Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 5/2012

01-05-2012 | Review

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs. conventional multiport cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: S. R. Markar, A. Karthikesalingam, S. Thrumurthy, L. Muirhead, J. Kinross, P. Paraskeva

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 5/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has gained increasing attention due to the potential to maximize the benefits of laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this systematic review and pooled analysis was to compare clinical outcome following SILS and standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the treatment of gallstone-related disease.

Methods

An electronic search of Embase and Medline databases for articles from 1966 to 2011 was performed. Publications were included if they were randomised controlled studies in which patients underwent either single-incision or multiport cholecystectomy. The primary outcome measures for the meta-analysis were postoperative complications and postoperative pain score [visual analogue scale (VAS) on the day of surgery]. Secondary outcome measures were operating time and length of hospital stay. Weighted mean difference was calculated for the effect size of SILS on continuous variables, and pooled odds ratios were calculated for discrete variables.

Results

In total, 375 cholecystectomy operations from 7 randomised controlled trials were included, 195 by single-incision (SILS) and 180 by conventional multiport. Operating time was significantly longer in the SILS group compared to the standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy group (weighted mean difference = 2.13; P = 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications, postoperative pain score (VAS), or the length of hospital stay between the two groups.

Conclusion

The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated gallstone disease, with postoperative outcome similar to that of standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Future high-powered randomized studies should be focused on elucidating subtle differences in postoperative complications, reported postoperative pain, and cosmesis following SILS cholecystectomy in more severe biliary disease.
Literature
1.
2.
go back to reference Muhe E (1986) The first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 369:804 Muhe E (1986) The first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 369:804
3.
go back to reference Kaiser AM, Corman ML (2001) History of laparoscopy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 10:483–492PubMed Kaiser AM, Corman ML (2001) History of laparoscopy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 10:483–492PubMed
4.
go back to reference Keus F, de Jong JA, Gooszen HG, can Laarhoven CJ (2006) Laparoscopic vs open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Sys Rev (4):CD006231 Keus F, de Jong JA, Gooszen HG, can Laarhoven CJ (2006) Laparoscopic vs open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Sys Rev (4):CD006231
5.
6.
go back to reference Aprea G, Coppola Bottazzi E, Guida F, Masone S, Persico G (2011) Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) versus classic video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized prospective study. J Surg Res 166(2):e109–e112PubMedCrossRef Aprea G, Coppola Bottazzi E, Guida F, Masone S, Persico G (2011) Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) versus classic video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized prospective study. J Surg Res 166(2):e109–e112PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Asakuma M, Hayashi M, Komeda K, Shimizu T, Hirokawa F, Miyamoto Y, Okuda J, Tanigawa N (2011) Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain. Br J Surg 98(7):991–995PubMedCrossRef Asakuma M, Hayashi M, Komeda K, Shimizu T, Hirokawa F, Miyamoto Y, Okuda J, Tanigawa N (2011) Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain. Br J Surg 98(7):991–995PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Ma J, Cassera MA, Spaun GO, Hammill CW, Hansen PD, Aliabadi-Wahle S (2011) Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 254(1):22–27PubMedCrossRef Ma J, Cassera MA, Spaun GO, Hammill CW, Hansen PD, Aliabadi-Wahle S (2011) Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 254(1):22–27PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lee PC, Lo C, Lai PS, Chang JJ, Huang SJ, Lin MT, Lee PH (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97(7):1007–1012PubMedCrossRef Lee PC, Lo C, Lai PS, Chang JJ, Huang SJ, Lin MT, Lee PH (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97(7):1007–1012PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lirici MM, Califano AD, Angelini P, Corcione F (2011) Laparo-endoscopic single site cholecystectomy versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a pilot randomized trial. Am J Surg 202:45–52PubMedCrossRef Lirici MM, Califano AD, Angelini P, Corcione F (2011) Laparo-endoscopic single site cholecystectomy versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a pilot randomized trial. Am J Surg 202:45–52PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Marks J, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, Denoto G, Paraskeva P, Rivas H, Soper N, Rosemurgy A, Shah S (2011) Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data. Am J Surg 201(3):369–372 (discussion 372–373)PubMedCrossRef Marks J, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, Denoto G, Paraskeva P, Rivas H, Soper N, Rosemurgy A, Shah S (2011) Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data. Am J Surg 201(3):369–372 (discussion 372–373)PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Tsimoyiannis EC, Tsimogiannis KE, Pappas-Gogos G, Farantos C, Benetatos N, Mavridou P, Manataki A (2010) Different pain scores in single transumbilical incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomize controlled trial. Surg Endosc 24(8):1842–1848PubMedCrossRef Tsimoyiannis EC, Tsimogiannis KE, Pappas-Gogos G, Farantos C, Benetatos N, Mavridou P, Manataki A (2010) Different pain scores in single transumbilical incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomize controlled trial. Surg Endosc 24(8):1842–1848PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Chow A, Purkayastha S, Aziz O, Pefanis D, Paraskeva P (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for cholecystectomy: a retrospective comparison with 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 145(12):1187–1191PubMedCrossRef Chow A, Purkayastha S, Aziz O, Pefanis D, Paraskeva P (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for cholecystectomy: a retrospective comparison with 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 145(12):1187–1191PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Rasic Z, Schwarz D, Nesek VA, Zoricic I, Sever M, Rasic D, Lojo N (2010) Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy–a new advantage of gallbladder surgery. Coll Antropol 34(2):595–598PubMed Rasic Z, Schwarz D, Nesek VA, Zoricic I, Sever M, Rasic D, Lojo N (2010) Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy–a new advantage of gallbladder surgery. Coll Antropol 34(2):595–598PubMed
15.
go back to reference Chang SK, Tay CW, Bicol RA, Lee YY, Madhavan K (2011) A case-control study of single-incision versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg 35(2):289–293PubMedCrossRef Chang SK, Tay CW, Bicol RA, Lee YY, Madhavan K (2011) A case-control study of single-incision versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg 35(2):289–293PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Love KM, Durham CA, Meara MP, Mays AC, Bower CE (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a cost comparison. Surg Endosc 25(5):1553–1558PubMedCrossRef Love KM, Durham CA, Meara MP, Mays AC, Bower CE (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a cost comparison. Surg Endosc 25(5):1553–1558PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Fronza JS, Linn JG, Nagle AP, Soper NJ (2010) A single institution’s experience with single incision cholecystectomy compared to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 148(4):731–734PubMedCrossRef Fronza JS, Linn JG, Nagle AP, Soper NJ (2010) A single institution’s experience with single incision cholecystectomy compared to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 148(4):731–734PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Qiu Z, Sun J, Pu Y, Jiang T, Cao J, Wu W (2011) Learning curve of transumbilical single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILS): a preliminary study of 80 selected patients with benign gallbladder diseases. World J Surg 35(9):2092–2101PubMedCrossRef Qiu Z, Sun J, Pu Y, Jiang T, Cao J, Wu W (2011) Learning curve of transumbilical single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILS): a preliminary study of 80 selected patients with benign gallbladder diseases. World J Surg 35(9):2092–2101PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Antoniou SA, Pointner R, Granderath FA (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 25:367–377PubMedCrossRef Antoniou SA, Pointner R, Granderath FA (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 25:367–377PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs. conventional multiport cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors
S. R. Markar
A. Karthikesalingam
S. Thrumurthy
L. Muirhead
J. Kinross
P. Paraskeva
Publication date
01-05-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 5/2012
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2051-0

Other articles of this Issue 5/2012

Surgical Endoscopy 5/2012 Go to the issue