Day case laparoscopic cholecystectomy carried out using the harmonic scalpel: analysis of a standard procedure. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2010;20:20-23. [PMID: 20173615 DOI: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e3181cd45f2]

A comparative study of ultrasonic scalpel (US) versus conventional metal clips for closure of the cystic duct in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC): A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become the gold standard surgery for benign gallbladder diseases. Metal clips are conventionally used to secure the cystic duct and artery, while monopolar electrocautery (ME) predominates during laparoscopic dissection. ultrasonic scalpel (US) has already been explored for sealing the cystic duct and artery as a sole instrument, which has been regarded as a reasonable alternative to clips. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of US versus clips for securing the cystic duct during LC.

METHODS

We identified eligible studies in PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, and SpringerLink up to 1st May 2018, together with the reference lists of original studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA 14.0. Q-based chi-square test and the I statistics were utilized to assess heterogeneity among the included studies. A P-value below .05 was set for statistical significance. Forest plots of combined Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were also generated.

RESULTS

Eight studies met eligibility criteria in this meta-analysis eventually. A total of 1131 patients were included, of whom 529 were contained in the US group, compared to 602 in the clips group, which showed a significant difference (P = .025) without substantial statistical heterogeneity (I = 0.0%). No statistical significance was revealed regarding age (I = 0.0%, P = .957), and sex (I = 0.0%, P = .578) between both groups. The operative time and hospital stay in the US group were significantly shorter than that in the clips group, with I = 95.0%, P = .000 and I = 72.8%, P = .005, respectively. Concerning conversion (I = 48.6%, P = .084), perforation (I = 12.0%, P = .338), along with bile leakage (I = 0.0% P = .594), and overall morbidity (I = 19.1%, P = .289), comparison between both groups exhibited no statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

US enabled shorter operative time and hospital stay during LC, compared with clips. Additionally, US was comparable to clips regarding conversion, perforation, along with bile leakage and overall morbidity. Therefore, our meta-analysis concluded that US is clinically superior to the conventional clips in some aspects, or is at least as safe and effective as them, concerning closure of the cystic duct and artery.

Systematic review of cystic duct closure techniques in relation to prevention of bile duct leakage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

AIM

To study the effect of different techniques of cystic duct closure on bile leakage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for biliary disease.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane and EMBASE was performed. Rate of cystic duct leakage (CDL) was the primary outcome. Risk of bias was evaluated. Odds ratios were analyzed for comparison of techniques and pooled event rates for non-comparative analyses. Pooled event rates were compared for each of included techniques.

RESULTS

Out of 1491 articles, 38 studies were included. A total of 47491 patients were included, of which 38683 (81.5%) underwent cystic duct closure with non-locking (metal) clips. All studies were of low-moderate methodological quality. Only two studies reported separate data on uncomplicated and complicated gallbladder disease. For overall CDL, an odds ratio of 0.4 (95%CI: 0.06-2.48) was found for harmonic energy vs clip closure and an odds ratio of 0.17 (95%CI: 0.03-0.93) for locking vs non-locking clips. Pooled CDL rate was around 1% for harmonic energy and metal clips, and 0% for locking clips and ligatures.

CONCLUSION

Based on available evidence it is not possible to either recommend or discourage any of the techniques for cystic duct closure during LC with respects to CDL, although data point out a slight preference for locking clips and ligatures vs other techniques. No separate recommendation can be made for complicated gallbladder disease.

Is LigaSure a safe cystic duct sealer? An ex vivo study

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy and safety of both mechanical methods (clips) and electrosurgical instruments, harmonic scalpel (HS) and LigaSure (LS), for securing the cystic duct during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

During the study period from October 2010 to October 2012, 458 patients with gallbladder stones underwent LC. A total of 38 patients were excluded from the study for different reasons. The gallbladder was excised laparoscopically through the traditional method. The gallbladder specimens of the patients were divided into three equal groups randomly, and the distal part of the cystic duct was sealed ex vivo using ligaclips (Group A), HS (Group B), and LS (Group C). The gallbladders were then connected to a pneumatic tourniquet device and we very gradually increased the pressure with air. The bursting pressure of the cystic duct (CDBP) was measured and differences between the three groups were calculated.

RESULTS

The mean CDBP was 329.7 ± 38.8 mmHg in the ligaclip group, 358.0 ± 33.1 mmHg in the HS group, and 219.7 ± 41.2 mmHg in the LS group. A comparison of the mean CDBP between the groups indicated the superiority of HS over ligaclip and LS. CDBP was significantly higher in the ligaclips group compared with the LS group (p <0.001). HS and ligaclips were found to be safe sealers as their mean CDBP was found to be higher (>195 mmHg) than the maximum common bile duct pressure, whereas for LS the CDBP range was 150-297 mmHg, indicating that it is not safe for sealing.

CONCLUSION

HS is a safe alternative to clips. In fact, it was even safer than clips. By contrast, LS is not safe for cystic duct sealing.

Single incision cholecystectomy using a clipless technique with LigaSure in a resource limited environment: The Bahamas experience

•

SILC in the third world.

•

The addition of LigaSure to enhance procedure.

•

Look at feasibility.

•

Look at cost different.

Background

Scarless/single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) is a new procedure. It affords a superior cosmetic outcome when compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We examine the application of this technique using LigaSure via a clipless method. The present study looks at the experience of a single surgeon using this method with initial evaluation of the safety, feasibility, affordability, and benefits of this procedure.

Methods

Twenty-eight patients underwent transumbilical SILC at Doctors Hospital from January to December, 2014. The cohort included both emergency and elective patients. There was no difference in the preoperative work-up as indicated. To perform the operation, a 2–2.5-cm linear incision was made through the umbilicus and the single port platform utilized. A 10 mm 30-degree laparoscope, a 5 mm LigaSure and straight instruments were used to perform the laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure.

Results

All patients except two were operated on successfully. Conversion was considered the placement of an additional epigastric/Right upper quadrant (RUQ) port. The conversion rate to standard LC was 7%. No patient was converted to open cholecystectomy. In the 28 successfully completed patients, the median duration of the operation was 38.5 min and estimated operative blood loss was 24 ml. Patients were commenced on liquid diet immediately on being fully conscious and after return to the ward with an estimated time of 6 h. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 1.4 days. Follow-up visits were conducted for all patients at 2-weeks intervals and continued for 6 weeks after surgery where possible. Two patients developed wound infections. All patients were satisfied with the good cosmetic effect of the surgery. The total satisfaction rate was 100%.

Conclusions

SILC is a safe and feasible technique for operating with scarless outcomes and reducing perioperative discomfort at the same time. The GelPOINTTM is a safe and feasible platform to be used. The procedure can be accomplished using regular instruments and laparoscope. Curved instruments and a bariatric length laparoscope may make the procedure easier and result in greater time saving. The addition of LigaSure™ decreases the complexity of the operation, decreases operative time and blood loss. The technique is economical in a resource-limited environment.