Is Fourth Port Really Required in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy?

Since the advent of four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, many modifications regarding port number and size have been tried. The feasibility of three-port technique has been found comparable to the conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. To assess the feasibility and safety of three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a prospective study. Between March 2007 and March 2009, fifty patients with cholelithiasis aged between 15 and 56 years underwent three-port cholecystectomy in a prospective study in Government medical college, Srinagar. A single surgeon did all the cases and there was no criterion for the patient selection. These were consecutive fifty surgeries done by the surgeon. The outcome was assessed in terms of intra-operative and post-operative parameters. The mean (range) age was 45 (15–56) years and there were thirty-nine females and eleven males in the study. All the procedures were completed successfully without any conversions to open or any major complications; though three patients needed the addition of a fourth port as in conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The mean (range) operative time was 55 (30–90) min and the average blood loss was 30 ml. The mean (range) hospital stay was 1 (1–3) days. All patients returned to routine work within 1 week of surgery. The mean follow-up was 5 (2–7) months. We conclude, from the results above, that three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and feasible. There are only two visible surgical scars, better cosmetic appearance with no increased risk of bile duct injury. It reduces the manpower in the form of a second assistant. Thus, it can be recommended as a safe alternative procedure to conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.