Abstract

ObjectiveTo determine whether gall bladder (GB) retrieval from umbilical port is associated with more pain at port site as compared to GB retrieval from epigastric port in adult patients undergoing four port elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy at a tertiary care hospital. MethodsAdult patients, who were undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy during a six month period in 2010 at our institute, were randomized to either group A (n = 60, GB retrieval through epigastric port) or group B (n = 60, GB retrieval through umbilical port). VAS for pain was assessed by a registered nurse at 1, 6, 12, 24 and 36 h after surgery. ResultsThe VAS for pain at umbilical port was less than epigastric port at 1, 6, 12, 24 and 36 h after surgery (5.9 ± 1.1 vs. 4.1 ± 1.5, 4.6 ± 0.94 vs. 3.5 ± 1.05, 3.9 ± 0.85 vs. 2.4 ± 0.79, 3.05 ± 0.87 vs. 2.15 ± 0.87, respectively) and the difference was statistically significant (p-value < 0.001). Multiple linear regression was done for port site pain at 24 h and the VAS at umblical port was less than epigastric port with VAS difference of 0.9 after adjusting for age, sex, duration of surgery and additional analgesia use (r2 = 0.253, p-value < 0.001). ConclusionGall bladder retrieval from umbilical port is associated with lower port site pain than GB retrieval from epigastric port in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We recommend umbilical port for gall bladder retrieval.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.