Single-port transumbilical pediatric cholecystectomy: any benefits for the patient?

Q3 Medicine
J C Moreno Alfonso, A Molina Caballero, R Ros Briones, A Pérez Martínez, C Bardají Pascual
{"title":"Single-port transumbilical pediatric cholecystectomy: any benefits for the patient?","authors":"J C Moreno Alfonso,&nbsp;A Molina Caballero,&nbsp;R Ros Briones,&nbsp;A Pérez Martínez,&nbsp;C Bardají Pascual","doi":"10.54847/cp.2023.02.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the perioperative results of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) with those of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), and to analyze whether there were any differences between both techniques in our patients.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective, observational analysis was carried out in non-homogeneous groups of patients under 15 years of age undergoing LC and SPLC over a 6-year period. LC was conducted using four ports, while SPLC was performed through an umbilical incision using a wound retractor to which a surgical glove was coupled for the insertion of 3 ports and instruments curved as required. 15 clinical, surgical, and economic variables were compared by means of a univariate and bivariate analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>11 patients underwent surgery - 5 through SPLC and 6 through LC. No significant differences were found in terms of mean operating time (SPLC: 144 minutes vs. LC: 139, P= 0.855) or hospital stay, but a slight increase in hospital cost was noted (SPLC: 1,160 € vs. LC: 1,177 €). The cost of LC was 1,322 € vs. 1,367 € for SPLC, with a premium of 44.30 € owing to the use of the wound retractor. None of the patients had perioperative complications, and all of them felt the cosmetic result was excellent.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In our limited experience, the differences between SPLC and LC do not clearly support one or the other. SPLC could provide patients with a better cosmetic result and allow surgeons to improve their skills. However, we believe cholecystectomy is not the most adequate procedure to start a career in single-port laparoscopy because potential complications may be severe.</p>","PeriodicalId":10316,"journal":{"name":"Cirugia pediatrica : organo oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Cirugia Pediatrica","volume":"36 2","pages":"67-72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cirugia pediatrica : organo oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Cirugia Pediatrica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54847/cp.2023.02.13","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the perioperative results of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) with those of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), and to analyze whether there were any differences between both techniques in our patients.

Materials and methods: A retrospective, observational analysis was carried out in non-homogeneous groups of patients under 15 years of age undergoing LC and SPLC over a 6-year period. LC was conducted using four ports, while SPLC was performed through an umbilical incision using a wound retractor to which a surgical glove was coupled for the insertion of 3 ports and instruments curved as required. 15 clinical, surgical, and economic variables were compared by means of a univariate and bivariate analysis.

Results: 11 patients underwent surgery - 5 through SPLC and 6 through LC. No significant differences were found in terms of mean operating time (SPLC: 144 minutes vs. LC: 139, P= 0.855) or hospital stay, but a slight increase in hospital cost was noted (SPLC: 1,160 € vs. LC: 1,177 €). The cost of LC was 1,322 € vs. 1,367 € for SPLC, with a premium of 44.30 € owing to the use of the wound retractor. None of the patients had perioperative complications, and all of them felt the cosmetic result was excellent.

Conclusions: In our limited experience, the differences between SPLC and LC do not clearly support one or the other. SPLC could provide patients with a better cosmetic result and allow surgeons to improve their skills. However, we believe cholecystectomy is not the most adequate procedure to start a career in single-port laparoscopy because potential complications may be severe.

单孔经脐小儿胆囊切除术:对患者有什么好处?
目的:比较单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SPLC)与腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)的围手术期效果,分析两种技术在我院患者中是否存在差异。材料和方法:对15岁以下接受LC和SPLC的非均匀组患者进行了为期6年的回顾性观察分析。LC通过四个端口进行,SPLC通过脐带切口进行,使用伤口牵开器,连接手术手套以插入3个端口,并根据需要弯曲器械。通过单因素和双因素分析比较15个临床、手术和经济变量。结果:11例患者行手术,5例经SPLC, 6例经LC。在平均手术时间(SPLC: 144分钟vs LC: 139分钟,P= 0.855)或住院时间方面没有发现显著差异,但注意到住院费用略有增加(SPLC: 1,160欧元vs LC: 1,177欧元)。LC的费用为1322欧元,而SPLC的费用为1367欧元,由于使用了伤口牵开器,费用为44.30欧元。所有患者均无围手术期并发症发生,术后美观效果良好。结论:在我们有限的经验中,SPLC和LC之间的差异并不能明确地支持哪一个。SPLC可以为患者提供更好的美容效果,并允许外科医生提高他们的技能。然而,我们认为胆囊切除术并不是开始单孔腹腔镜职业生涯的最合适的手术,因为潜在的并发症可能很严重。
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
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
×
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