A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing 4-Port, 3-Port, and Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Abstract

SILC is associated with less postoperative pain in later hours, reduces in-hospital analgesic dosages, has longer procedure time, but does not increase intraoperative and postoperative adverse events It seems that SILC has no obvious advantages in terms of later outcomes.

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

“…One trial had a 1·5 : 1 allocation ratio, with more patients in the SILC group. Another trial allocated patients equally to four‐port, three‐port and single‐port laparoscopic cholecystectomy; the four‐ and three‐port groups were analysed as a single group, resulting in a 2 : 1 ratio. A third study had a 2 : 1 allocation ratio with fewer patients in the MLC group.…”

Readmission to hospital following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis

“…Studies reporting a readmission rate of ≥ 5% had an average cohort size of 15,000, whereas studies reporting a readmission rate of < 5% had an average cohort size of 44,000. There were three studies that reported a readmission rate > 7%; these include Vohra et al [43] based in the UK and Ireland (7.1%), Fuks et al [19] based in France (9.5%) and Nielsen et al [31] based in Denmark (11.7%).…”

Single incision versus standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Up-dated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

“…Data were pooled into one MLC group for the following reasons: a) only 3 other trials used exclusively a 3-port MLC and two trials combined the 3-port and 4-port approaches not making a distinction. Therefore, there was too few data to compare SILC separately to a 3-port and a 4-port MLC; b) the results for the two MLC approaches in this one trial 43 were practically identical. Trials also varied regarding the gallbladder retraction methods in SILC, inclusion/exclusion criteria and analgesic strategies (not shown), and blinding (Table 4).…”