Display options
Cite
Sülü B, Diken T, Altun H, et al. A comparison of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an alternative technique without a suspension suture. Ulus Cerrahi Derg. 2014;30(4):192-6doi: 10.5152/UCD.2014.2717.
Sülü, B., Diken, T., Altun, H., Anuk, T., Güvendi, B., İlingi, E., Eren, M. S., Günerhan, Y., & Köksal, N. (2014). A comparison of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an alternative technique without a suspension suture. Ulusal cerrahi dergisi, 30(4), 192-6. https://doi.org/10.5152/UCD.2014.2717
Sülü, Barlas, et al. "A comparison of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an alternative technique without a suspension suture." Ulusal cerrahi dergisi vol. 30,4 (2014): 192-6. doi: https://doi.org/10.5152/UCD.2014.2717
Sülü B, Diken T, Altun H, Anuk T, Güvendi B, İlingi E, Eren MS, Günerhan Y, Köksal N. A comparison of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an alternative technique without a suspension suture. Ulus Cerrahi Derg. 2014 Dec 01;30(4):192-6. doi: 10.5152/UCD.2014.2717. eCollection 2014. PMID: 25931927; PMCID: PMC4379804.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Ulus Cerrahi Derg. 2014 Dec 01;30(4):192-6. doi: 10.5152/UCD.2014.2717. eCollection 2014.

A comparison of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an alternative technique without a suspension suture.

Ulusal cerrahi dergisi

Barlas Sülü, Tülay Diken, Hasan Altun, Turgut Anuk, Bülent Güvendi, Elif İlingi, Musa Sinan Eren, Yusuf Günerhan, Neşet Köksal

Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Kafkas University Faculty of Medicine, Kars, Turkey.

PMID: 25931927 PMCID: PMC4379804 DOI: 10.5152/UCD.2014.2717

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Many surgeons face difficulties during single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) surgery and are forced to use an additional port. We compared the results of a technique that we developed with SILC.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifty-four patients who were diagnosed with chronic cholelithiasis were prospectively randomized and divided into two groups. An additional 5-mm port (MCAP: with an additional port using a multi-channel device through the umbilicus) was placed in the subxiphoid area instead of a transabdominal suspension suture in one group of patients. The other group was operated on with the SILC technique. The demographic and surgical data of the patients were compared.

RESULTS: The MCAP technique shortened the surgery duration by more than half (MCAP: 35.0±12.3, SILC: 79.1±27.7 min) (p<0.05). No difference was found between the two methods in terms of estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, postoperative day 1 and 7 visual analog scale scores, need for analgesia in the postoperative period, and rate of changing to another technique due to inadequacy of the surgical technique.

CONCLUSION: MCAP is as safe as SILC for cholecystectomy and is easier for the surgeon to perform.

Keywords: Cholecystectomy; cholelithiasis; laparoscopic surgery; minimally invasive

References

  1. Ann Surg. 2011 Jul;254(1):22-7 - PubMed
  2. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Jul 14;19(26):4209-13 - PubMed
  3. J Korean Surg Soc. 2013 Aug;85(2):68-74 - PubMed
  4. Colorectal Dis. 2008 Oct;10(8):823-6 - PubMed
  5. Surg Endosc. 2012 Apr;26(4):1153-9 - PubMed
  6. Ann Surg. 2012 Jul;256(1):1-6 - PubMed
  7. Hepatogastroenterology. 2012 Mar-Apr;59(114):325-8 - PubMed
  8. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013 Jun;23(3):235-43 - PubMed
  9. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jul;203(1):26.e1-6 - PubMed
  10. Scand J Surg. 2012;101(4):283-6 - PubMed
  11. J Minim Access Surg. 2013 Jul;9(3):122-5 - PubMed
  12. Minim Invasive Surg. 2013;2013:381628 - PubMed
  13. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012 Oct;22(8):731-7 - PubMed
  14. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012 Oct;22(8):738-9 - PubMed

Publication Types