Transvaginal-hybrid vs. single-port-access vs. ‘conventional’ laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective observational study

CONTEXT AND AIMS:Our study aims to evaluate the post-operative pain and cosmesis of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) in comparison with the standard, 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) with respect to the length of incision, cosmetic scores, post-operative pain scores and duration of hospital stay.SETTINGS AND DESIGN:This comparative randomised study was conducted in a tertiary care centre teaching hospital between September 2012 and 2014. One hundred and fifty consecutive patients, who qualified as per inclusion criteria, were included in the study.SUBJECTS AND METHODS:Seventy-five patients were included in the SLC arm and 75 in the SILC arm. SILC procedure was carried out as transumbilical multiport technique and SLC as 3-port technique utilizing - 5, 5, 10 mm ports.STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED:The data for the primary observations (post-operative pain scores, cosmetic score and incision length) and secondary observation (post-operative hospital stay) were noted. Weighted mean difference was used for calculation of quantitative variables, and odds ratios were used for pooling qualitative variables.RESULTS:Pain scores at 4 and 24 h were significantly better for SILC arm than SLC arm (at 4 h - 4.84 ± 0.95 vs. 6.17 ± 0.98, P < 0.05 and at 24 h - 3.84 ± 0.96 vs. 5.17 ± 0.09, P < 0.05). Length of incision was significantly smaller (SILC - 2.631 ± 0.44 cm vs. SLC - 5.11 ± 0.44 cm), P < 0.05 and cosmetic score was significantly better in SILC arm (6.25 ± 1.24) than SLC arm (4.71 ± 1.04), P < 0.05. Difference between the hospital stay is insignificant for two arms SILC (2.12 ± 0.34) and SLC (2.13 ± 0.35), P > 0.05.DISCUSSION:Significant difference was found in duration and intensity of pain between two procedures at 4 and 24 h. Cosmesis was significantly better in SILC than SLC group, the sample size in our study was small to arrive at a definite conclusion. The procedure can be selectively and judiciously performed by surgeons trained in regular laparoscopic surgery. Furthermore, the threshold for conversion should be low in learning phase. Widespread application must await Level 1 evidence from prospective trials.

show abstract

“…Few studies reported of a benefit in hospital stay with SILC,[202425] we found no such benefit [Table 9]. …”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 50%

Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Less scar, less pain

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…36 Similar prospective studies have compared classic laparoscopic techniques to a hybrid TV cholecystectomy. 37 In each case, the findings of the aforementioned article by Zornig et al have been corroborated.…”

Section: Tv Accesssupporting

confidence: 59%

Surgical innovation: From laparoscopy to natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery

Nau

Sylla

2012

Gastrointestinal Intervention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe field of surgery has undergone a revolution in the past 25 years, progressing toward a less invasive approach to address surgical pathology. With the introduction of laparoscopy, operations classically associated with significant morbidities could now be accomplished on an almost outpatient basis. More recently, single-site laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) have been introduced for use in humans. These new techniques promise new approaches to minimize the potential morbidities and maximize the cosmetic outcome for patients. Herein is a discussion on surgical innovation detailing the progression from laparoscopic approaches to NOTES within the United States, including the limitations prohibiting the widespread adoption of these new techniques.

show abstract

“…No major complications or conversions occurred and the mean operative time was 62.7 min (Table 1). Single-incision surgery using conventional laparoscopy has gained wide diffusion in various fields of abdominal surgery allowing to reduce surgical trauma and providing greater patient comfort [15][16][17]. However, it is still challenging due to the intrinsic impossibility of using a standard triangulation approach [18][19][20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%