首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Two-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Authors:C. M.?Poon,K. W.?Chan,D. W. H.?Lee,K. C.?Chan,C. W.?Ko,H. Y.?Cheung,K. W.?Lee  author-information"  >  author-information__contact u-icon-before"  >  mailto:leekw@ha.org.hk"   title="  leekw@ha.org.hk"   itemprop="  email"   data-track="  click"   data-track-action="  Email author"   data-track-label="  "  >Email author
Affiliation:(1) Department of Surgery, North District Hospital, Sheung Shui, N. T., Hong Kong SAR, China
Abstract: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
Keywords:Laparoscopic cholecystectomy  Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy
本文献已被 PubMed SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号