Three-port versus standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled clinical trial in a community-based teaching hospital in eastern Nepal.

OBJECTIVES: With increasing surgeon experience, laparoscopic cholecystectomy has undergone many refinements including reduction in port number and size. Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been reported to be safe and feasible in various clinical trials. However, whether it offers any additional advantages remains controversial. This study reports a randomized trial that compared the clinical outcomes of 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Seventy-five consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to undergo either the 3-port or the 4-port technique. Four surgical tapes were applied to standard 4-port sites in both groups at the end of the operation. All dressings were kept intact until the first follow-up 1 week after surgery. Postoperative pain at the 4 sites was assessed on the first day after surgery by using a 10-cm unscaled visual analog scale (VAS). Other outcome measures included analgesia requirements, length of the operation, postoperative stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars. RESULTS: Demographic data were comparable for both groups. Patients in the 3-port group had shorter mean operative time (47.3+/-29.8 min vs 60.8+/-32.3 min) for the 4-port group (P=0.04) and less pain at port sites (mean score using 10-cm unscaled VAS: 2.19+/-1.06 vs 2.91+/-1.20 (P=0.02). Overall pain score, analgesia requirements, hospital stay, and patient satisfaction score (mean score using 10-cm unscaled VAS: 8.2+/-1.7 vs 7.8+/-1.7, P=0.24) on surgery and scars were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy resulted in less individual port-site pain and similar clinical outcomes with fewer surgical scars and without any increased risk of bile duct injury compared with 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Thus, it can be recommended as a safe alternative procedure in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

Two-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background: Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been reported to be safe and feasible. However, whether it offers any additional advantages remains controversial. This study reports a randomized trial that compared the clinical outcomes of two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: One hundred and twenty consecutive patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to receive either the two-port or the four-port technique. All patients were blinded to the type of operation they underwent. Four surgical tapes were applied to standard four-port sites in both groups at the end of the operation. All dressings were kept intact until the first follow-up 1 week after surgery. Postoperative pain at the four sites was assessed on the first day after surgery using a 10-cm unscaled visual analog scale (VAS). Other outcome measures included analgesia requirements, length and difficulty of the operation, postoperative stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars. Results: Demographic data were comparable for both groups. Patients in the two-port group had shorter mean operative time (54.6 ± 24.7 min vs 66.9 ± 33.1 min for the four-post group; p = 0.03) and less pain at individual subcostal port sites [mean score using 10-cm unscaled VAS: 1.5 vs 2.8 (p = 0.01) at the midsubcostal port site and 1.3 vs 2.3 (p = 0.02) at the lateral subcostal port site]. Overall pain score, analgesia requirements, hospital stay, and patient satisfaction score on surgery and scars were similar between the two groups. Conclusion: Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy resulted in less individual port-site pain and similar clinical outcomes but fewer surgical scars compared to four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Thus, it can be recommended as a routine procedure in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Paper presented at the Fifth World Congress of the International Hepato-pancreato-biliary Association, Tokyo, Japan, April 2002     

Effect of intercostals neural blockade with Marcaine (bupivacaine) on postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain experienced by patients who undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy may aggravate surgical complications, prevent early discharge, and cause readmission. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an intraoperative intercostals neural blockade for the control of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: In a prospective, double-blinded, clinical trial, 61 patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) 1 and 2 undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized to receive only general anesthesia (control group, n = 30) or general anesthesia plus intraoperative intercostals neural blockade using 0.5% bupivacaine-adrenaline at the right side (intercostals group, n = 31). Postoperative pain was assessed according to a pain severity score using a subjective analog visual scale (VAS) 6, 12, and 24 h after the surgery. Systemic narcotic injection was available to all surgically treated patients postoperatively according to their demand. The history, pain severity score, and all postoperative data were recorded for each patient. RESULTS: The pain severity score was significantly higher in control group than in the intercostals group (p < 0.001), suggesting that patients who received intercostals neural blockade had less pain postoperatively than the control group. CONCLUSION: Intercostals neural blockade may safely be used to reduce the postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

The effect of preoperative intravenous use of tenoxicam: a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

In this study, we aimed to investigate the postoperative pain relief effect of preoperative tenoxicam usage in patients who undergo elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy or groin hernia repair. Eighty patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy or groin hernia repair procedures were randomized to receive either physiologic serum at 100 mL (group I, n = 40) or 20 mg iv tenoxicam (group II, n = 40) immediately before induction. Postoperative analgesic requirement, peroperative side effects and complications of drugs, operating time, post-operative mobilization time and pain score, hospitalization time, and patient pleasure were recorded. Postoperative pain was assessed by the visual analogue scale (VAS) on the recovery unit (RU), at 4, 8, and 24 h and every day at the same times in the morning. The RU median VAS score was also not different when Group 1 was compared with Group 2 (p = .97). However, the postoperative 4-h and 8-h median VAS score was significantly less (p = .01 and p = .03, respectively); first postoperative mobilization time was earlier in group 2 (p = .32). The median pain score and intramuscular analgesic requirement of patients were also reduced in Group 2 in postoperative day 1 (p = .015). The median duration of intramuscular analgesic requirement and total amount of intramuscular analgesic used in patients were also significantly less in Group 2 (p = .0001 and p = .0001, respectively). Thus, this study showed that preoperative use of iv tenoxicam is safe, simple, and effective for postoperative pain relief after laparoscopic cholecystectomy or inguinal hernia repair.     

Treatment for postoperative wound pain in gynecologic laparoscopic surgery: topical lidocaine patches

Abstract Background: This article reports our early experience with the use of lidocaine patches for pain control in the immediate postoperative period after laparoscopic gynecologic surgery. Subjects and Methods: A prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was conducted on 40 patients undergoing a gynecologic laparoscopy who were randomized to receive either topical patches of 700?mg of lidocaine (n=20) or placebo patches (n=20). The patch was divided evenly into four smaller patches, which were applied at the four port sites and changed every 12 hours for 36 hours after surgery. Postoperative pain was evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) score and the Prince Henry and 5-point verbal rating pain scale (VRS), and the analgesic requirement was also evaluated at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 hours after surgery. Results: The VAS score for wound pain was lower in the lidocaine patch group at 1 and 6 hours after surgery than the control group (P=.005 and <.0005, respectively). The VAS scores for postoperative pain were lower in the lidocaine patch group at rest 1 hour after surgery (P=.045). The 5-point VRS score for postoperative pain was lower in the lidocaine patch group at 6 and 12 hours after surgery (P=.015 and .035, respectively) than in the control group. Conclusions: Topical lidocaine patches at the laparoscopic port sites reduced postoperative pain, particularly postoperative wound pain after gynecological laparoscopic procedures.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术的比较研究

目的评价经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的安全性、可行性及优势。方法回顾性分析经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术组（A组,16例）及传统四孔法腹腔镜胆囊切除术组（B组,20例）临床资料,A组采用脐孔上缘20 mm圆弧形切口,切口中间穿刺置入直径10 mm穿刺鞘,观察镜进入;两侧分别置入两个5 mm的穿刺鞘,放置操作器械,器械摆放呈＂三角＂状,各穿刺鞘之间由腹壁组织相间隔。经右锁骨中线肋缘下穿刺置入直径1 mm的克氏针,以克氏针钝头辅助牵引暴露术野,完成手术操作。结果 A组与B组比较,手术时间分别为（63.1±11.2）min vs.（52.9±13.1）min,术后疼痛评分为（1.2±1.0）vs.（2.5±1.2）,均有统计学差异（P〈0.05）,而术后肠功能恢复时间、术中出血量、住院天数均无统计学差异（P〉0.05）。结论现阶段的经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术是安全可行的,且更具有微创、美容的优势。     

Randomized, controlled trial of bupivacaine injection to decrease pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if intraoperative instillation of bupivacaine would decrease early postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, if the patients would consequently require less narcotic postoperatively and if such patients would elect to be discharged on the day of operation if given the choice. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: A tertiary care hospital in Hamilton, Ont. PATIENTS: Fifty patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Day-surgery patients had the choice of staying overnight for discharge the following day. They were compared with a control group of 47 patients who had laparoscopic cholecystectomy but did not receive bupivacaine. INTERVENTION: Instillation of 20 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine with epinephrine into laparoscopic cholecystectomy port sites intraoperatively before closure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores assessed 4 times postoperatively, the choice of patients to leave hospital the same day or to remain in the hospital overnight; the level of postoperative narcotic usage. MAIN RESULTS: Mean VAS pain scores (range 0 [no pain] to 5 [severe pain]) at less than 2 hours and at 6 hours after surgery were 2.9 and 2.9, respectively, in the bupivacaine group compared with 4.5 and 4.0, respectively, in the control group (p = 0.001 and 0.025). VAS scores at 10 hours postoperatively and the next morning did not differ between the groups. More patients in the bupivacaine group elected to go home on the day of surgery (p = 0.034). Narcotic usage was not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Instillation of bupivacaine into port sites should be standard practice for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术不同气腹持续时间对术后肩痛的影响

目的:探讨腹腔镜胆囊手术不同气腹持续时间对术后肩痛的影响。方法:于全身麻醉下为91例患者行腹腔镜胆囊切除术,气腹压力为12mm Hg,根据气腹时间分为3组,A组<1h;B组1~2h;C组>2h。记录术后清醒、拔管时间及术后3d内的肩痛情况,并让患者于术后12h、24h、48h、72h肩痛用视觉模拟评分法(visual analogue scale system,VAS)评分。结果:术后出现肩痛A组12例,B组10例,C组8例,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。3组患者肩痛VAS评分差异无统计学意义。结论:不同气腹时间对术后肩痛的发生率和疼痛程度无影响。     

2mm无鞘针形器械在隐瘢痕腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的应用:一种无瘢痕手术新思路

目的:探讨隐瘢痕腹腔镜胆囊切除术的手术方法及应用价值。方法:选择2011年1月至2011年6月60例无严重胆囊炎症的胆囊息肉或胆囊结石患者,随机分为2组,新方法组行隐瘢痕腹腔镜胆囊切除术,单孔组行常规单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术,对比分析两组患者手术时间、术后切口疼痛程度、术后切口满意程度及中转率。结果:新方法组均顺利完成手术;单孔组28例顺利完成手术,2例中转常规腹腔镜胆囊切除术。新方法组与单孔组手术时间平均(14.17±3.51)min和(24.67±4.12)min,新方法组明显优于单孔组(P<0.01);术后切口疼痛程度轻于单孔组,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后患者对切口满意程度优于单孔组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01)。两组均无出血、胆漏、胆管损伤等并发症发生。结论:隐瘢痕腹腔镜胆囊切除术安全、可行,术后瘢痕不明显且隐蔽,相对单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术,手术时间缩短,手术难度及中转率降低,术后患者切口满意度高,为腹腔镜手术的更微创化发展提供了新的可行途径及思路。     

The value of pre-emptive analgesia in the treatment of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Postoperative pain is an important surgical problem. Recent studies in pain pathophysiology have led to the hypothesis that with pre-operative administration of analgesics (pre-emptive analgesia) it may be possible to prevent or reduce postoperative pain. This study was planned to investigate the efficacy of pre-emptive analgesia on postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: 45 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into three groups. Bupivacaine was injected into the area of skin incision before trocar entry and after trocar removal in group 1 and 2, respectively; however, this procedure was not applied to the control group. The pain score of the patients was evaluated by the visual analogue scale (VAS) at 1, 4, 12( )and 24 h after surgery. The daily analgesic requirement was evaluated in terms of diclophenac sodium (Diclomec, Abdi Ibrahim, 75 mg) intake/day. Analgesics were given to the patients whose VAS was 5 or higher. RESULTS: While there was no significant difference in VAS scores between group 1 and 2, the mean pain scores of these two groups were found to be significantly lower than of the control group although the analgesic requirement of the patients in each group was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Pre-emptive analgesia is as effective as postsurgical local anaesthesia in reducing postoperative pain.     

A prospective, randomized comparison of pain, inflammatory response, and short-term outcomes between single port and laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the postoperative inflammatory response and severity of pain between single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

Two groups of 20 patients were prospectively randomized to either conventional LC or SILS cholecystectomy. Serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were assayed before surgery, at 4–6 h, and at 18–24 h after the procedure. Serum C-reactive protein (CRP) levels also were assayed at 18–24 h after surgery. Pain was measured at each of three time points after surgery using the visual analogue scale (VAS). The number of analgesia doses administered in the first 24 h after the procedure also was recorded and 30-day surgical outcomes were documented.

Results

The groups had equivalent body mass index (BMI), age, and comorbidity distribution. Peak IL-6 levels occurred 4–6 h after surgery, and the median level was 12.8 pg/ml in the LC and 8.9 pg/ml in the SILS group (p = 0.5). The median CRP level before discharge was 1.6 mg/dl in the LC and 1.9 mg/dl in the SILS group (p = 0.38). There was no difference in either analgesic use or pain intensity as measured by the VAS between the two groups (p = 0.72). The length of the surgical procedure was significantly longer in the SILS group (p < 0.001). No intraoperative complications occurred in either group.

Conclusions

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery does not significantly reduce systemic inflammatory response, postoperative pain, or analgesic use compared with LC.     

Outcomes for case‐matched single‐port colectomy are comparable with conventional laparoscopic colectomy

Aim With the introduction of single‐port surgery, expected advantages are improved cosmesis, decrease of pain and shorter length of stay. The aim of this study was to compare early outcomes of single‐port colectomy with those of conventional laparoscopic colectomy. Method All consecutive patients undergoing single‐port colectomy between January and June 2010 were identified from a prospective database. They were matched for age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiology score and type of resection with patients who had conventional laparoscopic colectomy. All perioperative data, analgesic requirement, pain scores and inflammatory response were compared using the Wilcoxon signed‐rank and McNemar tests. Results Fourteen patients [five men, nine women; median age (interquartile range) 56 (30–73) years, body mass index (interquartile range) 22 (20–24) kg/m²] underwent single‐port colectomy and were matched with patients who had conventional laparoscopic colectomy. Median operating times, estimated blood loss, pain scores, analgesic requirement, inflammatory response and length of hospital stay were similar. Median increase in incision length was significantly higher in the single‐port group (P = 0.004), but maximal incision length for specimen extraction was comparable. There were no anastomotic leaks, wound infections or 30‐day readmissions. Conclusion In a case‐matched setting with a small sample size, single‐port laparoscopic colectomy has comparable outcomes to conventional laparoscopic colectomy.     

经脐单套管三通道与经脐腹壁内三通道单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的对比研究

目的:探讨经脐腹壁内三通道单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy,LC)的手术经验及临床价值。方法:回顾分析2010年6月至2011年12月为11例患者行经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的临床资料。11例患者分别行经脐单套管三通道单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(对照组)及经脐腹壁内三通道单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(改良组)。对比分析两组患者手术时间、手术并发症、术后24 h使用镇痛剂例数及术后住院时间等。结果:11例手术均获成功,无并发症发生,均于4 d出院。两组患者术后住院时间及使用镇痛剂例数差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。对照组手术时间95～145 min,平均(120.25±18.95)min;改良组手术时间40～70 min,平均(55.71±9.74)min;两组差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论:经脐单套管三通道单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术手术器械平行置入,前端狭小术野内腹腔镜、抓钳及主操作器械运动时相互干扰,难以相互配合,多顾此失彼,且易漏气,造成手术困难、时间延长。经脐腹壁内三通道单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术器械间的距离相对增加,相互干扰减少,操作空间亦相对增加,腹壁组织相对柔软,操作较灵活、漏气少,安全可行。相对传统LC而言,单孔手术操作困难,对术者技术要求较高;但术后腹壁无明显可见疤痕,美容效果极佳,具有临床推广价值。     

Lactate and acid base changes during laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND: The observation of hemodynamic and metabolic impairment related to CO2 pneumoperitoneum and postoperative mesenteric ischemia reports following laparoscopic procedures have raised concern about local and systemic effects of increase intraabdominal pressure during laparoscopic procedures. The present study aims to evaluate the metabolic and acid base responses of using high pressure versus low pressure pneumoperitonium in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a prospective randomized clinical trial. PATIENTS AND METHOD: 20 ASA I-II patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly allocated to one of two study groups; high pressure pneumoperitoneum 12-14mmHg (HPP, n=10) versus low pressure pneumoperitoneum 6-8mmHg (LPP, n=10) undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arterial blood gases and lactate levels were determined after induction of anesthesia (before pneumoperitonium), then after 10 min, then 30 min after insufflations and at the end of surgery and 1 hour postoperatively. Nurses in recovery unit reported pain assessment starting postoperatively until 3 hours on a 10mm VAS (0-10). Statistical significant was established at P<0.05. RESULT: Bicarbonate was significantly (P>0.0412) lower in high pressure group at 30 min and 60 min after insufflations. In high pressure group lactate levels increased significantly as compared to low pressure group, (at 30 minutes after the establishment of abdominal pneumatic inflation P<0.006 and remained significantly increased (P<0.001) until the end of surgery and one hour thereafter) (P<0.001). The mean postoperative pain score during second hour (VAS) at HPP group was 7.4 +/- 1.17 which is significantly (P < or = 0.006) higher than pain score in LPP group 5.0 +/- 1.886. Shoulder tip pain was reported in 3 patients in the high pressure group and only one patient in the lower pressure group. Conclusion: High-pressure pneumoperitonium causes statistically significant elevation in the arterial lactate level intraoperatively until one hour post operatively. It also causes higher pain score and shoulder tip pain.     

羟考酮对腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者拔管期应激反应、术后疼痛的影响分析

目的分析羟考酮对腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者拔管期应激反应、术后疼痛的影响分析。方法收集行腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗的患者120例,ASA分级为Ⅰ~Ⅱ级,根据随机数字表法分为4组(每组30例),A、B、C组分别于术前15min静脉注射0.1mg/kg、0.15mg/kg、0.2mg/kg的羟考酮,D组静脉注射相同剂量的生理盐水。比较4组患者术后VAS评分、Ramsay镇静评分和炎性因子水平,并比较4组患者静脉注射羟考酮即刻(T1)、拔管即刻(T2)及拔管后5(T3)、10min(T4)的平均动脉压(MAP)、心率(HR)、血清肾上腺素(E)、皮质醇(Cor)水平。结果 C组拔管时间、苏醒时间明显高于A组、B组和D组(P0.05);B组、C组T2、T3时刻MAP、HR均明显低于A组和D组(P0.05);B组、C组T2、T3、T4时刻血清E、Cor水平明显低于A组和D组(P0.05);B组、C组术后1、2、6h的VAS评分明显低于A组和D组(P0.05);C组术后1、2、6h的Ramsay评分明显高于A组、B组和D组(P0.05);D组术后6、12h血IL-6水平均明显高于A组、B组和C组,术后6、12、24h血IL-10水平均明显高于A组、B组和C组(P0.05);B组、C组术后6、12h血IL-6水平均明显低于A组,IL-10水平均明显高于A组(P0.05);C组恶心呕吐、嗜睡、头晕发生率明显高于A组、B组和D组(P0.05)。结论腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者术前15min静脉注射0.15mg/kg的羟考酮,可更加有效减轻拔管期应激反应,改善了术后疼痛和炎症反应,且未增加不良反应的发生和拔管时间、苏醒时间,值得临床重视。     

改良戳孔孔径对腹腔镜胆囊切除术后机体疼痛及应激反应影响的临床对照研究

目的 在术后机体疼痛及应激反应等方面探讨改良戳孔孔径腹腔镜胆囊切除术是否优于传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术.方法 前瞻性收集2019年1月至6月高淳人民医院因胆囊息肉或胆囊结石合并慢性胆囊炎需行胆囊切除术的患者150例,随机分为研究组75例(改良戳孔孔径腹腔镜胆囊切除术)和对照组75例(传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术),统计两组患者的年龄...     

术前口服普瑞巴林对腹腔镜胆囊切除术后的镇痛效果:随机、对照、双盲研究

目的 评价术前口服普瑞巴林对腹腔镜胆囊切除术后的镇痛效果.方法 本研究为随机、对照、双盲研究.择期行腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者60例,性别不限,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,年龄19～72岁,身高153～ 182 cm,体重46～ 86 kg,采用随机数字表法,将其随机分为2组(n=30),安慰剂对照组(C组)和普瑞巴林组(P组)术前1h分别口服安慰剂和普瑞巴林150 mg.静脉注射异丙酚、芬太尼和罗库溴铵进行麻醉诱导,气管内插管后行机械通气,静吸复合维持麻醉.记录术后6、12和24h时静息状态和活动状态下VAS评分、Ramsay镇静评分,记录术后24h内吗啡用量、恶心呕吐和头疼头晕等不良反应的发生情况.结果 与C组比较,P组静息状态、活动状态下VAS评分和吗啡用量降低,术后6h时Ramsay镇静评分升高(P＜0.05或0.01),不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);P组无一例发生过度镇静.结论 术前1h口服普瑞巴林150 mg可缓解腹腔镜胆囊切除术后疼痛,且副作用较小.     

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy--initial experience with different multichannel ports

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a relatively new minimally invasive surgical technique in treatment of benign gallbladder diseases. It is considered a bridge technique between conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and NOTES. We are presenting our initial experiences in SILC (single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy). Seventeen patients underwent SILC (11 women and 6 men) with an average age of 43 years. Mean BMI score was 29,4 kg/m2. The mean operative time was 93,5 minutes. There were conversions to conventional LC in two cases (11,6%). Average pain score measured on visual-analogue scale (VAS) 8 h after the operation was 2,00. All patients expressed satisfaction with achieved cosmetic effect. We conclude that SILC is safe and feasible procedure, with excellent cosmetic effect, but further prospective studies are required before SILC can be generally accepted.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜与传统腹腔镜胆囊切除术的对比研究

目的：探讨现阶段经脐单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术（laparoscop ic cholecystectomy,LC）的安全性、可行性及优势。方法：回顾分析山东大学齐鲁医院开展的经脐单孔LC（A组,n=12）及同期完成的传统LC（B组,n=23）的临床资料。对比两组手术时间、术中出血量、术后住院时间、并发症发生率及总住院费用等指标。结果：35例手术均获成功,术后无并发症发生。两组术中出血量差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）,经脐单孔LC组术后住院时间及总住院费用明显优于传统LC组（P〈0.01）,而传统组手术时间则优于经脐单孔组（P〈0.01）。在经脐单孔组组内对比发现,手术时间随手术量的增加有逐渐减少的趋势,其中后4例手术时间明显少于前4例（P〈0.01）。结论：目前经脐单孔LC是安全可行的,术后住院时间及总住院费用明显优于传统LC,具有成为一定时期内主流LC的潜力。     

后腹腔镜肾癌根治术对患者术后疼痛及相关血液指标的影响研究

目的 观察后腹腔镜肾癌根治术与开放性肾癌根治术对患者术后疼痛及相关血液指标影响的差异.方法 以2012年5月至2015年5月在本院接受肾癌根治术的80例患者为研究对象,并随机分为对照组和观察组,每组各40例患者.其中对照组采取开放性肾癌根治术,观察组则给予后腹腔镜肾癌根治术.比较两组患者手术前后VAS得分和疼痛因子水平;比较两组患者手术前后血清中应激相关指标[白细胞数、血清皮质醇、甲状腺素和C-反应蛋白(CRP)]、肿瘤标志物(CA50、CEA、CA125)和炎症相关细胞因子水平的差异.结果 手术前两组患者VAS得分和5-HT水平无明显差异,术后第3天,由于手术创伤两组患者的VAS得分和5-HT水平均较术前明显升高,但观察组低于对照组(P＜0.05);术前两组患者的应激指标无明显差异,术后第3天,对照组白细胞数、皮质醇、CRP水平均高于观察组,而FT3和FT4水平低于观察组;观察组患者抑炎因子中IL-2高于对照组,IL-10和IL-13低于对照组,促炎因子IL-1β、IL-6和IL-12均低于对照组(P＜0.05).结论 与开放性肾癌根治术相比,后腹腔镜肾癌根治术在确保癌肿清除的同时,对机体炎性平衡状态的影响较小,并可减轻机体的氧化应激反应,对减轻患者术后疼痛、促进机体早日恢复有重要意义.