An “All 5-mm Ports” Versus Conventional Ports Approach to Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Nissen Fundoplication: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Abstract

The "all 5-mm ports" approach to LC and LNF in selected patients did not offer clear advantages over the conventional approach in terms of postoperative pain or analgesic requirements. Nevertheless, the former approach enjoyed a superior cosmetic outcome and patient acceptability.

Cosmetic Outcome of Robotic Surgery Compared to Laparoscopic Surgery for Benign Gynecologic Disease

“…Although our clinic used the same number of ports during both procedures, the port size and location in RALS differed from those in CLS. Accordingly, the port size and locations were identified as among the underlying factors for the lower cosmetic satisfaction scores in patients who underwent RALS, which is consistent with the results reported by Abbas et al 25 …”

Would Fewer Port Numbers in Laparoscopy Produce Better Cosmesis? Prospective Study

“…Accordingly, some investigators [2,3,14] have used the visual analog scale (score of 1 to 10) as a tool for assessment of cosmetic outcome, without appropriate validation process. In comparison, we used the Body Image Questionnaire, a well-validated tool that has been used to assess cosmetic satisfaction after surgery in previous studies involving ileocolectomy [9,15], proctectomy [16,17], nephrectomy [18], splenectomy [19], cholecystectomy [20,21], appendectomy [22], and hepatic resection [23]. We believe that the use of this validated tool is important to reveal a small but definite difference in cosmetic satisfaction after single-port laparoscopy.…”

Total 5‐mm port approach: a feasible technique for both elective and emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy

“…Furthermore, when the umbilical incision was extended it was to a length no greater than would otherwise have been made using a conventional 10‐ or 12‐mm port. These findings are comparable to previously published results using the same system …”