morbidity and pain, and the small scar size is cosmetically desirable. Unfortunately, there are reports of serious intraoperative complications, including injury to blood vessels, bowel, and the bile ducts, caused by failure to identify structures properly. The conventional cholecystectomy technique currently is relegated to patients on whom the laparoscopic procedure cannot be performed. METHODS: Cholecystectomy was performed through a 3-cm transverse high subxiphoid incision in the "minimal stress triangle." The location, anterior to Calot's triangle, was critical in providing a direct vertical view of the biliary ducts during dissection. Direct view cholecystectomy was performed using endoscopic instruments without pneumoperitoneum. Postoperative data were compared with both laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy results. RESULTS: Using the microceliotomy technique in the ambulatory setting, cholecystectomy was performed successfully in 99.3% (N = 143) of cases. Biliary leakage beyond the third postoperative day was caused by failure of clips or obstruction to bile flow. The postoperative morbidity, acceptability of scar, and analgesic requirements compare favorably with other techniques. Microceliotomy is cost effective. Portal hypertension is a contraindication for this procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The microceliotomy approach offers a viable, safe, and cost-effective alternative to the laparoscopic technique for cholecystectomy, especially when facilities for laparoscopy are not available or when the laparoscopic procedure cannot be performed.
Authors: Samuli Aspinen; Jukka Harju; Petri Juvonen; Kalevi Karjalainen; Hannu Kokki; Hannu Paajanen; Matti Eskelinen Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-10-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Samuli Aspinen; Jari Kärkkäinen; Jukka Harju; Petri Juvonen; Hannu Kokki; Matti Eskelinen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2016-12-21 Impact factor: 4.147