Comparative study between two-port and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy | ||
| Journal of the Arab Society for Medical Research | ||
| Volume 8, Issue 1, January 2013, Pages 33-37 PDF (567.59 K) | ||
| Authors | ||
| Ayman M. Elwan; Mohammed A. Abomera; Nagah S. Atwa; Mahmoud A. Abo Al Makarem | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Background/aim Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the standard of care for patients requiring removal of the gallbladder. Traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed using the four-port technique. The aim of this study was to compare two-port with four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to determine whether there are extra benefits with two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients and methods Between March 2010 and March 2012, 70 adult patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis were enrolled into this study, which was carried out at New Dameitta University Hospital. They were randomly divided into two equal groups: group A underwent four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and group B underwent two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Results The mean follow-up time was 13.18 months (range 6-23 months). The mean operative time was 36.285 min for group A and 39.142 min for group B. As regards group A, the severity of postoperative pain was mild in 11 patients (31.42%), moderate in 19 patients (54.28%), and severe in five patients (14.28%). As regards group B, the severity of postoperative pain was mild in 22 patients (62.85%), moderate in 12 patients (34.28%), and severe in one patient (2.85%). As regards cosmetic appearance and patient satisfaction for the scar, for group B they were excellent in 31 patients (88.57%) and good in four patients (11.42%); however, for group A they were excellent in 22 patients (62.85%) and good in 13 patients (37.14%). Conclusion In our study, we found that the use of two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy did not affect the procedure's safety and conversion rate. Two-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients needed less analgesia and had a shorter hospital stay. Other advantages include fewer scars, more patient satisfaction, and cost effectiveness. | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 1 |
||
