The invisible cholecystectomy: a different way

Navarra, Giuseppe; Malfa, Giuseppe La; Bartolotta, Giuseppe; Currò, Giuseppe

doi:10.1007/s00464-008-9960-6

Cited by 32 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Dissection with one hand is challenging, and adequate exposure is not always possible [17,45,46]. The use of three ports transumbilically, either placed adjacently or combined (R-Port, GelPort, TriPort, Endopath Xcel), eliminates the need for additional sutures or wires [47].…”

Section: Role In General Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of single-incision laparoscopic surgery in abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential benefits of SILS include superior cosmesis and possibly shorter operative time, lower costs, and a shortened time to full physical recovery. Careful case selection and a low threshold of conversion to conventional laparoscopic surgery are essential. Multicenter, randomized, prospective studies are needed to compare short- and long-term outcome measures against those of conventional laparoscopic surgery.

show abstract

Section: Role In General Surgerymentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of single-incision laparoscopic surgery in abdominal and pelvic surgery: a systematic review

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[11,12] Some surgeons have expressed concerns about the safety of the diminished port technique, arguing that it may lead to a higher incidence of bile duct injuries and complications, [18,23] but others failed to confirm this. [1,10,15,19,20,22,27] Our study did not reveal that a reduced number of ports is associated with an increase in complications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

“…Today, we stand on the brink of a technological explosion that may drive surgery from requiring small incisions to being incisionless. [1][2][3][4][5][6][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] To date, there has not been any randomized prospective controlled study comparing the single incision vs. two-vs. three-vs. fourport techniques.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the number of trocars important in laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

Moran¹

2017

Laparosc Endosc Surg Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the criterion standard for cholelithiasis. There have been some changes in LC technique, one of which was a reduction in the number of trocars used. The aim of the present study was to explore the feasibility of reducing the number of ports in cases of LC without compromising safety, and to evaluate the benefits associated in terms of pain, recovery, and patient satisfaction.

show abstract

“…Table 3 " Table 4 shows the comparison of our study with the studies done by other authors considering the number of cases, conversion to standard laparoscopy, complications and the duration of the surgery." Average Operating Time (min) Palanivelu et al [1] 2008 10 4 (40) 1 (10) 148 Navarra et al [2] 2008 30 0 0 123 Cugura et al [3] 2008 1 0 0 NR Bucher et al [4] 2009 11 0 0 52 Ersin et al [5] 2009 20 1 (5) 0 94 Nguyen et al [6] 2009 1 0 0 70 Langwieler et al [7] 2009 14 0 0 53-115 Podolsky et al [8] 2009 5 0 0 121 Zhu et al [9] 2009 26 0 0 62 Guo et al [10] 2008 1 0 0 158 Gumbs et al [11] 2009 2 0 0 < 60 Hong et al [12] 2009 15 0 0 79 Kuon Lee et al [13] 2009 37 5 (13. 14 Since then, it has been accepted worldwide and is now considered as a Gold standard procedure in the surgical treatment of gall bladder diseases.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%