Surgical Outcomes of Gallbladder Retrieval via Different Ports in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Raed I Alshalfan, Rema S Almohanna, Waad S Alshahrani, Shuruq M Alqahtani, Wed K Alwabel, Ghadah M Alquwaiee, Aseel A Alsulaimani, Husam I Ardah
{"title":"Surgical Outcomes of Gallbladder Retrieval via Different Ports in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.","authors":"Raed I Alshalfan, Rema S Almohanna, Waad S Alshahrani, Shuruq M Alqahtani, Wed K Alwabel, Ghadah M Alquwaiee, Aseel A Alsulaimani, Husam I Ardah","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2025.00097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>An important step during laparoscopic cholecystectomy that has a proven effect on postoperative morbidity and outcomes is the site of gallbladder retrieval, which is either through the umbilical or epigastric port. Currently, no guidelines recommend the superiority of one port over the other, and it is mainly based on the surgeon's preference. This study aimed to address the outcomes and complications of gallbladder retrieval through the epigastric port in comparison with the umbilical port and to identify the associated risk factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of 658 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 2020 and 2021 was conducted. Patient demographics, preoperative workups, intraoperative findings, and postoperative outcomes were compared between retrieval via the epigastric and umbilical ports.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Gallbladder retrieval occurred through the epigastric port in 441 patients and through the umbilical port in 217 patients. The epigastric group had a greater mean age (44.2 ± 14.90 vs 41.3 ± 14.47 years; <i>P</i> = .0109), and most the study population was female (7.2%). Intraoperative duration and bleeding were comparable, but fascial plane extension was more common in the umbilical group (6.9%; <i>P</i> = .0179). Port site hernias occurred in 1.8% of patients, all of whom were females (<i>P</i> = .0222), and were associated with older age, higher body mass index (BMI), and gallbladder needle decompression (<i>P</i> = .0356). The length of hospital stay was similar across both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Epigastric port retrieval during laparoscopic cholecystectomy offers comparable intraoperative outcomes to those of umbilical retrieval. However, hernia risk, which is linked to specific factors, warrants further research to improve outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":"29 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12668384/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2025.00097","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: An important step during laparoscopic cholecystectomy that has a proven effect on postoperative morbidity and outcomes is the site of gallbladder retrieval, which is either through the umbilical or epigastric port. Currently, no guidelines recommend the superiority of one port over the other, and it is mainly based on the surgeon's preference. This study aimed to address the outcomes and complications of gallbladder retrieval through the epigastric port in comparison with the umbilical port and to identify the associated risk factors.

Methods: A retrospective review of 658 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 2020 and 2021 was conducted. Patient demographics, preoperative workups, intraoperative findings, and postoperative outcomes were compared between retrieval via the epigastric and umbilical ports.

Results: Gallbladder retrieval occurred through the epigastric port in 441 patients and through the umbilical port in 217 patients. The epigastric group had a greater mean age (44.2 ± 14.90 vs 41.3 ± 14.47 years; P = .0109), and most the study population was female (7.2%). Intraoperative duration and bleeding were comparable, but fascial plane extension was more common in the umbilical group (6.9%; P = .0179). Port site hernias occurred in 1.8% of patients, all of whom were females (P = .0222), and were associated with older age, higher body mass index (BMI), and gallbladder needle decompression (P = .0356). The length of hospital stay was similar across both groups.

Conclusion: Epigastric port retrieval during laparoscopic cholecystectomy offers comparable intraoperative outcomes to those of umbilical retrieval. However, hernia risk, which is linked to specific factors, warrants further research to improve outcomes.

腹腔镜胆囊切除术中不同取胆口的手术效果。
背景:腹腔镜胆囊切除术的一个重要步骤是胆囊的取物位置,可以通过脐口或上胃口取物,这已被证实对术后发病率和预后有影响。目前,没有指南推荐一个端口比另一个端口优越,主要是基于外科医生的偏好。本研究旨在探讨经上胃口取胆囊与经脐口取胆囊的预后和并发症,并确定相关的危险因素。方法:回顾性分析2020 - 2021年间658例行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的患者。患者的人口统计资料、术前检查、术中发现和术后结果比较了通过上腹部和脐口取物的结果。结果:441例患者经上胃口取胆囊,217例经脐口取胆囊。上腹部组平均年龄较大(44.2±14.90岁vs 41.3±14.47岁;P = 0.0109),且研究人群以女性居多(7.2%)。术中持续时间和出血比较,但脐带组筋膜平面延伸更常见(6.9%;P = 0.0179)。肝部位疝发生率为1.8%,均为女性(P = 0.0222),与年龄较大、体重指数(BMI)较高、胆囊穿刺减压(P = 0.056)相关。两组患者的住院时间相似。结论:腹腔镜胆囊切除术中取腹口术与取脐术的术中效果相当。然而,疝气风险与特定因素有关,值得进一步研究以改善结果。
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
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
×
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
小红书