• HPB (Oxford) · Jun 2015

    Comparative Study

    Minimally invasive versus the conventional open surgical approach of a radical cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer: a retrospective comparative study.

    • Anil K Agarwal, Amit Javed, Raja Kalayarasan, and Puja Sakhuja.
    • Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, GB Pant Hospital & MAM College, Delhi University, New Delhi, India.
    • HPB (Oxford). 2015 Jun 1; 17 (6): 536-41.

    BackgroundLaparoscopic surgery has traditionally been contraindicated for the management of gall bladder cancer (GBC). This study was undertaken to determine the safety and feasibility of a laparoscopic radical cholecystectomy (LRC) for GBC and compare it with an open radical cholecystectomy (ORC).MethodsRetrospective analysis of primary GBC patients (with limited liver infiltration) and incidental GBC (IGBC) patients (detected after a laparoscopic cholecystectomy) who underwent LRC between June 2011 and October 2013. Patients who fulfilled the study criteria and underwent ORC during the same period formed the control group.ResultsDuring the study period, 147 patients with GBC underwent a radical cholecystectomy. Of these, 24 patients (primary GBC- 20, IGBC - 4) who underwent a LRC formed the study group (Group A). Of the remaining 123 patients who underwent ORC, 46 matched patients formed the control group (Group B). The median operating time was higher in Group A (270 versus 240 mins, P = 0.021) and the median blood loss (ml) was lower (200 versus 275 ml, P = 0.034). The post-operative morbidity and mortality were similar (P = 1.0). The pathological stage of the tumour in Group A was T1b (n = 1), T2 (n = 11) and T3 (n = 8), respectively. The median lymph node yield was 10 (4-31) and was comparable between the two groups (P = 0.642). During a median follow-up of 18 (6-34) months, 1 patient in Group A and 3 in Group B developed recurrence. No patient developed a recurrence at a port site.ConclusionLRC is safe and feasible in selected patients with GBC, and the results were comparable to ORC in this retrospective comparison.© 2015 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.

      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…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.