Is smaller necessarily better? A systematic review comparing the effects of minilaparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy on patient outcomes

被引:60
作者
McCloy, Rory
Randall, Delia [2 ]
Schug, Stephan A. [3 ]
Kehlet, Henrik [4 ]
Simanski, Christian [5 ]
Bonnet, Francis [6 ,7 ]
Camu, Frederic [8 ]
Fischer, Barrie [9 ]
Joshi, Girish [10 ]
Rawal, Narinder [11 ]
Neugebauer, Edmund A. M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Witten Herdecke, Inst Res Operat Med, Cologne, Germany
[2] Choice Pharma, Hitchin, Herts, England
[3] Univ Western Australia, Sch Med & Pharmacol, Perth, WA 6009, Australia
[4] Juliane Marie Ctr, Sect Surg Pathophysiol, Copenhagen, Denmark
[5] Univ Witten Herdecke, Dept Trauma & Orthopaed Surg Cologne Merheim, Cologne, Germany
[6] Hop Tenon, Assistance Publ Hop Paris, Dept Anesthesie & Reanimat, F-75970 Paris, France
[7] Univ Paris 06, Paris, France
[8] Flemish Free Univ Brussels, Med Ctr, Dept Anesthesiol, Brussels, Belgium
[9] Alexandra Hosp, Dept Anaesthesia, Redditch, Worcs, England
[10] Univ Texas SW Med Ctr Dallas, Dept Anesthesiol & Pain Management, Dallas, TX 75390 USA
[11] Orebro Med Ctr Hosp, Dept Anesthesiol & Intens Care, S-70185 Orebro, Sweden
来源
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | 2008年 / 22卷 / 12期
关键词
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy; Systematic review;
D O I
10.1007/s00464-008-0055-1
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background In recent years, minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC; total size of trocar incision <25 mm) has been increasingly advocated for the removal of the gallbladder, due to potentially better surgical outcomes (e.g., better cosmetic result, reduced pain, shorter hospital stay, quicker return to activity), but an evidence-based approach has been lacking. The current systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the importance of total size of trocar incision in improving surgical outcomes in adult laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods The literature was systematically reviewed using MEDLINE and EmBASE. Only randomized controlled trials in English, investigating minilaparoscopic versus conventional LC (total size of trocar incision >= 25 mm) and reporting pain scores were included. Quantitative analyses (meta-analyses) were performed on postoperative pain scores and other patient outcomes from more than one study where feasible and appropriate. Qualitative analyses consisted of assessing the number of studies showing a significant difference between the techniques. Results Thirteen trials met the inclusion criteria. There was a trend towards reduced pain with MLC compared with conventional LC, without reduction in opioid use. Patients in the MLC group had slightly reduced length of hospital stay, but there were no significant differences for return to activity. The two interventions were also similar in terms of operating times and adverse events, but MLC was associated with better cosmetic result (largely patient rated). There was a significantly greater likelihood of conversion to conventional LC or to open cholecystectomy in the MLC group than there was of conversion to open cholecystectomy in the conventional LC group [OR 4.71 (95% confidence interval 2.67-8.31), p < 0.00001]. Conclusions The data included in this review suggest that reducing the size of trocar incision results in some limited improvements in surgical outcomes after LC. However, it carries a higher risk of conversion to conventional LC or open cholecystectomy.
引用
收藏
页码:2541 / 2553
页数:13
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   Micropuncture cholecystectomy vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy - A randomized controlled trial [J].
Ainslie, WG ;
Catton, JA ;
Davides, D ;
Dexter, S ;
Gibson, J ;
Larvin, M ;
McMahon, MJ ;
Moore, M ;
Smith, S ;
Vezakis, A .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2003, 17 (05) :766-772
[2]   Is minisite cholecystectomy less traumatic?: Prospective randomized study comparing minisite and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomies [J].
Alponat, A ;
Çubukçu, A ;
Gönüllü, N ;
Cantürk, Z ;
Özbay, O .
WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2002, 26 (12) :1437-1440
[3]  
[Anonymous], J LAPAROENDOSC ADV S
[4]   Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using fine-caliber instruments - Smaller is not necessarily better [J].
Berci, G .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 1998, 12 (03) :197-197
[5]   Characteristics and prediction of early pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Bisgaard, T ;
Klarskov, B ;
Rosenberg, J ;
Kehlet, H .
PAIN, 2001, 90 (03) :261-269
[6]   Pain after microlaparoscopic cholecystectomy - A randomized double-blind controlled study [J].
Bisgaard, T ;
Klarskov, B ;
Trap, R ;
Kehlet, H ;
Rosenberg, J .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY-ULTRASOUND AND INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2000, 14 (04) :340-344
[7]   Microlaparoscopic vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy - A prospective randomized double-blind trial [J].
Bisgaard, T ;
Klarskov, B ;
Trap, R ;
Kehlet, H ;
Rosenberg, J .
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2002, 16 (03) :458-464
[8]   Elective transumbilical compared with standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Bresadola, F ;
Pasqualucci, A ;
Donini, A ;
Chiarandini, P ;
Anania, G ;
Terrosu, G ;
Sistu, MA ;
Pasetto, P .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1999, 165 (01) :29-34
[9]   Randomized trial of needlescopic versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy [J].
Cheah, WK ;
Lenzi, JE ;
So, JBY ;
Kum, CK ;
Goh, PMY .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2001, 88 (01) :45-47
[10]  
*COCHR COLL, 2003, REV MAN REVMAN 4 2