Top

Published in:

01-03-2013

Randomized clinical study for assessment of incision characteristics and pain associated with LESS versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Authors: Fernando Athayde Veloso Madureira, José Eduardo Ferreira Manso, Delta Madureira Fo, Antonio Carlos Garrido Iglesias

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 3/2013

Abstract

Background

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) has emerged as a technique that uses a natural scar, the umbilicus, within which a multiple-entry portal is placed into a 3.0–4.0-cm single incision to perform operations. The objective of this study was to compare incision size, wound complications, and postoperative pain of LESS compared with those of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

A prospective randomized controlled study was conducted between January and June 2011 at two university hospitals in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Fifty-seven patients were randomly assigned to undergo laparoscopic or LESS cholecystectomy. Skin and aponeurosis wound sizes were recorded. A 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) was used to assess pain at postoperative hours 3 and 24. Healing and wound complications were assessed at follow-up.

Results

A total of 57 patients, 53 women and 4 men with a mean age of 48.7 years, were randomly assigned to undergo LESS (n = 28) or LC (n = 29). The mean length of the umbilical skin incision was 4.0 cm (range = 2.1–5.8) in LESS and 2.7 cm (1.5–5.1) in LC (p < .0001). The mean internal aponeurosis diameter was 3.5 cm (2.0–5.5) in LESS and 2.3 cm (1.2–3.5) in LC (p < .0001). The mean operative time was 60.3 min (32–128) for LESS and 51.3 min (25–120) for LC (p = 0.11). Gallbladder perforation at detachment occurred in 15.69 % of the LESS cases and in 5.88 % of the LC cases (p = 0.028). The mean VAS score for pain at hour 3 was 2.0 points (0–7) for the LESS group and 4.0 (0–10) for the LC group (p = 0.07), and at postoperative hour 24 it was 0.3 points (0–6) for LESS and 2.3 (0–10) for LC (p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in wound complications. Incisional hernias were not found in either group.

Conclusions

The LESS single-port (SP) operations demand a bigger incision than LC surgery. However, there were no differences in healing, wound infections, and hernia development. We found a tendency of less postoperative pain associated with LESS/SP than with LC.

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 1:22–27CrossRef

Allemann P, Schafer M, Demartines N (2010) Critical appraisal of single port access cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97:1476–1480PubMedCrossRef

Gill IS, Advincula AP, Aron M et al (2010) Consensus statement of the consortium for laparoendoscopic single-site surgery. Surg Endosc 24:762–768PubMedCrossRef

Canes D, Desai MM, Aron M et al (2008) Transumbilical single-port surgery: evolution and current status. Eur Urol 54(5):1020–1029PubMedCrossRef

Chuang SC, Lee KT, Chang WT et al (2004) Risk factors for wound infection after cholecystectomy. J Formos Med Assoc 103(8):607–612PubMed

Gill IS, Canes D, Aron M, Haber GP, Goldfarb DA, Flechner S, Desai MR, Kaouk JH, Desai MM (2008) Single port transumbilical (E-NOTES) donor nephrectomy. J Urol 180(2):637–641 discussion 641PubMedCrossRef

Msezane LP, Mushtaq I, Gundeti MS (2009) An update on experience with the single-instrument port laparoscopic nephrectomy. BJU Int 103(10):1406–1408 discussion 1408–1409PubMedCrossRef

Aron M, Canes D, Desai MM, Haber GP, Kaouk JH, Gill IS (2009) Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. BJU Int 103(4):516–521PubMedCrossRef

Bresadola F, Pasqualucci A, Donini A et al (1999) Elective transumbilical compared with standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Eur J Surg 165(1):29–34PubMedCrossRef

10.

Tacchino R, Greco F, Matera D (2009) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: surgery without a visible scar. Surg Endosc 23(4):896–899PubMedCrossRef

11.

Cuesta MA, Berends F, Veenhof AA (2008) The “invisible cholecystectomy”: a transumbilical laparoscopic operation without a scar. Surg Endosc 22(5):1211–1213PubMedCrossRef

12.

Rao PP, Bhagwat SM, Rane A (2008) The feasibility of single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a pilot study of 20 cases. HPB (Oxford) 10(5):336–340CrossRef

13.

Merchant AM, Cook MW, White BC et al (2009) Transumbilical Gelport access technique for performing single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS). J Gastrointest Surg 13(1):159–162PubMedCrossRef

14.

Romanelli JR, Roshek TB 3rd, Lynn DC, Earle DB (2009) Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial experience. Surg Endosc 24(6):1374–1379PubMedCrossRef

15.

Gumbs AA, Milone L, Sinha P, Bessler M (2009) Totally transumbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 13(3):533–534PubMedCrossRef

16.

Palanivelu C, Jani K, Maheshkumar GS (2007) Single-center experience of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 17(5):608–614PubMedCrossRef

17.

Aitken RC (1969) Measurement of feelings using visual analogue scales. Proc R Soc Med 62:989–993PubMed

18.

Martins MVDC, Skinovsky J, Coelho DE (2009) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy by single trocar access (SITRACC^®) - A new option. Rev Col Bras Cir 36(2):177–179PubMedCrossRef

19.

Martins MVDC, Skinovsky J, Coelho DE, Torres MF (2008) SITRACC - single trocar access: a new device for a new surgical approach. Bras J Video-Sur 1(2):061–063

20.

Hodgett SE, Hernandez JM, Morton CA, Ross SB, Albrink M, Rosemurgy AS (2009) Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) cholecystectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 13:188–192PubMedCrossRef

21.

Erbella J Jr, Bunch GM (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the first 100 outpatients. Surg Endosc 24:1958–1961PubMedCrossRef

22.

Curcillo PG II, Wu AS, Podolsky ER, Graybeal C, Katkhouda N, Saenz A et al (2010) Single-port-access (SPA) cholecystectomy: a multi-institutional report of the first 297 cases. Surg Endosc 24:1854–1860PubMedCrossRef

23.

Roberts KE, Solomon D, Duffy AJ, Bell RL (2001) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a surgeon’s initial experience with 56 consecutive cases and a review of the literature. J Gastrointest Surg 14:506–510CrossRef

24.

Kuon Lee S, You YK, Park JH, Kim HJ, Lee KK, Kim DG (2009) Single-port transumbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a preliminary study in 37 patients with gallbladder disease. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19:495–499PubMedCrossRef

25.

Rivas H, Varela E, Scott D (2009) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial evaluation of a large series of patients. Surg Endosc 24:1403–1412PubMedCrossRef

26.

Hu H, Zhu J, Wang W, Huang A (2010) Optimized transumbilical endoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized comparison of two procedures. Surg Endosc 24:1080–1084PubMedCrossRef

27.

Hodgett SE, Hernandez JM, Morton CA, Ross SB, Albrink M, Rosemurgy AS (2009) Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) cholecystectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 13:188–192PubMedCrossRef

28.

Vidal O, Valentini M, Espert JJ, Ginesta C, Jimeno J, Martinez A et al (2009) Laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy: a safe and reproducible alternative. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19:599–602PubMedCrossRef

29.

Chow A, Purkayastha S, Paraskeva P (2009) Appendicectomy and cholecystectomy using single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS): the first UK experience. Surg Innov 16:211–217PubMedCrossRef

30.

Rothenberg SS, Shipman K, Yoder S (2009) Experience with modified single-port laparoscopic procedures in children. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19:695–698PubMedCrossRef

31.

Philipp SR, Miedema BW, Thaler K (2009) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using conventional instruments: early experience in comparison with the gold standard. J Am Coll Surg 209:632–637PubMedCrossRef

32.

Hong TH, You YK, Lee KH (2009) Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: scarless cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 23:1393–1397PubMedCrossRef

33.

Bucher P, Pugin F, Morel P (2010) From single-port access to laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 24:234–235PubMedCrossRef

34.

Asakuma M, Hayashi M et al (2011) Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain. Br J Surg 98(7):991–995PubMedCrossRef

Title: Randomized clinical study for assessment of incision characteristics and pain associated with LESS versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Authors: Fernando Athayde Veloso Madureira
José Eduardo Ferreira Manso
Delta Madureira Fo
Antonio Carlos Garrido Iglesias
Publication date: 01-03-2013
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 3/2013
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2556-1

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Randomized clinical study for assessment of incision characteristics and pain associated with LESS versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2013

Staging laparoscopy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: is it useful?

Persistent and de novo symptoms after cholecystectomy: a systematic review of cholecystectomy effectiveness

Influence of wrap length on the effectiveness of Nissen and Toupet fundoplications: 5-year results of prospective, randomized study

Is there an end of the “learning curve” of endoscopic totally extraperitoneal (TEP) hernia repair?

Laparoscopic simulation training: does timing impact the quality of skills acquisition?

Gastric ischemic conditioning increases neovascularization and reduces inflammation and fibrosis during gastroesophageal anastomotic healing