• Users Online: 207
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us ASMR Conference Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2013  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 33-37

Comparative study between two-port and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy


General Surgery Department, Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, New Damietta, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Ayman M. Elwan
MD, 103 Mubark District, New Damietta, Damietta
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

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.


[PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed368    
    Printed28    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded55    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal