Comparison of Bag and Non-Bag Extraction of Gall Stones through Laparoscopy

Chinnaswami, Adith; Purushothaman, P K; Duthaluri, Naresh; Rekha, Arcot

doi:10.31782/ijcrr.2021.132015

Cited by 2 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A total of 671 studies were identified after the systemic search of the above-mentioned databases. Of these 54 studies, eight studies were eligible to be included in this systematic review and meta-analysis [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A sterile surgical glove was used to extract the gallbladder specimen in two studies [15,17] whereas different types of sterile endo-bags were used as the methods of extraction in the remaining studies. Regarding prophylactic antibiotics, one dosage of antibiotics was given in one study [13], and three doses were reported in another different study [20]. In all the included studies, the specimen was extracted through the epigastric port except in one study in which the umbilical port was used [13].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several thoughts regarding extraction of gallbladder specimens after cholecystectomy have been explored, historically from the point of small laparotomy incision which is used to extract specimens following laparoscopic resections to a small extension of umbilical port incision of 3 cm to 5 cm to provide enough retrieval space for slightly larger specimens [19]. Meanwhile, the morcellation technique has been used to facilitate the use of smaller incisions with a few preservations in cases of cancer [20,21]. Despite the advantages of laparoscopy, the rates of SSI, wound dehiscence, and incisional hernia continued to be reported in the literature [29][30][31][32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Those patients either had their gallbladders extracted through a bag method (n=831) or extracted directly (n=974). Four of the included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) [ 14 , 15 , 17 , 20 ], while the rest were observational studies [ 13 , 16 , 18 , 19 ]. A sterile surgical glove was used to extract the gallbladder specimen in two studies [ 15 , 17 ] whereas different types of sterile endo-bags were used as the methods of extraction in the remaining studies.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding prophylactic antibiotics, one dosage of antibiotics was given in one study [ 13 ], and three doses were reported in another different study [ 20 ]. In all the included studies, the specimen was extracted through the epigastric port except in one study in which the umbilical port was used [ 13 ].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bag Extraction Versus Direct Extraction for Retrieval of Gallbladder After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Mohamed¹,

Albendary²,

Wuheb³

et al. 2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This analysis aims to evaluate the comparative outcomes of gallbladder extraction with a bag versus direct extraction in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). A systematic online search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane database, The Virtual Health Library, Clinical trials.gov, and Science Direct. Comparative studies comparing bag versus direct extraction of the gallbladder in LC were included. Outcomes were surgical site infection (SSI), the extension of fascial defect to extract the gallbladder, intra-abdominal collection, bile spillage, and port-site hernia. Revman 5.4 (Cochrane, London, United Kingdom) was used for the data analysis. The results show eight studies were eligible to be included in this review with a total number of 1805 patients divided between endo-bag (n=835) and direct extraction (n=970). Four of the included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) while the rest were observational studies. The rate of SSI and bile spillage were significantly higher in the direct extraction group: odds ratio (OR)=2.50, p=0.006 and OR=2.83, p=0.01, respectively. Comparable results were observed regarding intra-abdominal collection between the two groups(OR=0.01, p=0.51). However, the extension of a fascial defect was higher in the endo-bag group (OR=0.22, p=0.00001), and no difference was observed regarding the port-site hernia rate (OR-0.70, p=0.55). In conclusion, extraction of the gallbladder with an endo-bag provides a lower rate of SSI and bile spillage with similar results regarding post-operative intraabdominal collection. Although with the endo-bag, the fascial defect will more likely need to be increased to extract the gallbladder. However, the port-site hernia rate remains similar between the two groups.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bag Extraction Versus Direct Extraction for Retrieval of Gallbladder After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Mohamed¹,

Albendary²,

Wuheb³

et al. 2023

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effect of retrieval bags in preventing surgical site wound infection during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy in liver cancer patients: A meta‐analysis

Ding

2023

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A meta‐analysis research was implemented to appraise the effect of retrieval bags (RBs) in preventing surgical site wound infection (SSWI) in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) in liver cancer (LC) patients. Inclusive literature research until April 2023 was done, and 1273 interconnected researches were reviewed. From a total of 11 researches that were chosen, 2559 ELC procedures in LC patients were at the starting point of the researches: 1273 of them were utilising RBs and 1286 were controls. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were utilised to appraise the consequence of RBs in preventing SSWI in ELC in LC patients by the dichotomous approach and a fixed or random model. RBs had significantly lower SSWI (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.38–0.76, p < 0.001) compared with controls in ELC in LC patients. However, no significant difference was found between RBs and controls in ELC in LC patients in bile spillage (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.21–1.24, p = 0.14), fascial extension (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.07–4.11, p = 0.55), postoperative collection (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.24–1.76, p = 0.40) and port site hernia (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.25–2.06, p = 0.54). RBs had significantly lower SSWI, and no significant difference was found in bile spillage, fascial extension, postoperative collection and port site hernia compared with controls in ELC in LC patients. However, caution needs to be taken when interacting with its values because there was a low sample size in some of the chosen researches and a low number of researches were found for some of the comparisons in the meta‐analysis.

show abstract

Comparison of Bag and Non-Bag Extraction of Gall Stones through Laparoscopy

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bag Extraction Versus Direct Extraction for Retrieval of Gallbladder After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Bag Extraction Versus Direct Extraction for Retrieval of Gallbladder After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Effect of retrieval bags in preventing surgical site wound infection during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy in liver cancer patients: A meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About