The Clinical Application of a Self-developed Gasless Laparoendoscopic Operation Field Formation Device on Patients Undergoing Cholecystectomy

A Retrospective Study on the Three-Port Technique of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration for the Management of Cholelithiasis and Choledocholithiasis

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is convenient in treating cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis due to its advantage of accelerated recovery. This retrospective study aimed to summarize the experience of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis treatment via three-port approach of LCBDE in Eastern China.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis between July 2019 and October 2021 were included. Patients who received LC+LCBDE+primary suturing of the common bile duct (CBD) via a three-port approach were assigned to the LCBDE-P group, and those who received LC+LCBDE+T-tube drainage of CBD comprised the LCBDE-T group. The measurement data were compared between the two groups. P-values <0.05 indicated statistical significance.

Results

A total of 88 patients were divided into two groups: LCBDE-P (n=50) and LCBDE-T (n=38). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that LCBDE-P is associated with a shorter length of stay (OR=0.115, 95% CI: 0.040-0.329, P<0.001) and lower hospitalization costs (OR=0.120, 95% CI: 0.041-0.357, P<0.001). No significant differences between the two groups were detected in the operation time, intraoperative hemorrhage, clearance rate of CBD stones, postoperative liver function, and postoperative complications (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The three-port approach of LCBDE is a safe and feasible strategy for managing cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Compared to LCBDE-T, LCBDE-P reduces the length of hospital stay and medical costs during hospitalization.

Comparison of a new gasless method and the conventional CO2 pneumoperitoneum method in laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized clinical trial

To avoid CO₂ pneumoperitoneum-associated cardiopulmonary side-effects during conventional laparoscopic surgeries, we have developed a gasless laparoscopic operation field formation (LOFF) device for laparoendoscopic single-site surgery. The aim of this study is to analyze the safety and efficacy of the LOFF device for laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy and to verify its advantage of avoiding CO₂ pneumoperitoneum-associated complications. In this prospective, randomized, observer-blinded clinical trial, eligible participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either conventional CO₂ pneumoperitoneum assisted laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy (LESS) or the new gasless LOFF device assisted laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy (LOFF-LESS). Outcomes including intra-operative respiratory and hemodynamic parameters, operation time, conversion rate, complication rate, et al were compared between the two groups. A total of 100 patients were randomized to the LESS group [n = 50; mean (SD) age, 49.5 (13.9) years; 24 (48.0%) women] and the LOFF-LESS group [n = 50, mean (SD) age, 47.4 (13.3) years; 27 (54.0%) women]. Compared with the LOFF-LESS group, the LESS group witnessed significant fluctuations in intra-operative respiratory and hemodynamic parameters. The tracheal extubation time of the LESS group was significantly longer (P = 0.001). The gasless LOFF device is safe and feasible for simple laparoscopic cholecystectomy and has a predominance of avoiding CO₂ pneumoperitoneum-associated cardiopulmonary side-effects. Trial registration number: ChiCTR2000033702.

Laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for single-incision cholecystectomy: an updated systematic review

The role of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) is still unclear. We update the summarization of the feasibility and safety of SILC and SIRC. A comprehensive search of SILC and SIRC of English literature published on PubMed database between January 2015 and November 2020 was performed. A total of 70 articles were included: 41 covering SILC alone, 21 showing SIRC alone, 7 reporting both, and 1 study not specified. In total, 7828 cases were recorded (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 6234/1544/50); and the gender of 7423 cases was definitively reported: the female rate was 64.0% (SILC/SIRC/not specified, 62.1%/71.5%/74.0%). The weighted mean for body mass index (BMI), operative time, blood loss and post-operative hospital stay was 25.5 kg/m² (SILC/SIRC, 25.0/27.0 kg/m²), 73.8 min (SILC/SIRC, 68.2/88.8 min), 12.6 mL (SILC/SIRC, 12.1/14.8 mL) and 2.5 days (SILC/SIRC, 2.8/1.9 days), respectively. The pooled prevalence of an additional port, conversion to open surgery, post-operative complications, intraoperative biliary injury, and incisional hernia was 4.1% (SILC/SIRC, 4.7%/1.9%), 0.9% (SILC/SIRC, 0.7%/1.5%), 5.9% (SILC/SIRC, 6.2%/4.1%), 0.1% (SILC/SIRC, 0.2%/0.09%), and 2.1% (SILC/SIRC, 1.4%/4.8%), respectively. Compared with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, SIRC has experienced more postoperative incisional hernias (risk difference = 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.02-0.07; P < 0.0001). By far, SILC and SIRC have not been considered a standard procedure. With the innovation of medical devices and gradual accumulation of surgical experience, feasibility and safety of performing SILC and SIRC will improve.