Cargando…
Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial
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 si...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8270025/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32964868 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_97_20 |
_version_ | 1783720712094089216 |
---|---|
author | Subirana, Helena Rey, Francisco Javier Barri, Joan Robres, Joaquim Parra, Lourdes Martín, Montserrat Memba, Robert Mullerat, Josep Maria Jorba, Rosa |
author_facet | Subirana, Helena Rey, Francisco Javier Barri, Joan Robres, Joaquim Parra, Lourdes Martín, Montserrat Memba, Robert Mullerat, Josep Maria Jorba, Rosa |
author_sort | Subirana, Helena |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8270025 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer - Medknow |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-82700252021-07-27 Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial Subirana, Helena Rey, Francisco Javier Barri, Joan Robres, Joaquim Parra, Lourdes Martín, Montserrat Memba, Robert Mullerat, Josep Maria Jorba, Rosa J Minim Access Surg Original Article 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. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2021 2020-09-05 /pmc/articles/PMC8270025/ /pubmed/32964868 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_97_20 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Subirana, Helena Rey, Francisco Javier Barri, Joan Robres, Joaquim Parra, Lourdes Martín, Montserrat Memba, Robert Mullerat, Josep Maria Jorba, Rosa Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial |
title | Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial |
title_full | Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial |
title_short | Single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: A prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial |
title_sort | single-incision versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory surgery setting: a prospective randomised double-blind controlled trial |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8270025/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32964868 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jmas.JMAS_97_20 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT subiranahelena singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT reyfranciscojavier singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT barrijoan singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT robresjoaquim singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT parralourdes singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT martinmontserrat singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT membarobert singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT mulleratjosepmaria singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial AT jorbarosa singleincisionversusfourportlaparoscopiccholecystectomyinanambulatorysurgerysettingaprospectiverandomiseddoubleblindcontrolledtrial |