Users Online : 845 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

Robotic surgery enables safe and comfortable single-incision cholecystectomy: A comparison of robotic and laparoscopic approaches for single-incision surgery


1 Department of Surgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
2 Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea
3 Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine; Catholic Central Laboratory of Surgery, Institute of Biomedical Industry, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Correspondence Address:
Say-June Kim,
Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 222, Banpo-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul 06591
Republic of Korea
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_274_19

PMID: 33047682

Background: Although single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) overcomes various limitations of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC), it is associated with high cost. In this study, we intended to investigate if SIRC is recommendable and advantageous to patients despite its high cost. Materials and Methods: We prospectively collected and analysed data of patients who had undergone either SILC (n = 25) or SIRC (n = 50) for benign gallbladder diseases, with identical inclusion criteria, between November 2017 and February 2019. Results: SILC and SIRC showed similar operative outcomes in terms of intra- and post-operative complications and verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) for pain. However, the SIRC group exhibited significantly longer operation time than the SILC group (83.2 ± 32.6 vs. 66.4 ± 32.8, P = 0.002). The SIRC group also showed longer hospital stay (2.4 ± 0.7 vs. 2.2 ± 0.6, P = 0.053). Although the SILC and SIRC groups showed no significant difference in VNRS, the SIRC group required a higher amount (126.0 ± 88.8 mg vs. 87.5 ± 79.7 mg, P = 0.063) and frequency (3.0 ± 2.1 vs. 2.0 ± 1.8, P = 0.033) of intravenous opioid analgesic administration. During surgery, the critical view of safety (CVS), the prerequisite for safe cholecystectomy, was identified in only 24% (n = 6) of patients undergoing SILC and in 100% (n = 50) of patients undergoing SIRC (P < 0.05). Conclusion: We conclude that although SILC and SIRC have similar operative outcomes, SIRC is advantageous over SILC because of its potential to markedly enhance the safety of patients by proficiently acquiring CVS.


Print this article
Search
 Back
 
  Search Pubmed for
 
    -  Lee J
    -  Kim KH
    -  Lee TY
    -  Ahn J
    -  Kim SJ
 Citation Manager
 Article Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed74    
    PDF Downloaded7    

Recommend this journal

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