Cargando…

Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

OBJECTIVE: Incidence of Bile Duct Injuries (BDI) during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC) is reported to be higher as compared to Open Cholecystectomy. Studies have shown varying degree of success in reducing BDI by using Critical View of Safety (CVS) technique before clipping and cutting any struct...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zarin, Mohammad, Khan, Muhammad Asim, Khan, Maryam Alam, Shah, Syed Asad Maroof
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Professional Medical Publications 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6041509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30034418
http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.343.14309
_version_ 1783339008859832320
author Zarin, Mohammad
Khan, Muhammad Asim
Khan, Maryam Alam
Shah, Syed Asad Maroof
author_facet Zarin, Mohammad
Khan, Muhammad Asim
Khan, Maryam Alam
Shah, Syed Asad Maroof
author_sort Zarin, Mohammad
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Incidence of Bile Duct Injuries (BDI) during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC) is reported to be higher as compared to Open Cholecystectomy. Studies have shown varying degree of success in reducing BDI by using Critical View of Safety (CVS) technique before clipping and cutting any structure. In this study, we will see whether CVS technique is faster and safer compared to conventional infundibular technique. METHODS: This comparative study was conducted on patients who presented to Surgical Out-Patient-Department (OPD) of Khyber Teaching Hospital from July 2015 to June 2016. Total of 438 patients were divided into two groups. Group-A in which LC was done using infundibular while in Group-B, CVS technique was utilized. Two groups were compared for operating time and BDI. RESULTS: The operative time was significantly reduced for LC using CVS technique (50 mins vs. 73 mins). Minor leaks were comparable (0.5% vs. 0.9%) but there was a significant difference in major LEAKS between the two techniques (0.5% vs. 1.4%). CONCLUSION: Although the “critical view of safety” requires more dissection as compared to infundibular technique, but once learnt and mastered, it is faster and safer identification technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6041509
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Professional Medical Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60415092018-07-20 Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Zarin, Mohammad Khan, Muhammad Asim Khan, Maryam Alam Shah, Syed Asad Maroof Pak J Med Sci Original Article OBJECTIVE: Incidence of Bile Duct Injuries (BDI) during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC) is reported to be higher as compared to Open Cholecystectomy. Studies have shown varying degree of success in reducing BDI by using Critical View of Safety (CVS) technique before clipping and cutting any structure. In this study, we will see whether CVS technique is faster and safer compared to conventional infundibular technique. METHODS: This comparative study was conducted on patients who presented to Surgical Out-Patient-Department (OPD) of Khyber Teaching Hospital from July 2015 to June 2016. Total of 438 patients were divided into two groups. Group-A in which LC was done using infundibular while in Group-B, CVS technique was utilized. Two groups were compared for operating time and BDI. RESULTS: The operative time was significantly reduced for LC using CVS technique (50 mins vs. 73 mins). Minor leaks were comparable (0.5% vs. 0.9%) but there was a significant difference in major LEAKS between the two techniques (0.5% vs. 1.4%). CONCLUSION: Although the “critical view of safety” requires more dissection as compared to infundibular technique, but once learnt and mastered, it is faster and safer identification technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Professional Medical Publications 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6041509/ /pubmed/30034418 http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.343.14309 Text en Copyright: © Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Zarin, Mohammad
Khan, Muhammad Asim
Khan, Maryam Alam
Shah, Syed Asad Maroof
Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?
title Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?
title_full Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?
title_fullStr Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?
title_full_unstemmed Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?
title_short Critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?
title_sort critical view of safety faster and safer technique during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6041509/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30034418
http://dx.doi.org/10.12669/pjms.343.14309
work_keys_str_mv AT zarinmohammad criticalviewofsafetyfasterandsafertechniqueduringlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT khanmuhammadasim criticalviewofsafetyfasterandsafertechniqueduringlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT khanmaryamalam criticalviewofsafetyfasterandsafertechniqueduringlaparoscopiccholecystectomy
AT shahsyedasadmaroof criticalviewofsafetyfasterandsafertechniqueduringlaparoscopiccholecystectomy