A comparative study of postoperative port-site pain after gallbladder retrieval from umbilical versus epigastric ports in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Port Site Morbidities Following the Extraction of the Gallbladder from the Umbilical Port in Comparison to the Epigastric Port in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial

Background Port site morbidities after laparoscopic cholecystectomy may be related to the port used for the extraction of the gallbladder. Prior randomized trials that tried to address the suitable port for gallbladder extraction showed mixed results favouring epigastric, whereas others favoured umbilical. Thus, the present study was conducted with the aim of finding a suitable port for gallbladder extraction after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methodology A total of 104 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to either the epigastric (Group 1) or umbilical (Group 2) port group for gallbladder extraction. Post-operative pain (by visual analogue scale (VAS)), the frequency of surgical site infection (SSI), and port site herniation were compared. Results Post-operative pain was lower in the umbilical port group in the initial 24 hours. The SSIs and port site herniation rates were lower in the umbilical port group; however, they were statistically not significant. Conclusion Less post-operative pain at the umbilical port may help with the early discharge of patients. In contrast to other studies, our trial had fewer infections and hernias in the umbilical port group.

Comparison of Postoperative Port-Site Pain After Gallbladder Retrieval From Epigastric Versus Umbilical Port in Patients of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Symptomatic Cholelithiasis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction Gallbladder (GB) retrieval is an important cause of postoperative pain (POP) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Retrieval is through the epigastric or umbilical port based on the surgeon's preference. There is limited evidence to support the superiority of one port over the other in terms of POP. This study was done to compare POP between epigastric and umbilical ports after GB retrieval in LC for symptomatic cholelithiasis.  Material and methods All patients who underwent elective LC for symptomatic cholelithiasis were randomized for GB retrieval either through the umbilical (n = 15) or epigastric (n = 15) port. Postoperatively, the retrieval difficulty score by the operating surgeon, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain, and surgical site infection (SSI) by postoperative day (POD) 10 and 30 were assessed. Results The mean visual analog scores at the umbilical port at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 hours postoperatively were 5.20 ± 0.86, 4.60 ± 0.74, 4.00 ± 0.53, 3.40 ± 0.08, and 2.73 ± 0.82, which were significantly less than the visual analog scores at the epigastric port at the same time intervals, measuring 6.06 ± 1.34, 5.87 ± 1.30, 5.27 ± 1.16, 4.73 ± 1.10, and 3.93 ± 1.03, respectively. The difference was statistically significant between the two arms (p-value < 0.05). The mean retrieval difficulty score was significantly less for the umbilical port (4.40 ± 0.74) when compared with the epigastric port (5.13 ± 0.55). The overall SSI rate in the present study was 10%, and three (20%) patients in the epigastric port group developed SSI by POD 10, while none in the umbilical port group developed SSI. Conclusion GB retrieval from the umbilical port is associated with less POP, SSI, and retrieval difficulty when compared with GB retrieval from the epigastric port after elective LC for symptomatic cholelithiasis. Titration of analgesic use can also be done appropriately, reducing the dose of analgesics after 12-24 hours.

Umbilical port versus epigastric port for gallbladder extraction in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

After laparoscopic cholecystectomy, gallbladder can be extracted either from epigastric/subxiphoid port or umbilical port. We conducted systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing the two.

METHODS

PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted with pre-specified study protocol registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019128662). Multiple databases were searched from inception till 14 September 2019 using search terms "gallbladder", "specimen", "extraction', "extract", "cholecystectomy", "epigastric port", "subxiphoid port" "umbilical port". Outcomes assessed were postoperative pain (visual analog scale at 24 h postoperatively), port-site hernia, port-site infection, operative time and gallbladder retrieval time. Data were analyzed using random-effects models with risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous variables and mean difference (MD) for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Of 280 articles retrieved, 9 RCT's with 1036 participants were included. Quality of included studies was judged to be "moderate" to "low". There was no difference in postoperative pain at 24 h (p = 0.76), total operative time (p = 0.11), gallbladder retrieval time (p = 0.72) or surgical site infection (p = 0.93). Umbilical port retrieval was associated with significantly higher risk of port-site herniae (RR 2.68, 95%CI:1.06-6.80, p = 0.04). After sensitivity analysis, operative time was significantly shorter with epigastric retrieval (p = 0.0007). Trial sequential analysis showed that current studies were successful in achieving optimum information size for primary outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in postoperative pain and infections between umbilical and epigastric port retrieval. Umbilical port retrieval was associated with significantly higher risk of developing port-site hernia and could also be associated with longer operative time. Epigastric port may be favorable for gallbladder retrieval in multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Epigastric port retrieval of the gallbladder following laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with the reduced risk of port site infection and port site incisional hernia: An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Aims

The objective of this article is to compare the surgical outcomes for epigastric port or umbilical port retrieval of the gallbladder (GB) following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

The data retrieved from the published randomized, controlled trials (RCT) comparing the surgical outcomes for epigastric port or umbilical port retrieval of the GB following LC was analysed using the principles of meta-analysis. The summated outcome of continuous variables was expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) and dichotomous data was presented in odds ratio (OR).

Results

Eight RCTs on 2676 patients comparing the surgical outcomes for epigastric port or umbilical port retrieval of the GB following LC were analysed. In the random effects model analysis using the statistical software Review Manager 5.3, the GB retrieval through epigastric port was associated with the reduced duration of operation (SMD, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.18, 0.64; z = 3.52; P = 0.0004). Epigastric retrieval was also associated with reduced risk of surgical site infection (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.75, 5.11; z = 1.36; P = 0.17), and port site incisional hernia (OR, 4.22; 95% CI, 0.43, 41.40; z = 1.24; P = 0.22) compared to umbilical port retrieval though it did not reach statistical significance. The need for port enlargement to retrieve the GB was similar in both groups. In contrast, the umbilical port retrieval of the GB was associated with significantly less post-operative pain (SMD, −0.51; 95% CI, −0.95, −0.06; z = 2.24; P = 0.03), reduced GB perforation rate, reduced port site bleeding rate and reduced difficulty in GB retrieval.

Conclusion

GB retrieval through epigastric port following LC has clinically proven advantage of reduced retrieval site infection rate, lower operation time and incisional hernia rate but at the cost of increased pain at 24 h, higher risk of GB perforation, port site bleeding and technical difficulties.

•

An updated meta-analysis providing better evidence on gall bladder extraction port following laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC).

•

Epigastric port retrieval of gallbladder following LC has advantage of reduced rate of both infection and incisional hernia.

•

Umbilical port retrieval of gallbladder following LC has advantage of reduced pain, port site bleeding and perforation risk.

•

In conclusion from this meta-analysis epigastric port retrieval seems to be more advantageous compared to the umbilical port.

Gallbladder Retrieval From Epigastric Versus Umbilical Port in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A PRISMA-Compliant Meta-Analysis

Purpose. To date, no evidence supports the retrieval of the gallbladder through a specific trocar site, and this choice is left to surgeons’ preference. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the influence of the trocar site used to extract the gallbladder on postoperative outcomes. Methods. According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a literature search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases was performed. Terms used were: (“gallbladder” OR “cholecystectomy”) AND “umbilical” AND (“epigastric” OR “subxiphoid”). Randomized trials comparing the gallbladder retrieval from different trocar sites were considered for further analysis. Results. Literature search revealed 145 articles, of which 7 matched inclusion criteria and reported adequate data about postoperative pain, operative time, port-site infections, and hernias. A total of 876 patients were included, and the gallbladder was extracted through epigastric or umbilical trocar site in 441 and in 435 patients, respectively. A statistically significant difference among groups was noted in terms of postoperative pain at 1, 6, 12, and 24 hours in favor of the umbilical trocar site ( P < .001). No significant differences were noted in postoperative hernia and infection rate, nor in terms of operative time. Conclusions. This meta-analysis shows a statistically significant reduction in terms of postoperative pain at 1, 6, 12, and 24 hours after surgery when the gallbladder is extracted through the umbilical port. Retrieval time, infections, and hernias rate implicate no contraindication for the choice of a specific trocar site to extract specimens. Despite limitations of this study, the umbilical trocar should be favored as the first choice to retrieve the gallbladder.