No difference in incidence of port-site hernia and chronic pain after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a nationwide prospective, matched cohort study

被引:32
|
作者
Christoffersen, Mette W. [1 ]
Brandt, Erik [2 ]
Oehlenschlager, Jacob [1 ]
Rosenberg, Jacob [3 ]
Helgstrand, Frederik [2 ]
Jorgensen, Lars N. [4 ]
Bardram, Linda [5 ]
Bisgaard, Thue [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Hvidovre Hosp, Div Surg, Gastro Unit, DK-2650 Hvidovre, Denmark
[2] Univ Copenhagen, Koge Hosp, Surg Sect, Koge, Denmark
[3] Univ Copenhagen, Herlev Hosp, Div Surg, Gastro Unit, DK-2730 Herlev, Denmark
[4] Univ Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Hosp, Ctr Digest Dis, Bispebjerg, Denmark
[5] Univ Copenhagen, Rigshosp, Dept Gastrointestinal Surg & Liver Transplantat, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
Single-site laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Port-site hernia; Chronic pain; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIALS; RISK-FACTORS; SURGERY; METAANALYSIS; DENMARK; REPAIR; CONVALESCENCE; INFECTION; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-015-4066-4
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC) is regarded as the gold standard for cholecystectomy. However, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) has been suggested to replace CLC. This study aimed at comparing long-term incidences of port-site hernia and chronic pain after SLC versus CLC. We conducted a matched cohort study based on prospective data (Jan 1, 2009-June 1, 2011) from the Danish Cholecystectomy Database with perioperative information and clinical follow-up. Consecutive patients undergoing elective SLC during the study period were included and matched 1:2 with patients subjected to CLC using pre-defined criteria. Follow-up data were obtained from the Danish National Patient Registry, mailed patient questionnaires, and clinical examination. A port-site hernia was defined as a repair for a port-site hernia or clinical hernia located at one or more port sites. In total, 699 patients were eligible and 147 patients were excluded from the analysis due to pre-defined criteria. The rate of returned questionnaires was 83%. Thus, 552 (SLC, n = 185; CLC, n = 367) patients were analyzed. The median observation time was 48 months (range 1-65) after SLC and 48 months (1-64) after CLC (P = 0.940). The total cumulated port-site hernia rate was 4 % and 6 % for SLC and CLC, respectively (P = 0.560). Incidences of moderate/severe chronic pain were 4 % and 5 % after SLC and CLC, respectively (P = 0.661). We found no difference in long-term incidence of port-site hernia or chronic pain after SLC versus CLC.
引用
收藏
页码:3239 / 3245
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Report of preliminary data
    Marks, Jeffrey
    Tacchino, Roberto
    Roberts, Kurt
    Onders, Raymond
    Denoto, George
    Paraskeva, Paraskevas
    Rivas, Homero
    Soper, Nathaniel
    Rosemurgy, Alexander
    Shah, Sajani
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2011, 201 (03): : 369 - 373
  • [42] Clinical results between single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective case-matched analysis in single institution
    Jung, Gum O.
    Park, Dong Eun
    Chae, Kwon Mook
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN SURGICAL SOCIETY, 2012, 83 (06): : 374 - 380
  • [43] Re: Single-incision versus 3-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in symptomatic gallstones: A prospective randomized study
    Pal, Ajay Kumar
    Singh, Deelip
    Sonkar, Abhinav Arun
    Kumar, Awanish
    SURGERY, 2017, 162 (06) : 1347 - 1347
  • [44] Single-incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review of Available Data
    Song, Turun
    Liao, Banghua
    Liu, Jiao
    Yin, Yuan
    Luo, Qian
    Cheng, Nansheng
    SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY ENDOSCOPY & PERCUTANEOUS TECHNIQUES, 2012, 22 (04): : E190 - E196
  • [45] 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
    van den Boezem, Peter B.
    Velthuis, Simone
    Lourens, Harm J.
    Cuesta, Miguel A.
    Sietses, Colin
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2014, 38 (01) : 25 - 32
  • [46] A Study of Pain in Patients Operated with Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy as Compared to Single-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
    Rinait, Avinash
    Akulwar, Anil
    Lamture, Yashwant
    ANNALS OF MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES RESEARCH, 2021, 11 : 24 - 27
  • [47] Triple, double- and single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective study
    Sabuncuoglu, Mehmet Zafer
    Benzin, Mehmet Fatih
    Cakir, Tugrul
    Sozen, Isa
    Sabuncuoglu, Aylin
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE, 2014, 7 (10): : 3385 - 3391
  • [48] Safety and Feasibility for Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Local Community Hospital: A Retrospective Comparison With Conventional 4-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
    Ikeda, Naoya
    Ueno, Masato
    Kanamura, Tetsuhiro
    Kojima, Yu
    Nakagawa, Kenji
    Ishioka, Kohei
    Sasaki, Yoshiyuki
    Sho, Masayuki
    Sakaguchi, Hiroshi
    Hidaka, Shoko
    Ochi, Tomoko
    Nakajima, Yoshiyuki
    SURGICAL LAPAROSCOPY ENDOSCOPY & PERCUTANEOUS TECHNIQUES, 2013, 23 (01): : 33 - 36
  • [49] Short-Term Efficacy of Transumbilical Single-Incision Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study
    Liu, Fuguo
    Cui, Ran
    Mutailipu, Muladili
    Zhao, Zinan
    Wang, Xujing
    Chen, Bo
    Wang, Yongkun
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2025, 35 (01): : 36 - 41
  • [50] Single-Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Sajid, Muhammad S.
    Ladwa, Nikhil
    Kalra, Lorain
    Hutson, Kristian K.
    Singh, Krishna K.
    Sayegh, Mazin
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2012, 36 (11) : 2644 - 2653