Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed safely with only three ports in the majority of cases.

Chirurgia italiana Pub Date : 2009-09-01
Giovanni Saccomani, Alberto Arezzo, Andrea Percivale, Stefano Baldo, Riccardo Pellicci
{"title":"Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed safely with only three ports in the majority of cases.","authors":"Giovanni Saccomani,&nbsp;Alberto Arezzo,&nbsp;Andrea Percivale,&nbsp;Stefano Baldo,&nbsp;Riccardo Pellicci","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Reducing the number of ports used to perform laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is indicated as means of further minimising postoperative pain, allowing a rapid return to activity and work, and obtaining patient satisfaction and better cosmetic results. It is still debatable whether the three-port technique is comparably safe. Since 2001, 374 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elective and emergency surgery. Three ports were routinely positioned and the need for a fourth cannula was evaluated during the surgical procedure. Of the 374 consecutive cholecystectomies performed, 204 were completed with three ports and 161 needed a fourth port to be completed, while 9 required conversion to laparotomy. Patients who were operated on with just three ports were significantly younger and mostly female. Complications of procedures completed with three ports were negligible and those of procedures completed with four ports were in line with the recent literature. Our experience shows that the three-port technique is always a good initial option when performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It is safe and requires conversion to four-port placement in only a minority of cases overall.</p>","PeriodicalId":75700,"journal":{"name":"Chirurgia italiana","volume":"61 5-6","pages":"613-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chirurgia italiana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reducing the number of ports used to perform laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is indicated as means of further minimising postoperative pain, allowing a rapid return to activity and work, and obtaining patient satisfaction and better cosmetic results. It is still debatable whether the three-port technique is comparably safe. Since 2001, 374 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elective and emergency surgery. Three ports were routinely positioned and the need for a fourth cannula was evaluated during the surgical procedure. Of the 374 consecutive cholecystectomies performed, 204 were completed with three ports and 161 needed a fourth port to be completed, while 9 required conversion to laparotomy. Patients who were operated on with just three ports were significantly younger and mostly female. Complications of procedures completed with three ports were negligible and those of procedures completed with four ports were in line with the recent literature. Our experience shows that the three-port technique is always a good initial option when performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It is safe and requires conversion to four-port placement in only a minority of cases overall.

在大多数情况下,只有三个端口的腹腔镜胆囊切除术可以安全进行。
减少用于腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)的端口数量被认为是进一步减少术后疼痛的手段,允许快速恢复活动和工作,获得患者满意度和更好的美容效果。三端口技术是否相对安全仍有争议。自2001年以来,连续374例患者在择期和急诊手术中接受了腹腔镜胆囊切除术。常规定位三个端口,并在手术过程中评估是否需要第四根套管。在374例连续胆囊切除术中,204例完成三道胆囊切除术,161例完成第四道胆囊切除术,9例转为开腹手术。只用三个端口做手术的患者明显更年轻,而且大多数是女性。三端口手术的并发症可以忽略不计,四端口手术的并发症与最近的文献一致。我们的经验表明,在进行腹腔镜胆囊切除术时,三孔技术始终是一个良好的初始选择。它是安全的,并且只在少数情况下需要转换为四端口放置。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信