Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is a newly developed method of performing cholecystectomy and has been increasingly used. The aim of this study is to see if SILC has any advantages over conventional (three-port) laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).

In this cross-sectional study, 52 patients who underwent SILC (group A) during the period from May 2011 to March 2013 were compared with 62 patients who underwent CLC (group B) at two centers affiliated to Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in Shiraz, Iran. Data were gathered on operation time, pre- and postoperative complications, patients’ postoperative pain, pain reliever use, duration of hospital stay, and return to work, and these data were compared using SPSS software version 16.

The mean age of patients was 38.01 ± 13.24 in group A and 44.82 ± 15.11 in group B. Mean body mass index (BMI) was 23.97 ± 4.78 and 26.22 ± 4.67 in groups A and B, respectively. The mean operation time was 76.4 ± 29.0 min in group A and 72.9 ± 24.1 min in group B (P = 0.496). Preoperative complications were 3.8% in group A and 0 in group B (P = 0.206). Postoperative complications were 17.3% in group A and 11.3% in group B (P = 0.423). The mean for early postoperative pain revealed no significant difference (P = 0.814), but the mean pain on discharge was significantly higher in group A patients (P = 0.034). Regarding the mean admission time and return to normal activity, we found no significant differences.

SILC does not have any special advantages over CLC with regard to surgical outcomes, but it can be a safe alternative to CLC, especially in patients concerned about cosmoses.

• Iran
• laparoscopic cholecystectomy
• minimal invasive surgery

AIM: To compare the safety of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomies with standard four-port cholecystectomies.

METHODS: Between January 2011 and December 2012 datas were gathered from 100 consecutive patients who received a single-port cholecystectomy. Patient baseline characteristics of all 100 single-port cholecystectomies were collected (body mass index, age, etc.) in a database. This group was compared with 100 age-matched patients who underwent a conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the same period. Retrospectively, per- and postoperative data were added. The two groups were compared to each other using independent t-tests and χ²-tests, P values below 0.05 were considered significantly different.

RESULTS: No differences were found between both groups regarding baseline characteristics. Operating time was significantly shorter in the total single-port group (42 min vs 62 min, P < 0.05); in procedures performed by surgeons the same trend was seen (45 min vs 59 min, P < 0.05). Peroperative complications between both groups were equal (3 in the single-port group vs 5 in the multiport group; P = 0.42). Although not significant less postoperative complications were seen in the single-port group compared with the multiport group (3 vs 9; P = 0.07). No statistically significant differences were found between both groups with regard to length of hospital stay, readmissions and mortality.

CONCLUSION: Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has the potential to be a safe technique with a low complication rate, short in-hospital stay and comparable operating time. Single-port cholecystectomy provides the patient an almost non-visible scar while preserving optimal quality of surgery. Further prospective studies are needed to prove the safety of the single-port technique.

• Single-port
• Minimal invasive
• Laparoscopy
• Safety
• Feasibility
• Cholecystectomy

We conducted a network meta analysis (NMA) to compare different kinds of laparoscopic cholecystectomy [LC] (single port [SPLC], two ports [2PLC], three ports [3PLC], and four ports laparoscopic cholecystectomy [4PLC], and four ports mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy [mini-4PLC]).

PubMed, the Cochrane library, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched to find randomized controlled trials [RCTs]. Direct pair-wise meta analysis (DMA), indirect treatment comparison meta analysis (ITC) and NMA were conducted to compare different kinds of LC.

We included 43 RCTs. The risk of bias of included studies was high. DMA showed that SPLC was associated with more postoperative complications, longer operative time, and higher cosmetic score than 4PLC, longer operative time and higher cosmetic score than 3PLC, more postoperative complications than mini-4PLC. Mini-4PLC was associated with longer operative time than 4PLC. ITC showed that 3PLC was associated with shorter operative time than mini-4PLC, and lower postoperative pain level than 2PLC. 2PLC was associated with fewer postoperative complications and longer hospital stay than SPLC. NMA showed that SPLC was associated with more postoperative complications than mini-4PLC, and longer operative time than 4PLC.

The rank probability plot suggested 4PLC might be the worst due to the highest level of postoperative pain, longest hospital stay, and lowest level of cosmetic score. The best one might be mini-4PLC because of highest level of cosmetic score, and fewest postoperative complications, or SPLC because of lowest level of postoperative pain and shortest hospital stay. But more studies are needed to determine which will be better between mini-4PLC and SPLC.

• Adult
• Aged
• Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects
• Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods
• Databases, Bibliographic
• Female
• Humans
• Length of Stay
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Operative Time
• Pain, Postoperative/etiology
• Pain, Postoperative/physiopathology
• Postoperative Complications/etiology
• Postoperative Complications/physiopathology
• Publication Bias
• Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

AIM: To compare the clinical outcome of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and three-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (3ILC) for acute cholecystitis.

METHODS: From July 2009 to September 2012, 136 patients underwent SILC or 3ILC for acute cholecystitis at a tertiary referral hospital. One experienced surgeon performed every procedure using 5 or 10 mm 30-degree laparoscopes, straight instruments, and conventional ports. Five patients with perforated gallbladder and diffuse peritonitis and 23 patients with mild acute cholecystitis were excluded. The remaining 108 patients were divided into complicated and uncomplicated groups according to pathologic findings. Patient demography, clinical data, operative results and complications were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS: Fifty patients with gangrenous cholecystitis, gallbladder empyema, or hydrops were classified as the complicated group, and 58 patients with acute cholecystitis were classified as the uncomplicated group. Twenty-three (46.0%) of the patients in the complicated group (n = 50) and 39 (67.2%) of the patients in the uncomplicated group (n = 58) underwent SILC; all others underwent 3ILC. The postoperative length of hospital stay (PLOS) was significantly shorter in the SILC subgroups than the 3ILC subgroups (3.5 ± 1.1 d vs 4.6 ± 1.3 d, P < 0.01 in the complicated group; 2.9 ± 1.1 d vs 3.7 ± 1.4 d, P < 0.05 in the uncomplicated group). The maximum body temperature recorded at day 1 and at day 2 following the procedure was lower in the SILC subgroups, but the difference reached statistical significance only in the uncomplicated group (37.41 ± 0.56 °C vs 37.80 ± 0.72 °C, P < 0.05 on postoperative day 1; 37.10 ± 0.43 °C vs 37.57 ± 0.54 °C, P < 0.01 on postoperative day 2). The operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative narcotic use, total length of hospital stay, conversion rates, and complication rates were similar in both SILC and 3ILC subgroups. The complicated group had longer operative time (122.2 ± 35.0 min vs 106.6 ± 43.6 min, P < 0.05), longer PLOS (4.1 ± 1.3 d vs 3.2 ± 1.2 d, P < 0.001), and higher conversion rates (36.0% vs 19.0%, P < 0.05) compared with the uncomplicated group.

CONCLUSION: SILC is safe and efficacious for patients with acute cholecystitis. The main benefit is a faster recovery than that achieved with 3ILC.

• Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy
• Single-incision laparoscopic surgery
• Laparoendoscopic single site surgery
• Cholecystectomy
• Acute cholecystitis
• Complicated cholecystitis
• Gangrenous cholecystitis

• Adult
• Aged
• Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/adverse effects
• Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic/methods
• Cholecystitis, Acute/complications
• Cholecystitis, Acute/diagnosis
• Cholecystitis, Acute/surgery
• Female
• Humans
• Length of Stay
• Male
• Middle Aged
• Postoperative Complications/therapy
• Recovery of Function
• Taiwan
• Tertiary Care Centers
• Time Factors
• Treatment Outcome