• Am. J. Surg. · Mar 2011

    Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study

    Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data.

    • Jeffrey Marks, Roberto Tacchino, Kurt Roberts, Raymond Onders, George Denoto, Paraskevas Paraskeva, Homero Rivas, Nathaniel Soper, Alexander Rosemurgy, and Sajani Shah.
    • University Hospitals of Cleveland, Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA. Jeffrey.marks@uhhospitals.org
    • Am. J. Surg. 2011 Mar 1;201(3):369-72; discussion 372-3.

    BackgroundThis study presents preliminary data from a prospective randomized multicenter, single-blinded trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (4PLC).MethodsPatients with symptomatic gallstones, polyps, or biliary dyskinesia (ejection fraction <30%) were randomized to SILC or 4PLC. Data included operative time, estimated blood loss, length of skin and fascial incisions, complications, pain, satisfaction and cosmetic scoring, and conversion.ResultsOperating room time was longer with SILC (n = 50) versus 4PLC (n = 33). No differences were seen in blood loss, complications, or pain scores. Body image scores and cosmetic scores at 1, 2, 4, and 12 weeks were significantly higher for SILC. Satisfaction scores, however, were similar.ConclusionsPreliminary results from this prospective trial showed SILC to be safe compared with 4PLC although operative times were longer. Cosmetic scores were higher for SILS compared with 4PLC. Satisfaction scores were similar although both groups reported a significantly higher preference towards SILC.Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…