Cargando…

Comparison of Intraoperative Outcomes between Single-incision Robotic Cholecystectomy and Multi-incision Robotic Cholecystectomy

Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in the key surgical factors for single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) and multi-incision robotic cholecystectomy (MIRC). Methods A retrospective data review from August 2013 to April 2018 consisting of 104 SIRC and 105 MIRC ca...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schertz, Philip, Misra, Subhasis, Livert, David, Mulligan, Joanne, Rohatgi, Chand
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6791390/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31620314
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.5386
Descripción
Sumario:Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in the key surgical factors for single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) and multi-incision robotic cholecystectomy (MIRC). Methods A retrospective data review from August 2013 to April 2018 consisting of 104 SIRC and 105 MIRC cases was done considering factors including patient gender, age, operating time (skin incision to skin closure), robotic console time (docking to undocking), the preoperative diagnosis for surgery, any complications in surgery, length of stay (LOS), and estimated blood loss (EBL). Procedures with conversion away from original robotic cholecystectomy approach were excluded. Chi-square analysis (p-value: 0.05) was run between the two data sets. Results A total of 209 robotic cholecystectomy cases were reviewed since 2013. We found significantly less time with single-incision compared to multi-incision (single incision = 94.0 minutes, multi-incision = 99.9 minutes, p = 0.016) and EBL (single-incision = 11.52 mL, multi-incision = 17.17 mL, p = 0.004). There was no significant difference in age or robotic console time. The most common indication was symptomatic cholelithiasis overall, with equal cases of dyskinesia in single-incision approach, although there was no significant difference in indication between the two approaches. Intraoperatively, there was marginally significant use of irrigation in multi-incision (multi-incision 45 [42.9%], single-incision 31 [29.8%], p = 0.0499) and no difference in Firefly, perforation, or intraoperative cholangiogram use. LOS results showed significant decreased stay in SIRC cases (single-incision 84 outpatients [80.8%], multi-incision 75 [71.4%]; p = 0.0379). Conclusions SIRC and MIRC are both safe and feasible ways to remove the inflamed/dysfunctional gallbladder. SIRC is associated with less operative time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay.