Preoperative factors predicting the need for additional ports during single‐incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Sato, Norihiro; Yabuki, Kei; Kudo, Yuzan; Koga, Atsuhiro; Kohi, Shiro; Tamura, Tomohide; Shibao, Kazunori; Hirata, Keiji

doi:10.1111/ases.12286

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, CLC may be preferred over SILC or additional port insertion may be inevitable during SILC. Sato N. et al argued that the factors that may require additional port insertion during SILC were gender, prior history of upper abdominal surgery, and white blood cell count 20…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A large-cohort comparison between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a single center; 2080 cases

Lee

Moon

Choi

et al. 2018

Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Backgrounds/AimsThis study was conducted to verify and compare the safety and feasibility of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).MethodsA total of 2,080 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a single center, Konyang University Hospital, between 2010 and 2016. We retrospectively compared the demographics, perioperative outcome, and postoperative complication results between the CLC and SILC groups.ResultsAmong the 2,080 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 1,080 had CLC and 1,000 had SILC. When retrospectively reviewed, the SILC group had significantly higher percentages of patients who were aged under 80 years, who were women, and had the American Society of Anesthesiologist score of lower than 3 points compared to those of the CLC group. Furthermore, the CLC group had a higher percentage of patients with acute cholecystitis or empyema, whereas the SILC group had a higher percentage of patients with chronic cholecystitis. Preoperative percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage insertion or H-vac insertion was more frequently conducted, bleeding loss was more common, and hospital stay was longer in the CLC group. Postoperative complications such as wound infection, biloma, bile duct injury, and duodenal perforation were not significantly different between the two groups.ConclusionsIn conclusion, if performed after preoperative patient selection such as in younger and female patients with no abdominal operation history at the time of benign gallbladder surgery, SILC can be considered feasible and safe without additional complications when compared with CLC.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A large-cohort comparison between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a single center; 2080 cases

Lee

Moon

Choi

et al. 2018

Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Joseph et al [17] reported that SILC-associated bile duct injury occurred in 0.72% of cases during early period; this rate was higher than that compared to the standard LC (0.4%−0.5% of cases). Thus, patient selections are crucial, and risk factors for conversion have been studied [18,19]. Lee and Kim [20] reported a postoperative bile leakage rate of 3.8%, which is higher than that reported in other studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Outcome of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

Suh,

Choi,

Choi

et al. 2023

Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has advantages in cosmesis and postoperative pain, its utilization has been limited. This study raises the possibility of expanding its indication to acute cholecystitis with the novel method of solo surgery under retrospective analysis. Methods: We compared the outcomes of SILC (n = 58) to those of three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (TILC; n = 117) for acute cholecystitis, being performed from March 2014 to December 2015. Results: Intraoperative results, including the operation time, did not differ significantly, except for drain catheter insertion (p = 0.004). Each group had 1 case of open conversion due to common bile duct injury. There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay. Either group by itself was not a risk factor for complications, but in preoperative drainage for intraoperative perforation, 3 factors of intraoperative perforation, biliary complication, and history of upper abdominal operation for additional port, only American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores for postoperative complication of Clavien-Dindo grades III and IV were significant risk factors. Conclusions: Our study findings showed comparative outcomes between both groups, providing evidence for the safety and feasibility of SILC for acute cholecystitis.

show abstract

“…El puerto adicional se insertó en el hemi abdomen derecho para no interferir con los otros trocares y fue utilizado para controlar el sangrado por succión o compresión y para mantener una buena visión quirúrgica. (Fujinaga et al, 2022); (Sato et al, 2016).…”

Section: Otras Opciones Descritas Sonunclassified

Procedimientos de rescate en colecistectomía laparoscópica: cómo finalizar con seguridad por laparoscopía

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Los procedimientos de rescate en colecistectomía laparoscópica son variados. Objetivos: Describir los procedimientos de rescate usados en el Hospital Regional ISSSTE Puebla durante el 2022. Material y métodos: Estudio observacional descriptivo, prospectivo de corte trasversal, en donde se incluyeron pacientes en los cuales no se pudo completar la visión crítica de seguridad y por lo tanto se tuvo que usar algún procedimiento de rescate para completar la colecistectomía por laparoscopía. Resultados: Se realizaron 193 colecistectomías laparoscópicas, en 40 (20.7%) pacientes se empleó algún procedimiento de rescate, se convirtieron 4 (2%) pacientes. Mediante el análisis multivariado no hubo relación significativa entre el tipo de procedimiento y el género, la edad, así como el grado de severidad de Tokyo; pero si hubo relación significativa el puntaje de Parkland ≥4 con los siguientes procedimientos: "Fundus first" más "punción y aspiración", colecistectomía reconstitutiva, abordaje infundibular, abordaje del segmento IV, colocación de un puerto adicional, colecistectomía parcial con o sin colangiografía, y el abordaje del ganglio cístico. Los días de estancia hospitalaria mayores se relacionaron con la colecistectomía reconstitutiva, colecistectomía parcial y la conversión. El sangrado se relacionó con la necesidad de conversión y con el uso de la "punción y aspiración".

show abstract

Preoperative factors predicting the need for additional ports during single‐incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Abstract: Our results suggest that gender, prior history of upper abdominal surgery, and white blood cell count can predict the likelihood of requiring an additional port in SILC.

Cited by 5 publications

References 19 publications

A large-cohort comparison between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a single center; 2080 cases

A large-cohort comparison between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a single center; 2080 cases

Outcome of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

Procedimientos de rescate en colecistectomía laparoscópica: cómo finalizar con seguridad por laparoscopía

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About