When Should I Use an Additional Port at the Time of Three-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy?

Author(s):  
Elbrus Zarbaliyev ◽  
Murat Sevmiş ◽  
Dauren Sarsenov ◽  
Sebahattain Çelik ◽  
Mehmet Çağlıkülekçi
Author(s):  
Nitin Goyal ◽  
Anshuman Pandey ◽  
Shakeel Masood ◽  
Smita Chauhan ◽  
Alankar Gupta ◽  
...  

Abstract :Introduction: From the era of absolute contraindication to the phase of preferred treatment, the technique of laparoscopic cholecystectomy advances with time. Here, we report our experience of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in 20 patients of liver cirrhosis. In our institute, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred choice for cholelithiasis in cirrhotic patient.Methods: In last 2 years, 180 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed and 20 patients were cirrhotic. Their data analyzed retrospectively in terms of preoperative optimization, operative technique and results.Results: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was completed successfully in 19 patients and one was converted to open. Mean operative time was 54 minutes. No additional port was required in all cases. Calot’s first dissection was performed in 18 patients and fundus first technique was used in 2 patients due to unclear anatomy. Liver bed bleeding was present in 16 patients, which was controlled effectively. Subhepatic drain was placed in 12 patients. There was no mortality. Morbidity  in two patients was worsening of ascites in one; and incisional hernia in other patient which was converted to open. Port site complications were not noted in any patient and there was no evidence of intraabdominal bleeding or bile leak postoperatively. Blood and component transfusion was required in 2 patients. Average length of hospital stay was 4.8 days.Conclusion: Though laparoscopic cholecystectomy may be difficult in cirrhotic patients but it is feasible and relatively safe. It offers many advantages in cirrhotic patients and associated with low morbidity when compared with open surgery.Keywords: cirrhosis, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, difficult cholecystectomy


2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (3.4) ◽  
pp. 245-249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenichiro Araki ◽  
Ken Shirabe ◽  
Akira Watanabe ◽  
Norio Kubo ◽  
Shigeru Sasaki ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 111-117
Author(s):  
Mukund Raj Joshi ◽  
Tanka P Bohara ◽  
Anuj Parajuli ◽  
Shail Rupakheti

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed either by four port or three port. Although the overall patient outcome has been studied with comparable results, surgeon’s stress level has not been addressed commonly.Objective: To compare the difference in surgeon’s physical and mental stress between three port and four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Methods: This prospective randomized comparative study was carried out from January 2014 to August 2014 in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with American technique. Patients were randomized into four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy group and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. Surgery was performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. At the end of procedure, surgeons were given questionnaire to evaluate physical and mental stress faced by them based on Visual Analogue Scale. The results obtained were compared.Results: Total 60 cases were evaluated, 30 in each group. Mean age of patients and American society of Anesthesiologists score were not different. Surgeon’s perception regarding physical and mental stress while performing in two different groups was analyzed. The difference is not statistically significant. Neither any of the three port group needed to add additional port nor any of the patients were converted to open surgery. None of the patient in either group developed clinically significant complication.Conclusion: Both the four and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy techniques are comparable in regards to patient outcome as well as to the physical and mental stress experienced by the surgeons.


Author(s):  
K. A. Brookes ◽  
D. Finbow ◽  
Madeleine Samuel

Investigation of the particulate matter contained in the water sample, revealed the presence of a number of different types and certain of these were selected for analysis.An A.E.I. Corinth electron microscope was modified to accept a Kevex Si (Li) detector. To allow for existing instruments to be readily modified, this was kept to a minimum. An additional port is machined in the specimen region to accept the detector, with the liquid nitrogen cooling dewar conveniently housed in the left hand cupboard adjacent to the microscope column. Since background radiation leads to loss in the sensitivity of the instrument, great care has been taken to reduce this effect by screening and manufacturing components that are near the specimen from material of low atomic number. To change from normal transmission imaging to X-ray analysis, the special 4-position specimen rod is inserted through the normal specimen airlock.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document