Single port versus multiple port laparoscopic cholecystectomy-a comparative study

Laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for single-incision cholecystectomy: an updated systematic review

The role of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) is still unclear. We update the summarization of the feasibility and safety of SILC and SIRC. A comprehensive search of SILC and SIRC of English literature published on PubMed database between January 2015 and November 2020 was performed. A total of 70 articles were included: 41 covering SILC alone, 21 showing SIRC alone, 7 reporting both, and 1 study not specified. In total, 7828 cases were recorded (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 6234/1544/50); and the gender of 7423 cases was definitively reported: the female rate was 64.0% (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 62.1%/71.5%/74.0%). The weighted mean for body mass index (BMI), operative time, blood loss and post-operative hospital stay was 25.5 kg/m2 (SILC/SIRC, 25.0/27.0 kg/m2), 73.8 min (SILC/SIRC, 68.2/88.8 min), 12.6 mL (SILC/SIRC, 12.1/14.8 mL) and 2.5 days (SILC/SIRC, 2.8/1.9 days), respectively. The pooled prevalence of an additional port, conversion to open surgery, post-operative complications, intraoperative biliary injury, and incisional hernia was 4.1% (SILC/SIRC, 4.7%/1.9%), 0.9% (SILC/SIRC, 0.7%/1.5%), 5.9% (SILC/SIRC, 6.2%/4.1%), 0.1% (SILC/SIRC, 0.2%/0.09%), and 2.1% (SILC/SIRC, 1.4%/4.8%), respectively. Compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, SIRC has experienced more postoperative incisional hernias (risk difference = 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.07; P < 0.0001). By far, SILC and SIRC have not been considered a standard procedure. With the innovation of medical devices and gradual accumulation of surgical experience, feasibility and safety of performing SILC and SIRC will improve.

Single-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Assisted with Neodymium Magnets: Initial Prospective Experience with 60 Cases

Introduction: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard performed by the majority of surgeons worldwide, and the use of single-port cholecystectomy remains a matter of debate. Single-port magnetic-assisted cholecystectomy (SPMAC) was described as an alternative because of its ability for proper triangulation and the advantage of reducing port surgery. The objective of this study is to describe the initial experience of SPMAC and evaluate the surgical learning curve. Materials and Methods: A prospective cohort was conducted between February 2017 and August 2018; 60 patients completed the inclusion criteria. Variables analyzed were gender, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) classification, operative time, hospital stay, intraoperative bleeding, and conversion rate. Postoperative pain was measured with a visual analogue scale (VAS). Aesthetic perception was measured by the cosmetic visual analogue scale (CVAS). The postoperative complications were graded according to Clavien-Dindo classification, and the cumulative sum (CUSUM) model was used for evaluating the learning curve. Results: The mean operatory time was 56.1 minutes. With regard to the postoperative pain variable, the VAS value was 2 out of 10 in 78.33% of patients. With regard to aesthetic satisfaction, CVAS was reported to be 10 out of 10 in 96.67% of patients. Conversion rate was 0%. The learning curve of operative time was reached at the 22nd patient, according to the CUSUM chart. Conclusions: SPMAC is feasible and effective; in our consideration, an acceptable learning curve considering benign gallbladder pathology is one of the most prevalent in general surgery. Further comparative studies with conventional LC and SPMAC need to be performed to conduct a proper comparison.

An ergonomics study on wrist posture when using laparoscopic tools in four techniques in minimally invasive surgery

PURPOSE

With reference to four minimally invasive surgery (MIS) cholecystectomies, the aims were (a) to recognize the factors influencing dominant wrist postures manifested by the surgeon; (b) to detect risk factors involved in maintaining deviated wrist postures; (c) to compare the wrist postures of surgeons while using laparoscopic tools.

METHODS

Video films were recorded during live surgeries. The films were synchronized with wrist joint angles obtained from wireless electrogoniometers placed on the surgeon's hand. The analysis was conducted for five laparoscopic tools used during all surgical techniques.

RESULTS

The most common wrist posture was extension. In the case of one laparoscopic tool, the mean values defining extended wrist posture were distinct in all four surgical techniques. For one type of surgical technique, considered the most beneficial for patients, more extreme postures were noticed regarding all laparoscopic tools. We recognized a new factor, apart from the tool's handle design, that influences extreme and deviated wrist postures. It involves three areas of task specification including the type of action, type of motion patterns and motion dynamism.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcomes proved that the surgical technique which is best for the patient imposes the greatest strain on the surgeon's wrist. .

Higher cost of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy due to longer operating time. A study of opportunity cost based on meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to calculate the opportunity cost of the operating time to demonstrate that single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is more expensive than classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).

METHODS

We identified studies comparing use of both techniques during the period 2008-2016, and to calculate the opportunity cost, we performed another search in the same period of time with an economic evaluation of classic laparoscopy. We performed a meta-analysis of the items selected in the first review considering the cost of surgery and surgical time, and we analyzed their differences. We subsequently calculated the opportunity cost of these time differences based on the design of a cost/time variable using the data from the second literature review.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven articles were selected from the first review: 26 for operating time (3.138 patients) and 3 for the cost of surgery (831 patients), and 3 articles from the second review. Both echniques have similar operating costs. Single incision laparoscopy surgery takes longer (16.90min) to perform (p <0.00001) and this difference represents an opportunity cost of 755.97 € (cost/time unit factor of 44.73 €/min).

CONCLUSIONS

SILC costs the same as CLC, but the surgery takes longer to perform, and this difference involves an opportunity cost that increases the total cost of SILC. The value of the opportunity cost of the operating time can vary the total cost of a surgical technique and it should be included in the economic evaluation to support the decision to adopt a new surgical technique.

Kinematic and ergonomic assessment of laparoendoscopic single-site surgical instruments during simulator training tasks

While laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) appears to be feasible and safe, instrument triangulation, tissue handling, and other bimanual tasks are difficult even for experienced surgeons. Novel technologies emerged to overcome LESS' procedural and ergonomic difficulties of "tunnel vision" and "instrument clashing." Surgeon kinematics, self-reported workload and upper body discomfort were used to compare straight, bent and two articulating instruments while performing two basic surgical tasks in a LESS simulator. All instruments resulted in bilateral elevation and rotation of the shoulders, excessive forearm motion and flexion and ulnar deviation of wrists. Surgeons' adopted non-neutral upper extremity postures and performed excessive joint excursions to compensate for reduced freedom of movement at the single insertion site and to operate the instrument mechanisms. LESS' cosmetic benefits continue to impact laparoscopic surgery and by enabling performance through improved instruments, ergonomic improvement for LESS can reduce negative impact on surgeon well-being and patient safety.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF IMMUNOLOGICAL PROFILES IN WOMEN UNDERGOING CONVENTIONAL AND SINGLE-PORT LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY

Background

Surgical trauma triggers an important postoperative stress response characterized by significantly elevated levels of cytokines, an event that can favor the emergence of immune disorders which lead to disturbances in the patient's body defense. The magnitude of postoperative stress is related to the degree of surgical trauma.

Aim

To evaluate the expression of pro-inflammatory (TNF-α, IFN-γ, IL-1β, and IL-17) and anti-inflammatory (IL-4) cytokines in patients submitted to conventional and single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy before and 24 h after surgery.

Methods

Forty women with symptomatic cholelithiasis, ranging in age from 18 to 70 years, participated in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: 21 submitted to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 19 to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Results

Evaluation of the immune response showed no significant difference in IFN-γ and IL-1β levels between the groups or time points analyzed. With respect to TNF-α and IL-4, serum levels below the detection limit (10 pg/ml) were observed in the two groups and at the time points analyzed. Significantly higher postoperative expression of IL-17A was detected in patients submitted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy when compared to preoperative levels (p=0.0094).

Conclusions

Significant postoperative expression of IL-17 was observed in the group submitted to single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy when compared to preoperative levels, indicating that surgical stress in this group was higher compared to the conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Prospective randomized comparison of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with new facilitating maneuver vs. conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the technical feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) with our new facilitative maneuver and to compare it with the gold standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Operation time, cosmetic score and incisional hernia rates between LC (n=20) and SILC-1 (first 20 consecutive operations with the new technique) and 2 (subsequent 20 operations with the new technique) were compared.

RESULTS

The median operation time for LC, SILC-1 and SILC-2 were; 35 min (12-75), 47.5 min (30-70), and 30 min (12-80), respectively (p=0.005). The operation duration was similar in LC and SILC-2 (p=0.277) groups. Wound seroma rate was higher in SILC-1 (45%) and SILC-2 (30%) groups than LC (5%) group (p=0.010). Cosmetic score was similar between all the groups. Hernia rates were 15.8% and 5.3% in the SILC-1 and SILC-2 groups, respectively, while there was no hernia in the LC group.

CONCLUSION

SILC with new facilitating maneuver is comparable with classical four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in terms of ease, operation time, reproducibility and safety. Besides these advantages, the single-incision access technique must be optimized to provide comparable wound complication and postoperative hernia rates before being recommended to patients.

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized clinical trial study

BACKGROUND

Surgical technique using small-diameter instruments and single-incision laparoscopy are two new options for less invasive laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In this study, we have compared mini-LC (MLC) with single-incision LC (SILC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a randomized clinical trial conducted on the patients diagnosed with symptomatic cholelithiasis who underwent LC. Forty patients were randomized to two equal groups of MLC and SILC. They were compared in terms of demographic data, operation time, and surgical complications.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in two groups. Operation time in MLC was significantly shorter than that in SILC (45.1 ± 69 min vs 63.75 ± 7.57 min, P-value < 0.001). Also, the total length of the wound in SILC group was shorter than that in MLC group (P-value < 0.003). Postoperative pain scores were similar in two groups. Hospital stay was shorter in MLC (1.2 ± 0.6 days vs 1.6 ± 0.8 days, P < 0.021). There was no difference in postoperative complications in two groups.

CONCLUSION

MLC because of less operation time is preferred than SILC. Also, by subjective measures, it was a more comfortable method compared to SILC.

Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A non-randomized, age-matched single center trial

AIM: To compare the safety of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomies with standard four-port cholecystectomies.

METHODS: Between January 2011 and December 2012 datas were gathered from 100 consecutive patients who received a single-port cholecystectomy. Patient baseline characteristics of all 100 single-port cholecystectomies were collected (body mass index, age, etc.) in a database. This group was compared with 100 age-matched patients who underwent a conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the same period. Retrospectively, per- and postoperative data were added. The two groups were compared to each other using independent t-tests and χ²-tests, P values below 0.05 were considered significantly different.

RESULTS: No differences were found between both groups regarding baseline characteristics. Operating time was significantly shorter in the total single-port group (42 min vs 62 min, P < 0.05); in procedures performed by surgeons the same trend was seen (45 min vs 59 min, P < 0.05). Peroperative complications between both groups were equal (3 in the single-port group vs 5 in the multiport group; P = 0.42). Although not significant less postoperative complications were seen in the single-port group compared with the multiport group (3 vs 9; P = 0.07). No statistically significant differences were found between both groups with regard to length of hospital stay, readmissions and mortality.

CONCLUSION: Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has the potential to be a safe technique with a low complication rate, short in-hospital stay and comparable operating time. Single-port cholecystectomy provides the patient an almost non-visible scar while preserving optimal quality of surgery. Further prospective studies are needed to prove the safety of the single-port technique.

Tripartite comparison of single-incision and conventional laparoscopy in cholecystectomy: A multicenter trial

AIM: To compare the characteristics of two single-incision methods, and conventional laparoscopy in cholecystectomy, and demonstrate the safety and feasibility.

METHODS: Three hundred patients with gallstones or gallbladder polyps were admitted to two clinical centers from January 2013 to January 2014 and were randomized into three groups of 100: single-incision three-device group, X-Cone group, and conventional group. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, postoperative pain, cosmetic score, length of hospitalization, and hospital costs were compared, with a follow-up duration of 1 mo.

RESULTS: A total of 142 males (47%) and 158 females (53%) were enrolled in this study. The population characteristics of these three groups is no significant differences exist in terms of age, sex, body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiology (P > 0.05). In results, there were no significant differences in blood loss, length of hospitalization, postoperative complications.The operative time in X-Cone group was significantly longer than other groups.There were significant differences in postoperative pain scores and cosmetic scores at diffent times after surgery (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: This study shows that this two single-incision methods are safe and feasible. Both methods are superior to the conventional procedure in cosmetic and pain scores.