Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with inflexible laparoscopic instruments and laparoscopy: a single-center experience of 533 cases.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Zhiquan Chen, Liufan Zha, Jinhong Wu, Huanbing Zhu, Xiang Pan, Chao Li, Yangming Hou, Dan Ye, Daren Liu
{"title":"Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with inflexible laparoscopic instruments and laparoscopy: a single-center experience of 533 cases.","authors":"Zhiquan Chen, Liufan Zha, Jinhong Wu, Huanbing Zhu, Xiang Pan, Chao Li, Yangming Hou, Dan Ye, Daren Liu","doi":"10.1186/s12893-025-03124-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has been widely performed as the gold standard for BGDs. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) was considered as an option for minimizing surgical injuries and improving outcomes. However, the benefit of this novel technique, especially with conventional and inflexible instruments and laparoscopy, is still controversial.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study analyzed 958 consecutive cases (533 SILC vs. 425 CLC) from January 2023 to March 2024. SILC was performed via a single transumbilical incision with straight and inflexible instruments whereas CLC with traditional three-port strategy. Information of patients' demographic characteristics and pathological diagnoses was collected and analyzed. Comparative outcomes assessment included validated measures: SF-36 QoL indices, VAS pain scores, Vancouver Scar Scale assessments, hospitalization duration, and Clavien-Dindo complication grading.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Cases from two groups showed similar demographic characteristics and pathological diagnoses. They also had comparable surgical time, estimated intraoperative blood loss and hospital costs. Sixteen cases required supplementary trocars for technical challenges. The SILC group exhibited superior scar satisfaction, though no significant intergroup differences existed in hospitalization duration, postoperative pain scores, or wound infection rates. Longitudinal analysis revealed reduced chronic pain and diarrhea incidence in SILC patients. Six-month postoperative SF-36 assessments showed significant improvements in SILC recipients for Bodily Pain, Vitality, and Role-Emotional domains.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present study demonstrated SILC with conventional and inflexible instruments to be safe and feasible. SILC was found to be non-inferior to CLC. This technique demonstrated certain advantages, particularly in improving patient satisfaction with wound pain and appearance, while maintaining comparable surgical outcomes, hospital stay duration, and postoperative complication rates to those of CLC.</p>","PeriodicalId":49229,"journal":{"name":"BMC Surgery","volume":"25 1","pages":"396"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12382149/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-025-03124-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has been widely performed as the gold standard for BGDs. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) was considered as an option for minimizing surgical injuries and improving outcomes. However, the benefit of this novel technique, especially with conventional and inflexible instruments and laparoscopy, is still controversial.

Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 958 consecutive cases (533 SILC vs. 425 CLC) from January 2023 to March 2024. SILC was performed via a single transumbilical incision with straight and inflexible instruments whereas CLC with traditional three-port strategy. Information of patients' demographic characteristics and pathological diagnoses was collected and analyzed. Comparative outcomes assessment included validated measures: SF-36 QoL indices, VAS pain scores, Vancouver Scar Scale assessments, hospitalization duration, and Clavien-Dindo complication grading.

Results: Cases from two groups showed similar demographic characteristics and pathological diagnoses. They also had comparable surgical time, estimated intraoperative blood loss and hospital costs. Sixteen cases required supplementary trocars for technical challenges. The SILC group exhibited superior scar satisfaction, though no significant intergroup differences existed in hospitalization duration, postoperative pain scores, or wound infection rates. Longitudinal analysis revealed reduced chronic pain and diarrhea incidence in SILC patients. Six-month postoperative SF-36 assessments showed significant improvements in SILC recipients for Bodily Pain, Vitality, and Role-Emotional domains.

Conclusion: The present study demonstrated SILC with conventional and inflexible instruments to be safe and feasible. SILC was found to be non-inferior to CLC. This technique demonstrated certain advantages, particularly in improving patient satisfaction with wound pain and appearance, while maintaining comparable surgical outcomes, hospital stay duration, and postoperative complication rates to those of CLC.

Abstract Image

不灵活腹腔镜器械加腹腔镜单切口胆囊切除术533例的单中心经验。
背景:腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)作为治疗bgd的金标准已被广泛应用。单切口腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SILC)被认为是减少手术损伤和改善预后的选择。然而,这种新技术的好处,特别是与传统的和不灵活的仪器和腹腔镜手术相比,仍然存在争议。材料和方法:本回顾性队列研究分析了2023年1月至2024年3月期间958例连续病例(533例SILC vs 425例CLC)。SILC是通过单一的经脐切口,使用直的和不灵活的器械,而CLC是传统的三端口策略。收集和分析患者的人口学特征和病理诊断信息。比较结果评估包括验证措施:SF-36生活质量指数、VAS疼痛评分、温哥华疤痕量表评估、住院时间和Clavien-Dindo并发症分级。结果:两组病例的人口学特征和病理诊断相似。他们的手术时间、估计术中出血量和住院费用也相似。16例需要补充套管针以应对技术挑战。尽管在住院时间、术后疼痛评分或伤口感染率方面没有明显的组间差异,但SILC组表现出更好的疤痕满意度。纵向分析显示,SILC患者的慢性疼痛和腹泻发生率降低。术后6个月的SF-36评估显示,SILC受者在身体疼痛、活力和角色情感领域有显著改善。结论:本研究证明了常规和非柔性器械的SILC是安全可行的。发现SILC不逊于CLC。该技术显示出一定的优势,特别是在提高患者对伤口疼痛和外观的满意度,同时保持与CLC相当的手术结果、住院时间和术后并发症发生率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Surgery
BMC Surgery SURGERY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
391
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: BMC Surgery is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on surgical research, training, and practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信