An Observational Study Comparing Hybrid Transvaginal Notes and Four-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

被引:1
|
作者
Ansari, Asif M. [1 ]
Kaushal, Gourav [2 ]
Dhillon, Kanwarjit S. [3 ]
机构
[1] Vishwakarma Hosp & Heart Care Ctr, Gen Surg, Sambhal, India
[2] All India Inst Med Sci, Surg Gastroenterol, Bathinda, India
[3] Max Hosp, Gen & Laparoscop Surg, Mohali, India
关键词
cholecystectomy; notes; hybrid notes cholecystectomy; laparoscopic cholecystectomy; cholelithiasis; ENDOSCOPIC SURGERY; REMOVAL; SAFETY;
D O I
10.7759/cureus.33589
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Recently, a great interest has arisen in hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-cholecystectomy (NOTES-C). It has the potential to cause less postoperative pain and may offer better cosmesis over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).Patients and methods: A total of 112 females who underwent conventional cholecystectomy were compared with 108 patients of hybrid transvaginal NOTES-cholecystectomy (TV NOTES-C). We compared intraoperative factors, postoperative pain, the analgesic requirement at different intervals, duration of hospital stay, and time to return to normal activities. In addition, cosmesis and patient satisfaction were assessed at four weeks.Results: Postoperative pain and analgesic requirement were less in the hybrid TV NOTES-C group (p<0.001 at 95% CI). Hybrid TV NOTES-C patients were discharged more frequently within 12 hours (27.5% versus 1.8%; p<0.001) and returned faster (2.22 versus 4.62 days; p<0.001) to normal activities. Cosmetic results and short-term quality of life as assessed by the patient and observer scar assessment scale (POSAS) and short form-36 (SF-36) scores, respectively, were better in the hybrid TV NOTES-C group (p<0.001 at 95% CI).Conclusions: Hybrid TV NOTES-C is associated with reduced postoperative analgesic requirements, faster return to normal activities, better cosmesis, and patient satisfaction compared to conventional four-port cholecystectomy.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Systematic analysis of the safety and benefits of transvaginal hybrid-NOTES cholecystectomy
    Bulian, Dirk R.
    Knuth, Jurgen
    Lehmann, Kai S.
    Sauerwald, Axel
    Heiss, Markus M.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2015, 21 (38) : 10915 - 10925
  • [32] Three-Port Versus Four-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials
    Shaoliang Sun
    Kehu Yang
    Mingtai Gao
    Xiaodong He
    Jinhui Tian
    Bin Ma
    World Journal of Surgery, 2009, 33 : 1904 - 1908
  • [33] NOTES cholecystectomy: matched-pair analysis comparing the transvaginal hybrid and conventional laparoscopic techniques in a series of 216 patients
    Zornig, Carsten
    Siemssen, Linn
    Emmermann, Alice
    Alm, Margrit
    von Waldenfels, Hans A.
    Felixmueller, Conrad
    Mofid, Hamid
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2011, 25 (06): : 1822 - 1826
  • [34] NOTES cholecystectomy: matched-pair analysis comparing the transvaginal hybrid and conventional laparoscopic techniques in a series of 216 patients
    Carsten Zornig
    Linn Siemssen
    Alice Emmermann
    Margrit Alm
    Hans A. von Waldenfels
    Conrad Felixmüller
    Hamid Mofid
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2011, 25 : 1822 - 1826
  • [35] Intermediate results of a prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Melissa S. Phillips
    Jeffrey M. Marks
    Kurt Roberts
    Roberto Tacchino
    Raymond Onders
    George DeNoto
    Homero Rivas
    Arsalla Islam
    Nathaniel Soper
    Gary Gecelter
    Eugene Rubach
    Paraskevas Paraskeva
    Sajani Shah
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2012, 26 : 1296 - 1303
  • [36] Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of three-port vs four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (level 1 evidence)
    Hajibandeh, Shahab
    Finch, David A.
    Mohamedahmed, Ali Yasen Y.
    Iskandar, Amir
    Venkatesan, Gowtham
    Hajibandeh, Shahin
    Satyadas, Thomas
    UPDATES IN SURGERY, 2021, 73 (02) : 451 - 471
  • [37] Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of three-port vs four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (level 1 evidence)
    Shahab Hajibandeh
    David A. Finch
    Ali Yasen Y. Mohamedahmed
    Amir Iskandar
    Gowtham Venkatesan
    Shahin Hajibandeh
    Thomas Satyadas
    Updates in Surgery, 2021, 73 : 451 - 471
  • [38] Intermediate results of a prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Phillips, Melissa S.
    Marks, Jeffrey M.
    Roberts, Kurt
    Tacchino, Roberto
    Onders, Raymond
    DeNoto, George
    Rivas, Homero
    Islam, Arsalla
    Soper, Nathaniel
    Gecelter, Gary
    Rubach, Eugene
    Paraskeva, Paraskevas
    Shah, Sajani
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2012, 26 (05): : 1296 - 1303
  • [39] Pain, well-being, body image and cosmesis: A comparison of single-port and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Sodergren, Mikael Hans
    Aslanyan, Alec
    Mcgregor, Colleen Georgette Chantelle
    Purkayastha, Sanjay
    Malhotra, Surbhi
    Darzi, Ara
    Paraskeva, Paraskevas
    MINIMALLY INVASIVE THERAPY & ALLIED TECHNOLOGIES, 2014, 23 (3-4) : 223 - 229
  • [40] Prospective randomized comparison of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with new facilitating maneuver vs. conventional four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Aktimur, Recep
    Guzel, Kerim
    Cetinkunar, Suleyman
    Yildirim, Kadir
    Colak, Elif
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2016, 32 (01) : 23 - 29