We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDIES
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparison study of clinical outcomes between single-site robotic cholecystectomy and single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Asian Journal of Surgery 2017 November
BACKGROUND: Multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard surgical procedure for symptomatic gallbladder diseases. The latest evolution is single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC). Single-site robotic cholecystectomy (SSRC) overcomes several limitations of manual SILC. The aim of this study is to present our initial experiences in SSRC and to compare its clinical outcomes with those of SILC.
METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed data for patients who received SSRC or SILC from February 2014 to September 2015. The following variables were analyzed: age, sex, body mass index, indications, pain scale, length of stay, and complications. The data were analyzed with Student t test or by Fisher exact test.
RESULTS: The analysis included 51 SSRC (33 women, 18 men) and 63 SILC patients (40 women, 23 men). Patients in both groups had similar demographic features and indications for surgery. The SSRC group required no conversions to conventional laparoscopy and no additional trocars, whereas the SILC group had two (3.17%) cases. Length of stay did not significantly differ between the SSRC and SILC groups (4.29 ± 0.72 vs. 4.13 ± 0.93 days, respectively; p = 0.823). However, the SSRC group had shorter operative time (71.30 ± 48.88 vs. 74.70 ± 30.16 minutes; p = 0.772), less perioperative bile spillage (9.81% vs. 19.05%; p = 0.189), and less postoperative bile leakage (0% vs. 3.17%; p = 0.501). However, the parameters mentioned above were not statistically significant, whereas pain scale scores were significantly lower in the SSRC group (2.11 ± 0.76 vs. 3.98 ± 0.84; p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Both SSRC and SILC are safe and feasible procedures for performing single incision cholecystectomy. SSRC, however, has the advantage of significantly decreased postoperative pain.
METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed data for patients who received SSRC or SILC from February 2014 to September 2015. The following variables were analyzed: age, sex, body mass index, indications, pain scale, length of stay, and complications. The data were analyzed with Student t test or by Fisher exact test.
RESULTS: The analysis included 51 SSRC (33 women, 18 men) and 63 SILC patients (40 women, 23 men). Patients in both groups had similar demographic features and indications for surgery. The SSRC group required no conversions to conventional laparoscopy and no additional trocars, whereas the SILC group had two (3.17%) cases. Length of stay did not significantly differ between the SSRC and SILC groups (4.29 ± 0.72 vs. 4.13 ± 0.93 days, respectively; p = 0.823). However, the SSRC group had shorter operative time (71.30 ± 48.88 vs. 74.70 ± 30.16 minutes; p = 0.772), less perioperative bile spillage (9.81% vs. 19.05%; p = 0.189), and less postoperative bile leakage (0% vs. 3.17%; p = 0.501). However, the parameters mentioned above were not statistically significant, whereas pain scale scores were significantly lower in the SSRC group (2.11 ± 0.76 vs. 3.98 ± 0.84; p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Both SSRC and SILC are safe and feasible procedures for performing single incision cholecystectomy. SSRC, however, has the advantage of significantly decreased postoperative pain.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app