Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg.  2018 Nov;22(4):367-373. 10.14701/ahbps.2018.22.4.367.

A large-cohort comparison between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy from a single center; 2080 cases

• Lee YJ
• Moon JI
• Choi IS
• Lee SE
• Sung NS
• Kwon SW
• Yoon DS
• Choi WJ
• Park SM

• KMID: 2427368
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.14701/ahbps.2018.22.4.367

Abstract

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS
This study was conducted to verify and compare the safety and feasibility of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).
METHODS
A total of 2,080 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a single center, Konyang University Hospital, between 2010 and 2016. We retrospectively compared the demographics, perioperative outcome, and postoperative complication results between the CLC and SILC groups.
RESULTS
Among the 2,080 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 1,080 had CLC and 1,000 had SILC. When retrospectively reviewed, the SILC group had significantly higher percentages of patients who were aged under 80 years, who were women, and had the American Society of Anesthesiologist score of lower than 3 points compared to those of the CLC group. Furthermore, the CLC group had a higher percentage of patients with acute cholecystitis or empyema, whereas the SILC group had a higher percentage of patients with chronic cholecystitis. Preoperative percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage insertion or H-vac insertion was more frequently conducted, bleeding loss was more common, and hospital stay was longer in the CLC group. Postoperative complications such as wound infection, biloma, bile duct injury, and duodenal perforation were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, if performed after preoperative patient selection such as in younger and female patients with no abdominal operation history at the time of benign gallbladder surgery, SILC can be considered feasible and safe without additional complications when compared with CLC.

Keyword

Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy

MeSH Terms

Bile Ducts
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*
Cholecystitis
Cholecystitis, Acute
Demography
Drainage
Empyema
Female
Gallbladder
Hemorrhage
Humans
Length of Stay
Patient Selection
Postoperative Complications
Retrospective Studies
Wound Infection

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Flow chart showing the patient selection process.

Reference

1. Begos DG, Modlin IM. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: from gimmick to gold standard. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1994; 19:325–330. PMID: 7876516.

2. Chamberlain RS, Sakpal SV. A comprehensive review of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) and Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) techniques for cholecystectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2009; 13:1733–1740. PMID: 19412642.

3. Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S, Carcoforo P, Donini I. One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 1997; 84:695. PMID: 9171771.

4. Erhart D, Pohnán R. [55 laparoscopic cholecystectomies using single incision laparoscopic surgery--initial experience]. Rozhl Chir. 2011; 90:361–364. Czech. PMID: 22026104.

5. Aprea G, Coppola Bottazzi E, Guida F, Masone S, Persico G. Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) versus classic video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized prospective study. J Surg Res. 2011; 166:e109–e112. PMID: 21227454.

6. Bucher P, Pugin F, Buchs NC, Ostermann S, Morel P. Randomized clinical trial of laparoendoscopic single-site versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 2011; 98:1695–1702. PMID: 21964736.

7. Tsimoyiannis EC, Tsimogiannis KE, Pappas-Gogos G, Farantos C, Benetatos N, Mavridou P, et al. Different pain scores in single transumbilical incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:1842–1848. PMID: 20174950.

8. Brody F, Vaziri K, Kasza J, Edwards C. Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2010; 210:e9–e13. PMID: 20113931.

9. Joseph M, Phillips MR, Farrell TM, Rupp CC. Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a higher bile duct injury rate: a review and a word of caution. Ann Surg. 2012; 256:1–6. PMID: 22664556.

10. Edwards C, Bradshaw A, Ahearne P, Dematos P, Humble T, Johnson R, et al. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is feasible: initial experience with 80 cases. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:2241–2247. PMID: 20198490.

11. Erbella J Jr, Bunch GM. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the first 100 outpatients. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:1958–1961. PMID: 20112110.

12. Rivas H, Varela E, Scott D. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: initial evaluation of a large series of patients. Surg Endosc. 2010; 24:1403–1412. PMID: 20035355.

13. Hirano Y, Watanabe T, Uchida T, Yoshida S, Tawaraya K, Kato H, et al. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: single institution experience and literature review. World J Gastroenterol. 2010; 16:270–274. PMID: 20066749.

14. Son JI, Choi IS, Moon JI, Ra YM, Lee SE, Choi WJ, et al. Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using Konyang Standard Method. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014; 86:177–183. PMID: 24783176.

15. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009; 250:187–196. PMID: 19638912.

16. Kim MK, Choi IS, Moon JI, Lee SE, Yoon DS, Kwon SU, et al. Evolution of the Konyang Standard Method for single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the result from a thousand case of a single center experience. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2018; 95:80–86. PMID: 30079324.

17. Li T, Kim G, Chang S. Tips and tricks to avoid bile duct injury in SILC: an experience of 500 cases. Surg Endosc. 2016; 30:4750–4755. PMID: 26932550.

18. Julliard O, Hauters P, Possoz J, Malvaux P, Landenne J, Gherardi D. Incisional hernia after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: incidence and predictive factors. Surg Endosc. 2016; 30:4539–4543. PMID: 26895902.

19. Kim SG, Moon JI, Choi IS, Lee SE, Sung NS, Chun KW, et al. Risk factors for conversion to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2016; 90:303–308. PMID: 27274505.

20. Sato N, Yabuki K, Kudo Y, Koga A, Kohi S, Tamura T, et al. Preoperative factors predicting the need for additional ports during single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2016; 9:192–197. PMID: 27113627.

21. van den Boezem PB, Velthuis S, Lourens HJ, Cuesta MA, Sietses C. Single-incision and NOTES cholecystectomy, are there clinical or cosmetic advantages when compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A case-control study comparing single-incision, transvaginal, and conventional laparoscopic technique for cholecystectomy. World J Surg. 2014; 38:25–32. PMID: 24081531.

22. Obuchi T, Kameyama N, Tomita M, Mitsuhashi H, Miyata R, Baba S. Impact of obesity on surgical outcome after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Minim Access Surg. 2018; 14:99–104. PMID: 28695876.

23. Haueter R, Schütz T, Raptis DA, Clavien PA, Zuber M. Meta-analysis of single-port versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy comparing body image and cosmesis. Br J Surg. 2017; 104:1141–1159. PMID: 28569406.

24. Phillips MS, Marks JM, Roberts K, Tacchino R, Onders R, DeNoto G, et al. Intermediate results of a prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2012; 26:1296–1303. PMID: 22083331.