J C Moreno Alfonso, A Molina Caballero, R Ros Briones, A Pérez Martínez, C Bardají Pascual
{"title":"单孔经脐小儿胆囊切除术:对患者有什么好处?","authors":"J C Moreno Alfonso, A Molina Caballero, R Ros Briones, A Pérez Martínez, 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":"{\"title\":\"Single-port transumbilical pediatric cholecystectomy: any benefits for the patient?\",\"authors\":\"J C Moreno Alfonso, A Molina Caballero, R Ros Briones, A Pérez Martínez, 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}","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}
Single-port transumbilical pediatric cholecystectomy: any benefits for the patient?
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.