• Najmeh Dabbagh, Ahmadreza Soroosh, Zhamak Khorgami, Abolfazl Shojaeifard, Mehdi Jafari, Ali Ghorbani Abdehgah, and Hossein Mahmudzade.
• Department of Surgery, Research Center for Improvement of Surgical Outcomes and Procedures, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
• J Res Med Sci. 2015 Dec 1; 20 (12): 115311591153-9.

BackgroundSurgical technique using small-diameter instruments and single-incision laparoscopy are two new options for less invasive laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In this study, we have compared mini-LC (MLC) with single-incision LC (SILC).Materials And MethodsThis study is a randomized clinical trial conducted on the patients diagnosed with symptomatic cholelithiasis who underwent LC. Forty patients were randomized to two equal groups of MLC and SILC. They were compared in terms of demographic data, operation time, and surgical complications.ResultsBaseline characteristics were similar in two groups. Operation time in MLC was significantly shorter than that in SILC (45.1 ± 69 min vs 63.75 ± 7.57 min, P-value < 0.001). Also, the total length of the wound in SILC group was shorter than that in MLC group (P-value < 0.003). Postoperative pain scores were similar in two groups. Hospital stay was shorter in MLC (1.2 ± 0.6 days vs 1.6 ± 0.8 days, P < 0.021). There was no difference in postoperative complications in two groups.ConclusionMLC because of less operation time is preferred than SILC. Also, by subjective measures, it was a more comfortable method compared to SILC.

6 keywords...

hide…