A Comparative Study of Single Incision versus Conventional Four Ports Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

A Comprehensive Analysis of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Trends, Challenges, and Future Directions

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is a minimally invasive surgical technique introduced as an advancement to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This narrative review delves into the emergence of SILC, emphasizing its distinct advantages such as improved cosmesis, reduced postoperative pain, and potentially faster recovery compared to traditional LC. The study meticulously examines current trends and challenges in SILC, including variations in techniques and their impact on patient outcomes. Furthermore, the article sheds light on the technical intricacies and longer operative times associated with SILC. It aims to contribute valuable insights to the medical community by synthesizing existing literature and recent research findings, fostering a deeper understanding of SILC, and guiding future advancements in minimally invasive surgical approaches. The discussion extends to the learning curve, complications, and a comparative analysis between SILC and traditional LC, offering a nuanced understanding of their respective strengths and limitations. The article concludes with a forward-looking perspective, exploring future directions and innovations in SILC, including advancements in surgical techniques and the integration of innovative technologies, such as robotic assistance and in vivo robots, to enhance precision and efficacy. The call for continued research into the long-term outcomes, safety, and refined patient selection criteria emphasizes the evolving landscape of SILC and its potential to shape the future of minimally invasive abdominal surgeries.

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.

Initial experiences of robotic SP cholecystectomy: a comparative analysis with robotic Si single-site cholecystectomy

PURPOSE

The da Vinci SP robotic surgical system (Intuitive Surgical) offers pure SP with 4 lumens, which accommodates the fully-wristed endoscope and 3 arms with multijoint feature. We herein present our initial experience of the da Vinci SP surgical system in robotic single-site cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Thirty consecutive patients with a preoperative diagnosis of gallstones and/or chronic cholecystitis who underwent robotic SP cholecystectomy (RSPC) using da Vinci SP surgical system from January to May 2019 were reviewed. The perioperative outcomes were assessed and compared with those performed using Si-robotic single-site surgical system.

RESULTS

Mean docking time was 5.2 minutes. The mean actual dissection time was 14.6 minutes while the mean operation time was 75.1 minutes. Postoperative course was unremarkable and patients were discharged after a mean hospital stay of 1.5 days. In comparative analysis, operation time (109.5 ± 30.0 minutes vs. 75.1 ± 17.5 minutes, P = 0.001), docking time (11.9 ± 4.3 minutes vs. 5.2 ± 1.9 minutes, P = 0.001), actual dissection time (34.6 ± 18.4 minutes vs. 14.6 ± 5.1 minutes, P = 0.001), console time (58.7 ± 23.0 minutes vs. 32.4 ± 11.6 minutes, P = 0.001), immediate postoperative pain (4.6 ± 1.3 vs. 3.2 ± 1.0, P = 0.001), and pain prior to discharge (2.0 ± 0.6 vs. 1.4 ± 0.0, P = 0.002) were significantly improved in RSPC.

CONCLUSION

RSPC is feasible, safe, and effective. The perioperative outcomes are better compared with Si-robotic single-site surgical systems.

European association for endoscopic surgery (EAES) consensus statement on single-incision endoscopic surgery

Background

Laparoscopic surgery changed the management of numerous surgical conditions. It was associated with many advantages over open surgery, such as decreased postoperative pain, faster recovery, shorter hospital stay and excellent cosmesis. Since two decades single-incision endoscopic surgery (SIES) was introduced to the surgical community. SIES could possibly result in even better postoperative outcomes than multi-port laparoscopic surgery, especially concerning cosmetic outcomes and pain. However, the single-incision surgical procedure is associated with quite some challenges.

Methods

An expert panel of surgeons has been selected and invited to participate in the preparation of the material for a consensus meeting on the topic SIES, which was held during the EAES congress in Frankfurt, June 16, 2017. The material presented during the consensus meeting was based on evidence identified through a systematic search of literature according to a pre-specified protocol. Three main topics with respect to SIES have been identified by the panel: (1) General, (2) Organ specific, (3) New development. Within each of these topics, subcategories have been defined. Evidence was graded according to the Oxford 2011 Levels of Evidence. Recommendations were made according to the GRADE criteria.

Results

In general, there is a lack of high level evidence and a lack of long-term follow-up in the field of single-incision endoscopic surgery. In selected patients, the single-incision approach seems to be safe and effective in terms of perioperative morbidity. Satisfaction with cosmesis has been established to be the main advantage of the single-incision approach. Less pain after single-incision approach compared to conventional laparoscopy seems to be considered an advantage, although it has not been consistently demonstrated across studies.

Conclusions

Considering the increased direct costs (devices, instruments and operating time) of the SIES procedure and the prolonged learning curve, wider acceptance of the procedure should be supported only after demonstration of clear benefits.

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.