Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg. 2011;254:22-27. [PMID: 21494123 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e3182192f89]

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials

Background

Conventional multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC) has become the current 'gold standard' technique in gallbladder disease. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has gained attention due to its benefits in improving patient cosmetic results and pain reduction. We aim to assess the latest evidence on the feasibility, safety and surgical outcomes of SILC and CMLC.

Methods

We conducted searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), and Europe PMC between December 2011 and 2021. The latest search was conducted in January 2022. We analyzed several outcomes, including perioperative complications, estimated blood loss, operation time, conversion to open surgery, hospital stay, pain score, cosmesis, and days of return to work. Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) 2.0 tool was used to evaluate quality of studies. Mantel-Haenszel's formula and Inverse Variance method were conducted to synthesize results. This study was accomplished in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.

Results

A total of 37 studies were eligible, with a total of 2,129 and 2,392 patients who underwent SILC and CMLC. Our study demonstrated a superiority of SILC for the visual analog score (VAS) at six hours post-operation [mean difference (MD) -0.58 (95% CI -1.11, -0.05), p=0.03], cosmesis one-month post-operation [standard MD 2.12 (95% CI 1.10, 3.13), p<0.0001], and cosmesis six months post-operation [standard MD 0.53 (95% CI 0.06, 0.99), p<0.0001]. Meanwhile, SILC showed a longer operation time [MD 10.45 (95% CI 6.74, 14.17), p<0.00001]. In terms of VAS at four time points (4, 8, 12, and 24 hours), perioperative complications, estimated blood loss, conversion to open surgery, hospital stay and days to return to work, SILC did not differ from CMLC.

Conclusions

SILC is a safe, feasible and favorable procedure in terms of pain reduction and cosmetic results. The option between both procedures is based on surgeon preferences. Registration: PROSPERO ( CRD42022306532; 23 February 2022).

First human surgery using a surgical assistance robotics device for laparoscopic cholecystectomies

BACKGROUND

Over the past 20 years, surgeons involved in soft tissue minimally invasive surgery have experienced the pros and cons of both conventional and tele-robotic laparoscopic approaches. The Maestro System, developed by Moon Surgical (Paris, France) aims to overcome the challenges inherent to both approaches thanks to a new concept that augments the surgeon's performance at the bedside during a laparoscopic procedure.

METHODS

The current study aims to present the first human experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy with the Maestro system on 10 patients.

RESULTS

All ten procedures were completed successfully. No significant complications related to the use of the Maestro system werenoted.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary observations appear to support the benefits of the Maestro system in non-emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomies. It goes without saying that further research is necessary to demonstrate the safety of this approach in other procedures.

Cost-effective scarless cholecystectomy using a modified endoscopic minimally invasive reduced appliance technique (Emirate)

ABSTRACT

The current gold-standard surgical treatment for symptomatic gallstone disease is the conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). In recent years, however, celebrities and social media have altered people's attitudes regarding surgery. Consequently, CLC has undergone several changes to reduce scarring and improve patient satisfaction. In this case-matched control study, the cost-effectiveness of a modified endoscopic minimally invasive reduced appliance technique (Emirate) that uses less equipment and three 5 mm reusable ports only at precisely specified anatomical sites was compared to CLC.

METHODS

Single-center retrospective matched cohort analysis including 140 consecutive patients treated with Emirate laparoscopic cholecystectomy ("ELC-group"), matched 1:1 by sex, indications for surgery, surgeon expertise, and preop bile duct imaging, with 140 patients receiving CLC in the same period of time ("CLC group").

RESULTS

We performed a retrospective case-matched review of 140 patients who had Emirate laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstones between January 2019 and December 2022. The groups included 108 females and 32 males with an equal ratio of surgical expertise-115 procedures were performed by consultants and 25 by trainees. In each group, 18 patients had preoperative MRCP or ERCP and 20 had acute cholecystitis as indications for surgery. Preoperative characteristics such as age (39 years in the Emirates group and 38.6 years in the CLC group), BMI (29.3 years in the Emirates group and 30 years in the CLC group), stone size, or liver enzymes showed no statistical difference between the two groups. In both groups, the average hospital stay was 1.5 days, and there was no conversion to open surgery, nor was there any bleeding requiring blood transfusion, bile leakage, stone slippage, bile duct injury, or invasive intervention postoperatively. When compared to the CLC group, the ELC group had significantly faster surgery times (t-test, p = 0.001), lower levels of the bile duct enzyme ALP (p = 0.003), and much lower costs (t-test, p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The Emirate laparoscopic cholecystectomy method is a safe alternative to the traditional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy that is also much faster and less expensive.

Robotic single-port surgery: Preliminary experience in general surgery

BACKGROUND

We aim to analyse the safety and feasibility of the DaVinci Single Port (SP) platform in general surgery.

METHODS

A prospective series of robotic SP transabdominal pre-peritoneal inguinal hernia repairs (SP-TAPP) and cholecystectomies (SP-C) (off-label) were analysed. Primary endpoints were safety and feasibility defined by the need for conversion and incidence of perioperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 225 SP procedures were performed; 84 (37.3%) SP-TAPP (70 unilateral, 7 bilateral), and 141 (62.7%) SP-C. There were no conversions or additional ports placed. Mean console time was 17.6, 31.9, and 54 min for SP-C, unilateral, and bilateral SP-TAPP, respectively. There was no mortality, intraoperative or major postoperative complications. Mean LOS was 2.7 h for elective SP-TAPP and 2.3 h for SP-C.

CONCLUSION

Robotic SP surgery is safe and feasible for two of the most performed general surgery operations. Further experience might allow expanding the applications of robotic single-incision surgery for other procedures.

Suprapubic Cholecystectomy Improves Cosmetic Outcome Compared to Classic Cholecystectomy

Currently, cholecystectomy is performed laparoscopically. While the conventional approach (CA) with four access ports persists, other methods seek to reduce trauma or to optimize cosmetic results. In this study, the safety and cosmetic outcome of a suprapubic approach (SA) were evaluated. Between 2015 and 2016, patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy either by CA or by a suprapubic approach (SA) at our institution were included. The cosmetic outcome, postoperative morbidity, operative time and length of stay were evaluated. Pictures of the site of intervention were taken 6−12 months postoperatively and rated on a scale from 1 (unsatisfying aesthetic result) to 5 (excellent aesthetic result). Five “non-medical” and five “medical” raters as well as one board-certified plastic surgeon performed the ratings. A total of 70 patients were included (n = 28 SA, n = 42 CA). The two groups did not differ in baseline characteristics (age, gender, BMI). The SA group showed a significantly better aesthetic outcome compared to the CA group 4.8 (4.8−4.9) vs. 4.2 (3.8−4.4), (p > 0.001). Medical raters: 4.0 (3.8−4.2) vs. 4.8 (4.6−5.0), (p < 0.001); non-medical raters: 4.2 (3.8−4.6) vs. 5.0 (4.8−5.0), (p < 0.001); plastic surgeon: 4.0 (4.0−4.0) vs. 5.0 (5.0−5.0), (p < 0.001). Fair interrater consistency was demonstrated with an ICC of 0.47 (95% CI = 0.38−0.57). No significant difference in the complication rate (1 (3.5%) in SA vs. 6 (14%) in CA, (p = 0.3)), or the operating time 66 (50−86) vs. 70 (65−82) min, (p = 0.3), were observed. Patients stayed for a median of three (3−3) days in the SA group and 3 (3−4) days in the CA group (p = 0.08). This study demonstrated that the suprapubic approach is an appropriate alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, presenting a better cosmetic outcome with a similar complication rate.

Single-Port Cholecystectomy for Cholecystitis Versus Non-Cholecystitis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) for the treatment of symptomatic cholelithiasis in different gallbladder pathologic conditions.

METHODS

All patients who underwent SPLC in our department between October 1, 2017 and March 31, 2020 were registered consecutively in a prospective database. Patients' charts were retrospectively divided according to histological diagnosis: normal gallbladder (NG) (n = 13), chronic cholecystitis (CC) (n =47), and acute cholecystitis (AC) (n = 10). The parameters for assessing the procedure outcome included operative time, blood loss, use of additional trocars, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. Patient groups were statistically compared.

RESULTS

Seventy patients underwent SPLC. Duration of surgery increased from NG (55 ± 22.7 min) to CC (70 ± 33.5 min), and to AC patients (110.5 ± 50.5 min), which is statistically significant (P = .001). Postoperative complication rates were 7.6% in NG patients, 17% in CC, and 30% in AC (P = .442). Length of hospitalization was shorter for NG patients (1.0 ± 0.6 days) versus CC (2.0 ± 1.1 days) and AC patients (2.0 ± 4.7 days), with statistical significance (P = .020). Multivariate analysis found that pathology type and the occurrence of postoperative complications were independent predictors for prolonged operative times and prolonged hospital stay, respectively.

CONCLUSION

SPLC is feasible for acute and chronic cholecystitis with good procedural outcomes. Since SPLC technique itself can be sometimes challenging with the existing technology, its application, especially in cases of acute cholecystitis, should be done with caution. Only prospective randomized studies on this approach for acute and chronic gallbladder diseases will assess the complete reliability of this technique.

Emergency single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: A multi-center study

Single-incision laparoscopy is accepted as a safe alternative to multiple port laparoscopy for elective cholecystectomy; however, there are limited data on its use in patients with acute cholecystitis. The present multi-center study evaluated the outcomes of emergency single-incision surgeries for acute cholecystitis in hospitals in Belgium, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago over a 5-year period. Standardized definitions of uncomplicated and complicated acute cholecystitis were used and the data were compared using SPSS software. The results revealed that over the 5-year period, 108 patients with a mean age of 48±15 years and a mean body mass index of 27±4.2 kg/m² underwent emergency single-incision cholecystectomies. The surgeries were successful in 92.1% of cases without supplemental trocars being used. The overall morbidity rates (9.3%) were also comparable to the historic controls with multiple port cholecystectomy. As was expected, the complicated cholecystitis group required a significantly longer operating time (86.11±30.16 vs. 66.79±16.8; P<0.00194), as well as supplemental trocars (7.9%) vs. 0; P=0.0413). On the whole, the present study demonstrates that emergency single-incision cholecystectomy is a technically feasible and safe procedure for patients with acute cholecystitis. These findings advocate a low threshold to place additional ports to assist with dissection and exposure.

Single Incision Cholecystectomies for Acute Cholecystitis: A Single Surgeon Series from the Caribbean

INTRODUCTION

Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is accepted as a safe alternative to conventional multiport laparoscopic (MPL) cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease. Since many surgeons carefully select patients without inflammation, there are limited data on SILS for acute cholecystitis. We report a single surgeon experience with SILS cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After securing ethical approval, we performed an audit of all SILS cholecystectomies for acute cholecystitis by a single surgeon from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2019. The following data were extracted: patient demographics, intraoperative details, surgical techniques, specialized equipment utilized, conversions (additional port placement), morbidity, and mortality. Data were analyzed using SPSS 12.0.

RESULTS

SILS cholecystectomy was performed in 25 females at a mean age of 35 ± 4.1 (SD) years and a mean BMI of 31.9 ± 3.8 (SD) using a direct fascial puncture technique without access platforms. The operations were completed in 83 ± 29.4 minutes (mean ± SD) with an estimated blood loss of 76.9 ± 105 (mean + SD). Three (12%) patients required additional 5 mm port placement (conversions), but no open operations were performed. The patients were hospitalized for 1.96 ± 0.9 days (mean ± SD). There were 2 complications: postoperative superficial SSI (grade I) and a diaphragmatic laceration (grade III). No bile duct injuries were reported. There were 9 patients with complicated acute cholecystitis, and this sub-group had longer mean operating times (109.2 ± 27.3 minutes) and mean postoperative hospital stay (1.3 ± 0.87 days).

CONCLUSION

The SILS technique is a feasible and safe approach to perform cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. We advocate a low threshold to place additional ports to assist with difficult dissections for patient safety.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Healthcare requires patient feedback to improve outcomes and experience. This study undertook a systematic review of the depth, variability, and digital suitability of current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

A PROSPERO-registered (registration number CRD42021261707) systematic review was undertaken for all relevant English language articles using PubMed version of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases in June 2021. The search used Boolean operators and wildcards and included the keywords: laparoscopic cholecystectomy AND patient outcome OR patient-reported outcome OR patient-reported outcome measure OR PRO OR PROM. Medical Subjects Heading terms were used to search PubMed and Scopus. Articles published from 1 January 2011 to 2 June 2021 were included.

Results

A total of 4960 individual articles were reviewed in this study, of which 44 were found to evaluate PROMs in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and underwent methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) grading. Twenty-one articles spanning 19 countries and four continents met all inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative data synthesis. There was significant heterogeneity in PROMs identified with eight different comprehensive PROM tools used in the 21 studies. There was wide variation in the time points at which PROMs were recorded. Fourteen of 21 studies recorded PROMs before and after surgery, and 7 of 21 recorded PROMs only after surgery. Follow-up intervals ranged from 3 days to 2 years after surgery.

Conclusions

This study identified that while post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy PROMs are infrequently measured currently, tools are widely available to achieve this in clinical practice. PROMs may not capture all the outcomes but should be incorporated into future cholecystectomy outcome research. The EQ-5D™ (EuroQoL Group, Rotterdam, the Netherlands) provides a simple platform for the modern digital era.

A retrospective multicentre study on the evaluation of perioperative outcomes of single-port robotic cholecystectomy comparing the Xi and SP versions of the da Vinci robotic surgical system

BACKGROUND

Single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) is widely performed with both the da Vinci Xi system (Xi) and the da Vinci SP system (SP). But there are limited numbers of studies comparing these platforms.

METHODS

Patients who underwent SIRC between 2019 and 2020 were enrolled. Patient demographics, intraoperative factors, postoperative complications, postoperative pain were compared using a one-to-one propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

Overall, 258 patients underwent SIRC with Xi and 72 with SP. After PSM, there were significant differences between the Xi and SP in operation time at console and numeric rating scale for postoperative pain, but no difference in total operation time and postoperative complications. The SP group showed more estimated blood loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the statistical difference, clinical benefit was not significant. Both platforms can be safe and feasible to perform SIRC, but further investigation including the surgeon's workload and ergonomics is needed as a prospective study.

Long-term follow-up of the incisional hernia rate after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective observational study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term occurrence rate of incisional hernias following single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC).

BACKGROUND

Since the 90 s, SILC has emerged as a less invasive alternative to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy in selected patients. But concerns over port-incisional hernias have not been addressed.

METHODS

Between February 2009 and February 2011, 142 patients referred for gallstones who agreed to undergo SILC were included in a monocenter prospective observational study. All of the procedures were carried out using a single-port access technique. The occurrence rates of incisional hernias were analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier actuarial method. Statistical significance was set at p < .05.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients with gallbladder pathology were included in the study; 138 of them underwent SILC and 4 were converted to standard multiport cholecystectomy. Twelve patients (8%) were found to have developed a port-site incisional hernia (PSH) by physical examination or by imaging. The Kaplan-Meier curve showed that the rate of PSH development was 83% in the first 2 years after surgery. After 2 years, this risk becomes quite low.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the SILC procedure is a safe option for treatment of benign gallbladder diseases for selected patients, albeit with a high incisional hernia rate.

Comparative outcomes of needlescopic, single-incision laparoscopic, standard laparoscopic, mini-laparotomy, and open cholecystectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of 96 randomized controlled trials with 11,083 patients

BACKGROUND

Most randomized trials on minimally invasive cholecystectomy have been conducted with standard (3/4-port) laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy serving as the control group. However, there exists a dearth of head-to-head trials that directly compare different minimally invasive techniques for cholecystectomy (eg, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus needlescopic cholecystectomy). Hence, it remains largely unknown how the different minimally invasive cholecystectomy techniques fare up against one another.

METHODS

To minimize selection and confounding biases, only randomized controlled trials were considered for inclusion. Perioperative outcomes were compared using frequentist network meta-analyses. The interpretation of the results was driven by treatment effects and surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. A sensitivity analysis was also undertaken focusing on a subgroup of randomized controlled trials, which recruited patients with only uncomplicated cholecystitis.

RESULTS

Ninety-six eligible randomized controlled trials comprising 11,083 patients were identified. Risk of intra-abdominal infection or abscess, bile duct injury, bile leak, and open conversion did not differ significantly between minimally invasive techniques. Needlescopic cholecystectomy was associated with the lowest rates of wound infection (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.977) with an odds ratio of 0.095 (95% confidence interval: 0.023-0.39), 0.32 (95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.98), 0.33 (95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.99), 0.36 (95% confidence interval: 0.14-0.98) compared to open cholecystectomy, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, mini-laparotomy, and standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy, respectively. Mini-laparotomy was associated with the shortest operative time (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.981) by a mean difference of 22.20 (95% confidence interval: 13.79-30.62), 12.17 (95% confidence interval: 1.80-22.54), 9.07 (95% confidence interval: 1.59-16.54), and 8.36 (95% confidence interval: -1.79 to 18.52) minutes when compared to single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, needlescopic cholecystectomy, standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and open cholecystectomy, respectively. Needlescopic cholecystectomy appeared to be associated with the shortest hospitalization (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.717) and lowest postoperative pain (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.928).

CONCLUSION

Perioperative outcomes differed across minimally invasive techniques and, in some instances, afforded superior outcomes compared to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. These findings suggest that there may be equipoise for exploring further the utility of novel minimally invasive techniques and potentially incorporating them into the general surgery training curriculum.

Identification and categorisation of relevant outcomes for symptomatic uncomplicated gallstone disease: in-depth analysis to inform the development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND

Many completed trials of interventions for uncomplicated gallstone disease are not as helpful as they could be due to lack of standardisation across studies, outcome definition, collection and reporting. This heterogeneity of outcomes across studies hampers useful synthesis of primary studies and ultimately negatively impacts on decision making by all stakeholders. Core outcome sets offer a potential solution to this problem of heterogeneity and concerns over whether the 'right' outcomes are being measured. One of the first steps in core outcome set generation is to identify the range of outcomes reported (in the literature or by patients directly) that are considered important.

OBJECTIVES

To develop a systematic map that examines the variation in outcome reporting of interventions for uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease, and to identify other outcomes of importance to patients with gallstones not previously measured or reported in interventional studies.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 794 potentially relevant titles and abstracts of which 137 were deemed eligible for inclusion. A total of 129 randomised controlled trials, 4 gallstone disease specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and 8 qualitative studies were included. This was supplemented with data from 6 individual interviews, 1 focus group (n=5 participants) and analysis of 20 consultations. A total of 386 individual recorded outcomes were identified across the combined evidence: 330 outcomes (which were reported 1147 times) from trials evaluating interventions, 22 outcomes from PROMs, 17 outcomes from existing qualitative studies and 17 outcomes from primary qualitative research. Areas of overlap between the evidence sources existed but also the primary research contributed new, unreported in this context, outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This study took a rigorous approach to catalogue and map the outcomes of importance in gallstone disease to enhance the development of the COS 'long' list. A COS for uncomplicated gallstone disease that considers the views of all relevant stakeholders is needed.

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Initial Report From the Turks and Caicos Islands

There has been no prior report of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) from the Caribbean island of Turks and Caicos. We report our initial experience with SILS cholecystectomy to show that SILS in this environment is feasible with minimal change to the existing hardware. It is a safe alternative to conventional multi-trocar laparoscopic cholecystectomy in this setting.

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 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.

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a current meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

We performed this study to compare the safety and feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) with conventional multiple-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MPLC).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials comparing SILC versus MPLC. We evaluated the pooled outcomes for complications, pain scores, and surgery-related events. This study was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 48 randomized controlled trials involving 2838 patients in the SILC group and 2956 patients in the MPLC group were included in this study. Our results showed that SILC was associated with a higher incidence of incisional hernia (relative risk = 2.51; 95% confidence interval = 1.23-5.12; p = 0.01) and longer operation time (mean difference = 15.27 min; 95% confidence interval = 9.67-20.87; p < 0.00001). There were no significant differences between SILC and MPLC regarding bile duct injury, bile leakage, wound infection, conversion to open surgery, retained common bile duct stones, total complication rate, and estimated blood loss. No difference was observed in postoperative pain assessed by a visual analogue scale between the two groups at four time points (6 h, 8 h, 12 h, and 24 h postprocedure).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, SILC did not result in better outcomes compared with MPLC and both were equivalent regarding complications. Considering the additional surgical technology and longer operation time, SILC should be chosen with careful consideration.

Evaluation of umbilical anatomy via computed tomography prior to single-incision laparoscopy

Laparoscopic surgery performed through a single incision is relatively new. Here, we investigated the importance of radiological anatomical evaluation of the umbilicus prior to such surgery.Umbilical images of 500 patients who underwent computed tomography (CT) in 2019 were evaluated retrospectively, using both transverse and sagittal sections.Spearman rank correlation analysis indicated a significant positive relationship between age and the sagittal and transverse umbilical measurements (all patients: P < .01; men: P = .001; women: P < .01). Mean transverse and sagittal measurements were 5.63 ± 1.9 and 6.2 ± 2.0 mm in women and 5.49 ± 1.9 and 6.2 ± 1.8 mm in men.Umbilical anatomy can be evaluated radiologically as a component of preoperative evaluation.

Safety and Efficacy of Single-Port Laparoscopic Ileostomy in Palliative Settings

Purpose

Single-port laparoscopic techniques can be optimized with confined incisions. This approach has an intraoperative advantage of excellent visualization of the correct intestinal segment for exteriorization, along with direct visual control of the extraction to avoid twisting. However, only a few studies have verified the efficacy of the technique. Thus, this study assessed the results of single-port laparoscopic stoma creation for fecal diversion, specifically focusing on feasibility, safety, and efficacy.

Methods

Patients who underwent single-incision enterostomy performed by a single surgeon were included. Data on demographics, indications for and chosen procedure, and operation results were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

Results

Between April 2015 and January 2018, a total of 13 patients (8 males, 5 females) with a mean age of 57.7 years (range, 41–83 years) underwent single-port ileostomy creation. The most common reason for diversion was palliative ileostomy for colon obstruction or fistula from peritoneal malignancy (n = 12), followed by colonic fistula with necrotizing pancreatitis (n = 1). There were no cases of conversion to open or multiport laparoscopic surgery. The mean operative time was 54 minutes (range, 37–118 minutes), and the median length of hospital stay was 8 days (range, 2–211 days). A postoperative complication, aspiration pneumonia, was documented in 1 patient and treated conservatively. The mean duration of bowel movement was 0.7 days (range, 0–4 days). All stomas had good function, and there was no 30-day mortality.

Conclusion

Single-port laparoscopic ileostomy in patients with a palliative setting could be a safe and feasible option for fecal diversion.

Laparoscopic Single-Port Versus Traditional Multi-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Background and Objectives

Safety, efficacy, and costs are still debated issues in single-port laparoscopy. The aim of the study was to compare clinical outcomes and hospital costs for conventional 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (4PLC) and single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) performed at a single institution.

Methods

A series of 40 SPLC patients operated on from October 2016 to May 2017 were compared to a hystorical series of 40 4PLC patients. Primary endpoints were the operative time, blood loss, postoperative pain, analgesia requirement, length of stay, and morbidity. Secondary endpoints were the operative costs and total hospital costs.

Results

No patient required surgical conversion in both groups. Duration of surgery was significantly longer in the SPLC group. Length of hospitalization was shorter for patients operated on by SPLC (1.9 ± 0.9 vs 2.3 ± 1.2 days; P = .104). According to visual analogue scale evaluation, the pain profile was similar. Minor postoperative complications were present in 12.5% of the SPLC group and 2.5% in 4PLC group (P = .200). The total hospitalization costs associated with SPLC procedure were lower compared to standard 4PLC procedure. As regards the disposable operating room equipment costs, a statistically significant difference in favor of SPLC technique was found.

Conclusion

SPLC has shown relevant procedure and postoperative outcomes when compared to traditional 4PLC. The technique has proved to be promising even in cases of acute cholecystitis considered to date a relative contraindication. Further studies are needed to confirm its safety and feasibility in this setting. In contrast with the current evidence of increased costs for the single-port technique, a reduction of material and hospitalization costs was experienced in our study.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Incisional Hernia After Single-Incision Endoscopic Surgery

Introduction: Abdominal wall complications are one of the most controversial issues regarding single-incision endoscopic surgery. The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence and risk factors of incisional hernia after single-incision endoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and Methods: An observational retrospective study was performed, on a cohort of patients cholecystectomized laparoscopically through a transumbilical single incision due to gallbladder lithiasis or polyps. Postoperative complications were analyzed, with special interest in the incisional hernia rate, whose results were assessed in the long-term follow-up. Univariate and multivariate analyses were also performed to evaluate possible variables associated with the appearance of incisional hernia. Cumulative sum charts (CUSUM) were used to identify trends in the incisional hernia risk. Results: Some 109 patients were included in the study. With a mean follow-up of nearly 38 months, an incisional hernia incidence of 5.5% was found, with 67% being diagnosed during the first year of follow-up. In the Cox regression analysis, two variables showed an independent association with the emergence of incisional hernia, body mass index (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI 1.053-1.606]; P .015), and wound infection (HR 26.32; [3.186-217.40]; P .002]. CUSUM charts showed a decrease in the risk of incisional hernia after the first 10 cases. Conclusions: Single-incision endoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a substantially high risk of postoperative incisional hernia (5.5%).

Solo single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the parallel method; Surgical technique reducing a steep learning curve

Backgrounds/Aims

To describe the techniques, short-term outcomes, and learning curve of solo single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Solo-SILC) using a laparoscopic scope holder.

Methods

A total of 591 patients who underwent Solo-SILC from July 2014 to December 2016 performed by four experienced hepatobiliary surgeons were retrospectively assessed. Solo-SILC was performed using the parallel method using a scope holder. The moving average method was used to investigate the learning curve in terms of operative time.

Results

In total, 590 Solo-SILC procedures were performed. Very few procedures were converted to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There was one case of bile duct injury. The mean operative time (59.93±25.77 min) was shorter than that in other studies of SILC. Three postoperative complications, delaying bile leakage, occurred in the patients treated by one surgeon. These cases were resolved by ultrasound-guided puncture and drainage. The learning curve for surgeons A, B, and C was overcome after 14, 12, and 12 cases. Surgeon D, who had the most experience with SILC, had no obvious learning curve.

Conclusions

Hepatobiliary surgeons experienced in LC can perform Solo-SILC almost immediately. Solo-SILC using the parallel technique represents a more stable option and is a promising treatment for gallbladder disease.

Clinical outcomes of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy versus conventional 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background

Few studies have compared the surgical results of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) with those of conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative clinical efficacy of SIRC by comparing the number of postoperative days, pain level and complications between the 2 surgical methods.

Methods

We retrospectively collected demographic, perioperative and postoperative data for all patients who underwent SIRC or CLC performed by a single surgeon from June 2016 to May 2017. Operative time was recorded, divided into anesthesia time, docking time, console time and total operation time. Postoperative pain was measured with the Numerical Pain Rating Scale.

Results

A total of 121 patients underwent cholecystectomy during the study period, of whom 61 had SIRC and 60 had CLC. The mean total operation time of SIRC and CLC was 93.52 (SD 20.27) minutes and 37.67 (SD 19.73) minutes, respectively (p < 0.001). The total operation time excluding console time of SIRC was significantly longer than that of CLC (82.77 [SD 18.27] min v. 37.67 [SD 19.73] min) (p < 0.001). The mean Numerical Pain Rating Scale score was 4.73 (SD 1.23) (SIRC: 4.75 [SD 1.24]; CLC: 4.70 [SD 1.22]) (p = 0.8) within 1 hour after the operation; scores after 6 hours and 1 day decreased in a similar manner in the 2 groups (p = 0.1).

Conclusion

Postoperative pain, use of an additional port, complication rates, operation time and cost of SIRC were similar to or greater than those of CLC. Large randomized controlled trials are needed to examine the true benefits of SIRC.

Correlation between port-to-target distance and procedural difficulty in single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: An observational study

INTRODUCTION

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is more challenging than conventional (multiport) laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) because of the increased likelihood of instrument collision and the limited surgical workspace. In SILC, procedural difficulties may increase when the port-to-target distance is long. We aimed to assess the correlation between port-to-target distance and procedural difficulty.

METHODS

Thirty-six consecutive patients who underwent SILC at our hospital were included in this study. The umbilicus-to-Calot's triangle distance (UCD) was measured intraoperatively. The correlations between the UCD and operative time were analyzed, and for comparison, CLC cases during the same period (n = 28) were similarly analyzed. Moreover, UCD was estimated from preoperative CT (UCD-CT), and the usefulness of UCD-CT was assessed during SILC and CLC.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients successfully underwent SILC. There were positive correlations between the UCD and pneumoperitoneum time. Multivariate linear regression analysis, including BMI and height, which were previously reported to have a correlation with longer operative time in SILC, showed that UCD is an independent predictive factor for prolonged operative duration. However, BMI and height were not independent predictive factors. UCD and UCD-CT had a very strong positive correlation; therefore, UCD was estimated from CT. UCD-CT had a strong positive correlation with operative time in SILC, but not in CLC.

CONCLUSIONS

A longer UCD is an important predictive factor for difficult cases of SILC, but this finding is not applicable in CLC. The usefulness of UCD is specific to SILC.

Feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory setting

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery has emerged as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the clinical setting. Limited information is available on the possibility of performing single-incision laparoscopic surgery as an ambulatory procedure. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus conventional LC in an ambulatory setting.

METHODS

Ninety-one patients were randomized to SILC (n = 49) or LC (n = 42). The success rate, operative duration, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, total cost, complications, pain score, vomiting, and cosmetic satisfaction of the two groups were then compared.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in the operative time (46.89 ± 10.03 min in SILC vs. 37.24 ± 10.23 min in LC; P < 0.001). As compared with LC, SILC was associated with lower total costs (8012.28 ± 752.67 RMB vs. 10258.91 ± 1087.63 RMB; P < 0.001) and better cosmetic satisfaction (4.94 ± 0.24 vs. 4.74 ± 0.54; P = 0.031). There were no significant differences between-group in terms of general data, success rate, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, complications, pain score, and vomiting (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulatory SILC is safe and feasible for selected patients. The advantages of SILC as compared with LC are improved cosmetic satisfaction and lower total costs.

A systematic review of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and quality of life reporting in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a valuable means of measuring outcomes subjectively from a patient's perspective, facilitating the assessment of service quality across healthcare providers, and assisting patients and clinicians in shared decision making. The primary aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise all historic studies evaluating patient reported quality of life, in adult patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. The secondary aim was to perform a quality assessment of cholecystectomy-specific PROM-validation studies. A literature review was performed in PubMed, Google ScholarTM, the Cochrane Library, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsychINFO databases up to September 2017. Study characteristics, PROM-specific details and a bias assessment were summarised for non-validation studies. A COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) analysis was performed to assess the methodological quality of identified PROM-validation studies. Fifty one studies were found to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Although 94.1% of these studies included PROMs as a primary outcome measure, <20% provided level 1 evidence through randomised controlled trials (RCTs). There was significant variation in the selection and reporting of PROMs, with no studies declaring patient involvement in PROM selection, and 88.2% of studies failing to document the management of missing data points, or non-returned surveys (33.3%). In the 6 PROM-validation studies identified, only 5 psychometric properties were evaluated, the findings of which were limited due to the small number of studies. This systematic review identifies a lack in consistency of study design and PRO reporting in clinical trials. Whilst an increasing number of studies are being performed to evaluate PROs, a lack of adherence to existing PRO administration and reporting guidelines is continuing to negatively affect study quality. We recommend that future clinical trials utilizing PROs should adhere to established comprehensive guidelines as described.

Single incision laparoscopic surgery from a caribbean perspective

Conventional laparoscopy with multiple ports has recently gained a strong foothold in the Caribbean, but single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has lagged behind. In this paper, we compare the data on SILS and conventional multi-port laparoscopy in the English-speaking Caribbean.

Quality of life after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized, clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Controversy continues as to whether single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with the somewhat larger incision at the umbilicus, may lead to a worse postoperative quality of life and more pain compared with the more classic 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to compare single-incision and 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy from the perspective of quality of life.

METHODS

This study was a multicenter, parallel-group, open-label, randomized clinical trial. A total of 120 patients who were scheduled to undergo elective cholecystectomy were randomly assigned 1:1 into the single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy or the 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy group and then assessed continuously for 2 weeks during the postoperative period. The primary outcome was quality of life, defined as the time to resume normal daily activities. Postoperative pain was also assessed. To explore the heterogeneity of treatment effects, we assessed the interactions of sex, age, and working status on recovery time.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients in the single-incision group and 53 in the 4-port group (n = 111, 47 male, mean age 57 years) were analyzed. The mean time to resume daily activities was 10.2 days and 8.8 days, respectively, for single-incision and 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (95% confidence interval -0.4 to 3.2, P = .12). Similarly, the time to relief from postoperative pain did not differ significantly between the groups. Statistically insignificant but qualitative interactions were noted; in the subgroups of women, full-time workers, and patients younger than 60 years, recovery tended to be slower after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative quality of life did not differ substantially between single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients younger than 60 years, women, and full-time workers tended to have a somewhat slower recovery after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

A Concealed “Natural Orifice”: Umbilicus Anatomy for Minimally Invasive Surgery

Introduction. A recent development in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is single-port surgery, where a single large multiport trocar is placed in the umbilicus. All medical schools require that students complete an anatomy course as part of the medical curriculum. However, there is limited instruction regarding the detailed parts of the “umbilicus.” In several famous anatomy atlases, the umbilicus is not dissected at all and is merely represented as a button. Until now, the true nature of the umbilicus has not been anatomically demonstrated. Methods. Five cadavers were obtained from the Osaka Medical College medical student anatomy class. The umbilicus was dissected in the anatomy laboratory, to demonstrate all the layers. A detailed dissection was performed, focusing on the exact center of the umbilicus, in order to ascertain whether there exists a “natural orifice” or a fascial defect. Results. In all cadavers, a small defect of fascia was identified just below the center of the umbilicus. Yellow fatty tissue was present just below the skin in the exact center of the umbilicus. A probe placed exactly in the middle of this defect passes easily through into the abdominal cavity. Conclusions. With the widespread use of MIS, umbilical incision is commonly used to reduce pain and improve cosmetic results. This study consistently revealed a natural defect of fascia in the center of the umbilicus. Therefore, the umbilicus can be called a concealed “natural orifice.” It is important to recognize and utilize this defect effectively to minimize unnecessary tissue trauma during MIS.

Safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) is the gold standard technique for cholecystectomy. In order to reduce postoperative pain and improve cosmetic results, the application of the single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) technique was introduced, leading surgeons to face important challenges. Robotic technology has been proposed to overcome some of these limitations. The purpose of this review is to assess the safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) for benign disease.

METHODS

An Embase and Pubmed literature search was performed in February 2017. Randomized controlled trial and prospective observational studies were selected and assessed using PRISMA recommendations. Primary outcome was overall postoperative complication rate. Secondary outcomes were postoperative bile leak rate, total conversion rate, operative time, wound complication rate, postoperative hospital stay, and port site hernia rate. The outcomes were analyzed in Forest plots based on fixed and random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies provided data about 1010 patients who underwent to SIRC for benign disease of gallbladder. Overall postoperative complications rate was 11.6% but only 4/1010 (0.4%) patients required further surgery. A postoperative bile leak was reported in 3/950 patients (0.3%). Conversion occurred in 4.2% of patients. Mean operative time was 86.7 min including an average of 42 min should be added as for robotic console time. Wound complications occurred in 3.7% of patients. Median postoperative hospital stay was 1 day. Port site hernia at the latest follow-up available was reported in 5.2% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the Da Vinci robot in single-port cholecystectomy seems to have similar results in terms of incidence and grade of complications compared to standard laparoscopy. In addition, it seems affected by the same limitations of single-port surgery, consisting of an increased operative time and incidence of port site hernia.

Early results of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in comparison with the conventional: Does it have any impact on quality of life?

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard treatment for gallbladder diseases. In recent times, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy(SILC) has developed as a less invasive alternative technique to conventional laparoscopy. In the literature, many studies have compared SILC and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) procedures but a limited number of studies have compared the two techniques with regard to quality of life (QOL). The choice of surgical procedure was effected by QOL of the patients. The effects of SILC on QOL remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) and single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) procedures on the clinical outcomes and quality of life of patients by short-term follow-up evaluation.

Material and methods

In this study, 142 patients who underwent cholecystectomy operations with either technique underwent SILC and CLC were evaluated. The quality of life index in the patients was measured with short form 36 (SF 36) test.

Results

The results of mean operative time, length of stay and complication rate for SILC and CLC were similar. The postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores were not significantly different between the SILC and CLC patients but only physical functioning score were higher in SILC patients.

Conclusions

SILC is a safe and effective alternative to CLC. To detect the effects of SILC on HRQOL, we need long-term prospective comparative studies.

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is responsible for increased adverse events: results of a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Over the last decade, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) has gained popularity, although it is not evident if benefits of this procedure overcome the potential increased risk. Aim of the study is to compare the outcome of SLC with conventional multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) in a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials only.

METHODS

A systematic Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials literature search of articles on SLC and MLC for any indication was performed in June 2017. The main outcomes measured were overall adverse events, pain score (VAS), cosmetic results, quality of life, and incisional hernias. Linear regression was used to model the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

Forty-six trials were included and data from 5141 participants were analysed; 2444 underwent SLC and 2697 MLC, respectively. Mortality reported was nil in both treatment groups. Overall adverse events were higher in the SLC group (RR 1.41; p < 0.001) compared to MLC group, as well severe adverse events (RR 2.06; p < 0.001) and even mild adverse events (RR 1.23; p = 0.041). This was confirmed also when only trials including 4-port techniques (RR 1.37, p = 0.004) or 3-port techniques were considered (RR 1.89, p = 0.020). The pain score showed a standardized mean difference (SMD) of - 0.36 (p < 0.001) in favour of SLC. Cosmetic outcome by time point scored a SMD of 1.49 (p < 0.001) in favour of SLC. Incisional hernias occurred more frequently (RR 2.97, p = 0.005) in the SLC group.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite SLC offers a better cosmetic outcome and reduction of pain, the consistent higher rate of adverse events, both severe and mild, together with the higher rate of incisional hernias, should suggest to reconsider the application of single incision techniques when performing cholecystectomy with the existing technology.

Two-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Reducing Scars in a Simple Way

BACKGROUND

About 20% of the population has cholelithiasis and this is the main abdominal cause of hospitalization in developed countries. Considering that only in the United States about 700,000 cholecystectomies are done each year, it is possible to estimate the importance of the problem for public health.

OBJECTIVE

To describe a two-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (TILC) technique using only conventional material, without increasing complications or operative time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A consecutive and prospective case series compared to another historical operated by conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The TILC was performed with three trocars in two incisions, two trocars in umbilical incision, and one in epigastrium.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients were operated on by the same surgeon (36 in each group). There were no significant differences between groups for gender, mean age, body mass index, or length of hospital stay. The procedures were classified by the surgeon according to surgical difficulty and 58.3% (n = 42) were considered low grade, 9.7% (n = 7) difficult, and the other were intermediaries, with no difference between the series (P < .05). There were minor complications in 6.94% (n = 5) procedures. There were no differences between mean operative time (P = .989), which was 49 (95% confidence interval [CI] 42-56) minutes in LC and 40 (95% CI 35-44) min in TILC. There was no need for additional trocars in any case or for conversion to open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

TILC is feasible, safe, and with good aesthetic result, using the same instruments of LC, without increasing operative time.

Impact of obesity on surgical outcome after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Introduction:

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is widely used as a treatment option for gallbladder disease. However, obesity has been considered a relative contraindication to this approach due to more advanced technical difficulties. The aim of this report was to review our experience with SILC to evaluate the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the surgical outcome.

Patients and Methods:

Between May 2009 and February 2013, 237 patients underwent SILC at our institute. Pre- and post-operative data of the 17 obese patients (O-group) (BMI ≥30 kg/m²) and 220 non-obese patients (NO-group) (BMI <29.9 kg/m²) were compared retrospectively. SILC was performed under general anaesthesia, using glove technique. Indications for surgery included benign gallbladder disease, except for emergent surgeries.

Results:

Mean age of patients was significantly higher in the NO-group than O-group (58.9 ± 13.5 years vs. 50.8 ± 14.0 years, P = 0.025). SILC was successfully completed in 233 patients (98.3%). Four patients (1.7%) in the NO-group required an additional port, and one patient was converted to an open procedure. The median operative time was 70 ± 25 min in the NO-group and 75.2 ± 18.3 min in the O-group. All complications were minor, except for one case in the NO-group that suffered with leakage of the cystic duct stump, for which endoscopic nasobiliary drainage was need.

Conclusion:

Our findings show that obesity, intended as a BMI ≥30 kg/m², does not have an adverse impact on the technical difficulty and post-operative outcomes of SILC. Obesity-related comorbidities did not increase the risks for SILC.

Safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is a common procedure performed worldwide. In this study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of SILC for acute cholecystitis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent SILC between September 2012 and December 2016 were retrospectively enrolled and divided into acute and chronic groups. Demographic, operative and outcome data were obtained by reviewing medical records, physical examination and telephone follow-up.

RESULTS

In total, 1435 patients were included in this study: 220 (15.3%) in the acute group and 1215 (84.7%) in the chronic group. The mean operative time was longer in the acute group than in the chronic group (44.7 ± 21.6 versus 32.8 ± 9.8 min; P < 0.001). Insertion of additional ports was performed in 17 patients: six in the acute group and 11 in the chronic group. Conversion to abdominal laparotomy was performed in eight patients: one in the acute group and seven in the chronic group. The mean post-operative hospital stay was 31.7 ± 20.4 h in the acute group and 27.7 ± 13.7 h in the chronic group. The complication rate was similar between the acute (n = 8, 3.6%) and chronic (n = 33, 2.7%) groups.

CONCLUSION

SILC does not increase the complication rate and is a safe and feasible technique for both chronic and acute cholecystitis.

Meta-analysis of single-port versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy comparing body image and cosmesis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate improvements in cosmetic results and postoperative morbidity for single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) in comparison with multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC).

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken for RCTs comparing SILC with MLC in adult patients with benign gallbladder disease. Primary outcomes were body image and cosmesis scores at different time points. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative pain and frequency of port-site hernia.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven RCTs were included, with a total of 3051 patients. The body image score favoured SILC at all time points (short term: mean difference (MD) -2·09, P < 0·001; mid term: MD -1·33, P < 0·001), as did the cosmesis score (short term: MD 3·20, P < 0·001; mid term: MD 4·03, P < 0·001; long-term: MD 4·87, P = 0·05) and the wound satisfaction score (short term: MD 1·19, P = 0·03; mid term: MD 1·38, P < 0·001; long-term: MD 1·19, P = 0·02). Duration of operation was longer for SILC (MD 13·56 min; P < 0·001) and SILC required more additional ports (odds ratio (OR) 6·78; P < 0·001). Postoperative pain assessed by a visual analogue scale (VAS) was lower for SILC at 12 h after operation (MD in VAS score -0·80; P = 0·007). The incisional hernia rate was higher after SILC (OR 2·50, P = 0·03). All other outcomes were similar for both groups.

CONCLUSION

SILC is associated with better outcomes in terms of cosmesis, body image and postoperative pain. The risk of incisional hernia is four times higher after SILC than after MLC.

A randomized controlled trial for evaluation of lower abdominal laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

To improve minimally invasive outcomes, we designed a new procedure, lower abdominal laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LALC). This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of LALC versus classical (CLC) and single-incision (SILC) laparoscopic cholecystectomy on reducing systemic acute inflammatory response, improving cosmesis, and postoperative pain relief.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Beginning from July 2014, 105 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to three groups: LALC, CLC, and SILC. The primary endpoint was the determination of systemic inflammatory response to the surgery. Other outcome measures included cosmesis, postoperative pain, and perioperative indices.

RESULTS

Each of the three groups consisted of 35 patients. The duration of the operation was significantly longer in the SILC group (p= .005). The rates of adverse events were similar. Changes in interleukin-6 (p =  .001) and tumor-necrosis factor-α (p =  .016) measured before and after surgery differed significantly; patients who underwent LALC had the smallest change in inflammatory response. Cosmesis scores at one (p =  .002) and 12 (p =  .004) weeks after surgery favored LALC and SILC. Significant differences in pain scores at four (p =  .011) and 12 h (p =  .024) postoperatively were also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients, LALC shows more advantages in terms of lower systemic inflammatory response, improved cosmesis, and a favorable postoperative pain profile when compared with CLC and SILC.

Patient Body Image and Satisfaction with Surgical Wound Appearance After Reduced Port Surgery for Colorectal Diseases

BACKGROUND

The use of reduced port surgery (RPS) is increasing in the field of colorectal surgery. It is considered to offer advantages over conventional multiport surgery (MPS) in terms of decreased invasiveness and superior cosmesis. However, to date there has been no study that evaluates patient satisfaction after undergoing RPS for colorectal diseases. Herein, we present a questionnaire-based study to address this issue.

METHODS

Questionnaires were sent by mail to 216 patients who underwent RPS and 145 who underwent MPS. Patient's satisfaction with cosmesis and body image after colorectal surgery was assessed using a validated Body Image Questionnaire (BIQ) and Photo Series Questionnaire (PSQ).

RESULTS

A total of 76.9 % (166/216) of the RPS patients and 70.3 % (102/145) of the MPS patients returned the questionnaires. BIQ scores gradually improved after surgery, and were more positive overall in the RPS group compared to the MPS group. RPS patients marked significantly better PSQ scores than MPS patients (P < 0.05). In RPS subset analysis, patients with single port surgery (SPS) rated better PSQ scores than patients with SPS with additional port insertion (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We find that RPS, especially SPS, enhances patient satisfaction by reducing abdominal wall trauma. This new advantage of RPS may prove valuable in its consideration as an option in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Risk factors for an additional port in single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with cholecystitis

Although single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is now widely performed in patients with cholecystitis, some cases require an additional port to complete the procedure. In this study, we focused on risk factor of additional port in this surgery. We performed single-incision cholecystectomy in 75 patients with acute cholecystitis or after cholecystitis between 2010 and 2014 at Gunma University Hospital. Surgical indications followed the TG13 guidelines. Our standard procedure for single-incision cholecystectomy routinely uses two needlescopic devices. We used logistic regression analysis to identify the risk factors associated with use of an additional full-size port (5 or 10 mm). Surgical outcome was acceptable without biliary injury. Nine patients (12.0%) required an additional port, and one patient (1.3%) required conversion to open cholecystectomy because of severe adhesions around the cystic duct and common bile duct. In multivariate analysis, high C-reactive protein (CRP) values (>7.0 mg/dl) during cholecystitis attacks were significantly correlated with the need for an additional port (P = 0.009), with a sensitivity of 55.6%, specificity of 98.5%, and accuracy of 93.3%. This study indicated that the severe inflammation indicated by high CRP values during cholecystitis attacks predicts the need for an additional port. J. Med. Invest. 64: 245-249, August, 2017.

Randomized Trial of Immediate Postoperative Pain Following Single-incision Versus Traditional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

We undertook a randomized controlled trial to ascertain if single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) was more beneficial for reducing postoperative pain than traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (TLC). Moreover, the influencing factors of SILC were analyzed.

METHODS

A total of 552 patients with symptomatic gallstones or polyps were allocated randomly to undergo SILC (n = 138) or TLC (n = 414). Data on postoperative pain score, operative time, complications, procedure conversion, and hospital costs were collected. After a 6-month follow-up, all data were analyzed using the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

Among SILC group, 4 (2.9%) cases required conversion to TLC. Mean operative time of SILC was significantly longer than that of TLC (58.97 ± 21.56 vs. 43.38 ± 19.02 min, P < 0.001). The two groups showed no significant differences in analgesic dose, duration of hospital stay, or cost. Median pain scores were similar between the two groups 7 days after surgery, but SILC-treated patients had a significantly lower median pain score 6 h after surgery (10-point scale: 3 [2, 4] vs. 4 [3, 5], P = 0.009). Importantly, subgroup analyses of operative time for SILC showed that a longer operative time was associated with greater prevalence of pain score >5 (≥100 min: 5/7 patients vs. <40 min, 3/16 patients, P = 0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

The primary benefit of SILC appears to be slightly less pain immediately after surgery. Surgeon training seems to be important because the shorter operative time for SILC may elicit less pain immediately after surgery.

[Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: advantages and disadvantages]

AIM

To analyze the outcomes of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Early and long-term postoperative period has been analyzed in 240 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCE) including 120 cases of single-port technique and 120 cases of four-port technique. Both groups were compared in surgical time, pain syndrome severity (visual analog scale), need for analgesics, postoperative complications, hospital-stay, daily activity recovery and return to physical work, patients' satisfaction of surgical results and their aesthetic effect.

RESULTS

It was revealed that single-port LCE is associated with lower severity of postoperative pain, quick recovery of daily activity and return to physical work, high satisfaction of surgical results and their aesthetic effect compared with four-port LCE. Disadvantages of single-port LCE include longer duration of surgery, high incidence of postoperative umbilical hernia. However hernia was predominantly observed during the period of surgical technique development.

CONCLUSION

Further studies to standardize, evaluate the safety and benefits of single-port LCE are necessary.

Single-port versus conventional three-port laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal inguinal hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) has been introduced for totally extraperitoneal (TEP) inguinal hernia repair. Clinically, however, the benefits of single-port TEP (SP TEP) are unclear. This study aimed to compare short-term surgical outcomes between SP TEP and conventional laparoscopic TEP(CL TEP) inguinal hernia repair.

METHODS

Between January 2013 and February 2015, 99 men with primary unilateral inguinal hernia were randomized to the single-port or conventional 3-port TEP procedures. The primary end point was postoperative pain. Secondary end points were complications, postoperative hospital stay, days to return to daily normal activities, cosmesis, and quality of life (QOL).

RESULTS

We randomized 50 patients to SP TEP and 49 to CL TEP repair. The SP TEP group patients had significantly lower pain scores (visual analog scale) 7 days postoperation (p = 0.017). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in postoperative pain scores 24 h (p = 0.44) and 4 weeks (p = 0.677) after operation and analgesic requirements on the operation day (p = 0.303) and 7 days after the operation (p = 0.204). Operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and complications were comparable between the two groups. The days to return to daily normal activities, QOL, and cosmetic satisfaction were not different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes of SP TEP hernia repair for operation time and morbidities were comparable to CL TEP, and postoperative pain was lower at 7 days than in CL TEP hernia repair. The SP TEP technique can be recommended as an alternative treatment for inguinal hernia repair in experienced hands.