conventional laparoscopic
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

760
(FIVE YEARS 67)

H-INDEX

48
(FIVE YEARS 1)

Surgery ◽  
2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Safa Vatansever ◽  
Erik Nordenström ◽  
Marco Raffaelli ◽  
Laurent Brunaud ◽  
Özer Makay ◽  
...  


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. 3399-3401
Author(s):  
Naeem Ahmed ◽  
Maryum Saleem Raha ◽  
Uzma Shamim Seth ◽  
Mohammad Taha Kamal ◽  
Anum Nawazish Al ◽  
...  

Background: The gallbladder is a hollow organ that sits just beneath the right lobe of the liver. Chief functioning of gallbladder is to store gall, also known as bile that is required for digestion of food. Removing gallbladder through small incision in the abdomen is called laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Among benefits of cholecystectomy are decreased need for postoperative analgesia, decreased postoperative pain and shortened hospital stay from 1 week to less than 24 hours. Objective: To compare the frequency of port site wound infection with and without endogloves techniques of retrieval of gallbladder in pouch after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for chronic calculus cholecystitis. Design: It was a randomized controlled trial. Study Settings: This study was conducted at Department of General Surgery, Midland Doctors Medical Institute Tandali Muzaffarabad from July 2019 to July 2021 Material and Methods: A total of 260 cases who fulfilled inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study through wards of Department of General Surgery. Written informed consent was obtained from all the patients. Two groups were made by random division of patients. Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed in patients of group I. Through umbilical port gall-bladder was retrieved in these patients, exactly spot on by a sterile surgical hand glove endobag. Vicryl “O” with J-shaped needle was used to close 10mm umbilical port (fascial defect) and 5mm ports were conventionally closed. In patients of group II, conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed and gall-bladder was retrieved as in patients of group I but without using surgical sterile hand glove endobag. Results: The mean age of the patients in study group was 48.09±15.402 years and in control group it was 47.51±16.48 years. Male to female ratio was 1.06:1. The post-op wound infection was found in 11 (4.23%) patients. Statistically significant difference was found in groups (P<0.05). Conclusion: The use of endoglove technique of retrieval of gallbladder in pouch after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for chronic calculus cholecystitis is safe, cheap, simple and potentially reduces significant port site wound infection compared to without endogloves. Keywords: Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy, Endoglove, Gallbladder (GB).



2021 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Paolo Moroni ◽  
Carmen Payá-Llorente ◽  
Lelde Lauka ◽  
Elisa Reitano ◽  
Riccardo Memeo ◽  
...  


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Afshin Heidari ◽  
◽  
Aida Kazemi ◽  
Parisa Najjari ◽  
Kamran Dalvandi ◽  
...  

Review question / Objective: The aims of this study are: 1. To compare urinary complications of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy(RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy(LRP) in patients with prostate cancer; 2. To compare sexual complications of RARP and LRP in patients with prostate cancer. Condition being studied: Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent types of cancer; according to 2018 statistics, prostate cancer was responsible for 7.1% of all cancer in men. The primary intervention in such patients is radical prostatectomy surgery (RP), which could be performed in different methods in patients that cancer has not spread beyond the prostate gland or has not spread much. One of the most common types of RP is laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. There are several techniques for performing RP; two are Conventional Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (LRP) and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP). Sexual and urinary difficulties can occur in prostate cancer patients due to cancer itself or the treatment. Like any treatment option and surgery, radical prostatectomy can carry risks, like urinary(e.g., incontinency) and sexual complications(e.g., Impotence). In this review, we compared urinary and sexual complications of LRP and RARP.



Author(s):  
David Sien Chin Soon ◽  
Xavier Moar ◽  
Dewei Jordan Lee ◽  
Patrick Moore ◽  
Anthony Clough


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 1879-1883
Author(s):  
Usama Abo-Hashem ◽  
Rashed Rashed ◽  
Walaa El-Bassioune ◽  
Hossam Abdou


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document