Users Online : 546 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ahead of Print

Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial


1 Department of General Surgery, Hospital Moisès Broggi, Consorci Sanitari Integral, Barcelona, Spain
2 Department of General Surgery, Hospital General de l'Hospitalet, Consorci Sanitari Integral, Barcelona, Spain
3 Department of Anesthesiology, Hospital General de l'Hospitalet, Consorci Sanitari Integral, Barcelona, Spain
4 Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Hospital General de l'Hospitalet, Consorci Sanitari Integral, Barcelona, Spain
5 Department of General Surgery, Hospital Universitari Joan XXIII de Tarragona, Tarragona, Spain

Correspondence Address:
Helena Subirana,
Jacint Verdaguer 90, 08970 Sant Joan Despí, Barcelona
Spain
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_97_20

PMID: 32964868

Background: Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) can be done as a day-case procedure and may have advantages over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). We present the results of our study looking at post-operative pain and post-operative recovery time. Methods: This was a single-institution randomised double-blind controlled trial. Seventy-three patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis were randomized to SILC (n = 37) or LC (n = 36). The primary endpoint was to compare post-operative pain. We also compared surgical time, procedural difficulty, adverse events, additional ports used and conversion rate, success of day surgery process, return to work, aesthetic satisfaction, quality of life and 4-year incisional hernia rate. Results: In the SILC group, post-operative analgesic requirements were lower on day 7, there was an earlier return to work and cosmetic satisfaction was significantly higher. The SILC procedure presented a higher technical difficulty. Operative time, surgical complications, post-operative pain, success of the day-case process, return to normal activity, quality of life scores and incisional hernia rates were similar for both the procedures. Conclusions: SILC has advantages over LC in terms of late post-operative analgesic requirements and aesthetic results; however, it is technically harder to perform. There was no benefit in terms of day surgery outcomes.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Subirana H
    -  Rey FJ
    -  Barri J
    -  Robres J
    -  Parra L
    -  Martín M
    -  Memba R
    -  Mullerat JM
    -  Jorba R
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed127    
    PDF Downloaded6    

Recommend this journal

2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04