Safety Of Single-incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Research Articles

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis according to disease severity: single center retrospective study in Korea.

The safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) for acute cholecystitis (AC) has not yet been confirmed. This single-center retrospective study included patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for AC between April 2010 and December 2020. Propensity scores were used to match patients who underwent SILC with those who underwent conventional multiport LC (CMLC) in the entire cohort and in the two subgroups. A total of 1,876 patients underwent LC for AC, and 427 (22.8%) underwent SILC. In the propensity score-matched analysis of the entire cohort (404 patients in each group), the length of hospital stay (2.9 days vs. 3.5 days, p = 0.029) was shorter in the SILC group than in the CMLC group. No significant differences were observed in other surgical outcomes. In grade I AC (336 patients in each group), the SILC group showed poorer surgical outcomes than the CMLC group, regarding operation time (57.6 minutes vs. 52.4 minutes, p = 0.001) and estimated blood loss (22.9 mL vs. 13.1 mL, p = 0.006). In grade II/III AC (58 patients in each group), there were no significant differences in surgical outcomes between the two groups. Postoperative pain outcomes were also not significantly different in the two groups, regardless of severity. This study demonstrated that SILC had similar surgical and pain outcomes to CMLC in patients with AC; however, subgroup analysis showed that SILC was associated with poor surgical outcomes than CMLC in grade I AC. Therefore, SILC should be carefully performed in patients with AC by experienced hepatobiliary surgeons.

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 25.5kg/m2 (SILC/SIRC, 25.0/27.0kg/m2), 73.8min (SILC/SIRC, 68.2/88.8min), 12.6mL (SILC/SIRC, 12.1/14.8mL) and 2.5days (SILC/SIRC, 2.8/1.9days), 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.

Feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an ambulatory setting

BackgroundSingle-incision laparoscopic surgery has emerged as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the clinical setting. Limited information is available on the possibility of performing single-incision laparoscopic surgery as an ambulatory procedure. This study aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus conventional LC in an ambulatory setting. MethodsNinety-one patients were randomized to SILC (n = 49) or LC (n = 42). The success rate, operative duration, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, total cost, complications, pain score, vomiting, and cosmetic satisfaction of the two groups were then compared. ResultsThere were significant differences in the operative time (46.89 ± 10.03 min in SILC vs. 37.24 ± 10.23 min in LC; P < 0.001). As compared with LC, SILC was associated with lower total costs (8012.28 ± 752.67 RMB vs. 10258.91 ± 1087.63 RMB; P < 0.001) and better cosmetic satisfaction (4.94 ± 0.24 vs. 4.74 ± 0.54; P = 0.031). There were no significant differences between-group in terms of general data, success rate, blood loss, hospital stay, gallbladder perforation, drainage, delayed discharge, readmission, complications, pain score, and vomiting (P > 0.05). ConclusionsAmbulatory SILC is safe and feasible for selected patients. The advantages of SILC as compared with LC are improved cosmetic satisfaction and lower total costs.

SURGICAL OUTCOME OF SINGLE INCISION LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY IN COMPARISON WITH THE 4-PORT TECHNIQUE IN ZAGAZIG UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL

Cholelithiasis is one of the most common disorders of the digestive tract encountered bygeneral surgeons worldwide. Conventional or open cholecystectomy was the mainstay of treatment for a longtime for this disease. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has been the gold standard for removal of thegallbladder since the early 1990s. Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is becoming a more widely acceptedsurgical approach. However, the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC)are yet to be established. The present study compared outcomes following the use of SILC or conventionallaparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) on patients with gallbladder disease.

Feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elderly patients: A single institution, retrospective case series.

IntroductionTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) for uncomplicated gallbladder in elderly patients.Materials and MethodsA retrospective analysis of 810 patients undergoing SILC from May 2009 to October 2016 at Osaka Police Hospital was performed, and the outcomes of the patients aged < 80 years and the patients ≥ 80 years were compared.ResultsThe median operative times of patients <80 years and patients ≥80 years were 100 min and 110 min, respectively (p = 0.4). The conversion rates to a different operative procedure (multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy or open cholecystectomy) were 3% (22/763) of patients < 80 years and 0% of patients ≥ 80 years (p = 0.6). Perioperative complications were seen in 6% (46/763) of patients < 80 years and 17% (8/47) of patients ≥ 80 years (p < 0.05). Pneumonia was seen in 0% (0/763) of patients < 80 years and 4% (3/47) of patients ≥ 80 years (p < 0.05). There was no mortality in either group. The median postoperative hospital stay was 4 days for patients <80 years and 5 days for patients ≥80 years (p < 0.05).ConclusionSILC for uncomplicated gallbladder could be performed for patients ≥ 80 years with acceptable morbidity and mortality as compared with the previous reports, though the complication rate of patients ≥ 80 years was higher than that of patients < 80 years.

Peer review report 1 on “Feasibility And Safety Of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy In Elderly Patients: A Single Institution, Retrospective Case Series”

Peer review report 1 on “Feasibility And Safety Of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy In Elderly Patients: A Single Institution, Retrospective Case Series”

Peer review report 2 on “Feasibility And Safety Of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy In Elderly Patients: A Single Institution, Retrospective Case Series”

Peer review report 2 on “Feasibility And Safety Of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy In Elderly Patients: A Single Institution, Retrospective Case Series”

Safety and feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in obese patients.

BackgroundCurrent literature frequently indicates that experienced laparoscopic surgeons can safely perform single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, but there have been few reports evaluating the feasibility and safety of performing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for obese patients. Therefore, a large single-center database was retrospectively reviewed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for obese patients by comparing the outcomes of normal-weight and obese patients undergoing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy.MethodsA retrospective analysis of 608 patients undergoing SILC between May 2009 and May 2015 at Osaka Police Hospital was performed, and the outcomes of obese [body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2] and normal-weight patients (18.5 ≤ BMI < 25 kg/m2) were compared.ResultsThirty-eight obese patients (mean BMI 32.5 kg/m2) were compared to 362 normal-weight patients (mean BMI 22.0 kg/m2). The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores of the obese patients were significantly higher than those of normal-weight patients. The mean operative times in the normal-weight and the obese groups were 110 min vs. 127 min, respectively (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the bleeding volume and the conversion rate to a different operative procedure. Perioperative complications were seen in 6% (23/362) of the patients in the normal-weight group and 8% (3/38) of the patients in the obese group (p = 0.7). The mean postoperative hospital stay was 4.5 days for the normal-weight group and 4.4 days for the obese group (p = 0.8).ConclusionsSingle-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which offers good cosmetic outcomes, seems feasible and safe in obese patients.

A prospective randomized controlled trial: single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs. traditional three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy(SILC) compared with conventional three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy(3PLC). Methods Fifty-four patients diagnosed with biliary deases were included in this study at our institution. The patients were randomized into two groups: 3PLC group(n= 28) and SILC group(n= 26). Data including gender, age, weight, height, body mass index, operative duration, pain scores, percentage of conversion during the operation and vancouver scar scale were prospectively collected and analyzed. Patients were prospectively collected and analyzed. Patients were followed up for 12 months. Results There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to gender, age, weight, height and body mass index. The operation time in SILC group was significantly longer than that in 3PLC group[(56.9±15.8) min vs.(35.2±8.7) min,P< 0.01]. On the first day after operation, the pain scores were higher for SILC with the application of equal narcotic drugs. There were no statistically signiicnat differences between the two groups in terms of total pain scores. Wound complications were severer in SILC, but there was no significant difference in incidence of incision hernia between the two groups. Cosmetic scores were favored for SILC(11.7±0.8 vs.10.1±1.2,P< 0.05). Conclusion This prospective randomized controlled study showed that SILC is safe and feasible in treating patients with simple biliary diseases compared with 3PLC. Key words: Cholecystectomy; Laparoscopy

Feasibility of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

To assess the safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) for acute cholecystitis. All patients who underwent SILC at Sano Hospital (Kobe, Japan) between January 2010 and December 2014 were included in this retrospective study. Clinical data related to patient characteristics and surgical outcomes were collected from medical records. The parameters for assessing the safety of the procedure included operative time, volume of blood loss, achievement of the critical view of safety, use of additional trocars, conversion to laparotomy, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and duration of postoperative hospital stay. Patient backgrounds were statistically compared between those with and without conversion to laparotomy. A total of 100 patients underwent SILC for acute cholecystitis during the period. Preoperative endoscopic treatment was performed for suspected choledocholithiasis in 41 patients (41%). The mean time from onset of acute cholecystitis was 7.7 d. According to the Updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) for the severity of cholecystitis, 86 and 14 patients had grade I and grade II acute cholecystitis, respectively. The mean operative time was 87.4 min. The mean estimated blood loss was 80.6 mL. The critical view of safety was obtained in 89 patients (89%). Conversion laparotomy was performed in 12 patients (12%). Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade III or greater were observed in 4 patients (4%). The mean duration of postoperative hospital stay was 5.7 d. Patients converted from SILC to laparotomy tended to have higher days after onset. SILC is feasible for acute cholecystitis; in addition, early surgical intervention may reduce the risk of laparotomy conversion.

Single-Incision Versus Standard Multiple-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

The advantages of single-incision surgery for the treatment of gallstone disease is debated. Previous meta-analyses comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and standard laparoscopic multiport cholecystectomy (SLMC) included few and underpowered trials. To overcome this limitation, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studies. A MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library literature search of studies published in and comparing SILC with SLMC was performed. The primary outcome was safety of SILC as measured by the overall rate of postoperative complications and biliary spillage. Feasibility was another primary outcome as measured by the conversion and operative time. Postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, perioperative blood loss, time to return to normal activity, and cosmetic satisfaction were secondary outcomes. We identified 43 studies of which 30 were observational reports and 13 experimental trials, for a total of 7489 patients (2090 SILC and 5389 SLMC). The overall rate of complications was comparable between groups (relative risk [RR] = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.87-1.35; P = .46), as were the rates of biliary spillage (RR = 1.16; 95% CI = 0.73-1.84; P = .53) and conversion rate (RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.53-1.46; P = .62). Operative time was in favor of SLMC (weighted mean difference = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.67-0.79; P < .0001). Secondary outcomes favored SILC, but with marginal advantages. SILC is a feasible technique but without any significant advantage over SLMC for relevant end points. Although secondary outcomes favored SILC, the small magnitude of the advantage and the low quality of assessment methods question the clinical significance of these benefits.

Single-incision cholecystectomy: a comparative study of standard laparoscopic, robotic, and SPIDER platforms

Many series have shown the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC), but this technique still has limitations such as instrument collisions and lack of triangulation. Recently, two single-incision platforms, robotic and SPIDER, have attempted to ameliorate such problems. This study aimed to compare three different techniques of single-incision cholecystectomy: standard laparoscopic, robotic, and SPIDER approaches. The authors retrospectively collected data from their first 166 single-incision robotic cholecystectomies (SIRCs) and compared the findings with the data from their first 166 SILCs and the first 166 s-generation SPIDER procedures. All the SILCs were performed with three trocars placed in one umbilical incision and with gallbladder retraction using a Prolene stitch on the right upper quadrant. All the robotic cases were managed using the da Vinci Single-Site Surgical System, and all the SPIDER procedures were performed using the SPIDER Surgical System. The SILC, SIRC, and SPIDER groups consisted respectively of 129 (76.3%), 131 (78.9%), and 136 (81.9%) women with the respective mean ages of 44.5 ± 14.3, 51.6 ± 15.9, and 46.4 ± 15.2 years. The mean body mass indexes (BMIs) were respectively 29.1 ± 5.6, 29.4 ± 6.2, and 27.5 ± 4.8 kg/m(2), and the mean surgical times were 37.1 ± 13.3, 63.0 ± 25.2, and 52.8 ± 18.7 min. The total hospital stays were respectively 1.3 ± 5.3, 1.2 ± 2.2, and 1.5 ± 2.6 days, and complications were seen respectively in three SILC cases (1.8%), three SIRC cases (1.8%), and two SPIDER cases (1.2%). The results of this study demonstrate similar results among the three platforms for most of the parameters measured. The SILC procedure appears to be superior to SIRC and SPIDER in terms of surgical time, but selection bias could be the cause. The SILS, SIRC, and SPIDER procedures all are similar in terms of complication profile. It can be concluded that SILC, SIRC, and SPIDER all are feasible and safe alternatives when used for single-incision cholecystectomy.

Comparison of Single Incision and Three Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Si Min Park, M.D., In Seok Choi, M.D., Ju Ik Moon, M.D., Yu Mi Ra, M.D., Sang Eok Lee, M.D., Won Jun Choi, M.D., Dae Sung Yoon, M.D.. J Minim Invasive Surg 2013;16:1-5. https://doi.org/10.7602/jmis.2013.16.1.1

Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Is Associated With a Higher Bile Duct Injury Rate

To compare the incidence of bile duct injuries during single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) in relation to the accepted historic rate of 0.4% to 0.5% for standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC). Technically, SILC is more challenging than SLC. The role and benefit of SILC in patient care has yet to be defined. Bile duct injuries have been reported in several series of SILC. A comprehensive database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed Central was performed to generate all reported cases of SILC to present. The search was limited to reports of 20 or more patients based on current literature of existing SILC learning curves. Data were analyzed using the Student t test and χ analyses where appropriate. A total of 76 candidate studies were identified; 45 studies met inclusion criteria for an aggregate total of 2626 patients. Most SILCs were performed in the absence of acute cholecystitis (90.6%). The aggregate complication rate was 4.2%, and complications were graded according to the Dindo-Clavien Classification System. Nineteen bile duct injuries were identified for a SILC-associated bile duct injury rate of 0.72%. There seems to be an increase in the rate of bile duct injuries during SILC when compared with historic rates during SLC. Because most SILCs are performed in optimal conditions, such as lack of acute inflammation, we urge caution in applying this technique to inflamed gallbladder pathology. Controlled trials are needed before conclusions are made regarding safety of SILC.

A Comparison Between Single-Incision and Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is becoming a more widely accepted surgical approach. However, the feasibility and safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) are yet to be established. The present study compared outcomes following the use of SILC or conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) on patients with gallbladder disease. The study involved 190 symptomatic gallbladder disease patients treated between March 2009 and February 2011. Ninety-six patients underwent SILC, and 94 patients underwent CLC. Clinical and surgical outcomes were compared. The SILC and CLC groups were similar in terms of age, gender ratio, body mass index, and diagnoses. The two groups were also found to be similar in terms of postoperative clinical course and complications. The SILC group had a longer operation time, less postoperative pain, and a shorter hospital stay than the CLC group (P<.05 for all variables). SILC using the OCTO port system (Darim Corp., Korea) was as safe and feasible as CLC. Additionally, SILC is less invasive and more comfortable for patients than CLC.

A Novel Retraction Instrument Improves the Safety of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in an Animal Model

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) promises improved cosmesis and may further minimize the invasiveness of intraabdominal interventions but cannot come at the expense of patient safety. This study describes the evaluation of a novel 5-mm instrument designed for SILC that maintains an equivalent critical view to that obtained with standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC). Sixteen animals were randomly assigned to one of four study arms. Four techniques for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were used: standard four-port MLC, three-instrument SILC (SILC-A), three-instrument SILC using a suture for lateral retraction (SILC-B), and three-instrument SILC using the novel instrument for retraction (SILC-C). Each case was timed and video-recorded. The video was cropped to obscure the method of retraction and evaluated by five experienced laparoscopic surgeons blinded to the technique used. Each case was rated subjectively on a safety and visualization scale of 1-4. SILC-A and SILC-B cases were significantly longer in duration than both SILC-C and MLC cases. The safety and visualization scale results were lower for the SILC-A technique but were equivalent for the MLC, SILC-B, and SILC-C techniques. This study introduces a novel instrument for gallbladder retraction. In this initial evaluation, the new instrument showed encouraging results in its ability to generate good visualization, support the safe critical view technique, and reduce the length of the procedure.

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a modified dome-down approach with conventional laparoscopic instruments

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) may increase the risk of bile duct injury due to compromised operative exposure. Dome-down laparoscopic cholecystectomy provides the ability to evaluate the cystic duct circumferentially prior to its division, thus minimizing the risks of bile duct injury. This study assesses the feasibility and safety of SILC using a modified dome-down approach with all conventional laparoscopic instruments. Three low-profile 5-mm trocars are placed via a single transumbilical incision. The two working trocars are aimed laterally via the rectus to achieve adequate triangulation. An extralong 5-mm 30º laparoscope with an L-shaped light-cord adaptor is used to yield more external working space. Cephalic liver retraction is achieved with one transabdominal suture through the gallbladder fundus. Leaving the gallbladder fundus attached to the liver bed, a window is first created between the gallbladder body and the liver. The dissection is then carried down retrograde toward the porta hepatis. A 360º view of the gallbladder-cystic duct junction is achieved prior to transecting the cystic duct. The gallbladder is then freed by separation of the fundal attachments. The specimen is retrieved by enlarging the fascial incision. All fascial defects are then primarily closed. Sixteen patients (mean age 31 years, mean BMI 26.3 kg/m(2)) were enrolled in this study. Thirteen had elective surgery for symptomatic cholelithiasis, and three had emergency surgery for acute cholecystitis. Mean operating time was 80.3 min, and blood loss was minimal. All patients were discharged within 24 h without complications. Follow-up at 1 month revealed a barely visible scar within the umbilicus. SILC using a modified dome-down approach is technically feasible with all straight instruments, and it is safe because of good delineation of ductal anatomy. Adoption of this approach may minimize the risk of bile duct injury during early experience of SILC.