Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) 4/2016

31.08.2016 | Original Article

Is the fourth port routinely required for laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Our three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy experience

verfasst von: A. Ciftci, M. B. Yazicioglu, C. Tiryaki, H. T. Turgut, O. Subasi, M. Ilgoz, O. Civil, S. Y. Yildiz

Erschienen in: Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) | Ausgabe 4/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

There have been many changes in number and place of trocars that have been described, since the first laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), but, in fact, all authors agree that laparoscopic procedure is accepted as gold standard. However, four trocars use in standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy, it has been argued that the fourth port is not necessary for grasping fundus of gallbladder so as to expose Calot’s triangle. The aim of this study is to establish the safety of three-trocar LC in symptomatic gallbladder disease and also to determine the ratio of technical requirements of the fourth trocar.

Methods

Between August 2010 and January 2016, 291 cases were operated in Kocaeli Derince Education and Research Hospital, department of general surgery for symptomatic gallbladder disease with three-port LC, and their records were examined retrospectively.

Results

Two hundred and twenty patients were female (75.6 %) and seventy one (24.4 %) were male. Two hundred and eighteen of two hundred and ninety-one cases (74.92 %) were operated with three- port LC in a secure way. In seventy-three cases (25.08 %), one more port was needed to use. Mean operative time was 33.76 ± 11:18 min. (15–90 min). In these cases, major complications, such as main bile duct injury or bile leakage, that may increase the mortality and morbidity, did not occur. Only in one case (0.34 %) postoperative bleeding was seen from the liver bed, which was required exploration.

Conclusion

We concluded that in experienced hand, LC with three ports is safe and feasible technique if it is not endanger the course of the surgery.
Literatur
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Mouret P (1996) How i developed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Acad Med Singap 25:744–747PubMed Mouret P (1996) How i developed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Acad Med Singap 25:744–747PubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Kumar M, Agrawal CS, Gupta RK (2007) Three-port versus standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled clinical trial in a community-based teaching hospital in eastern Nepal. JSLS 11:358–362PubMedPubMedCentral Kumar M, Agrawal CS, Gupta RK (2007) Three-port versus standard four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled clinical trial in a community-based teaching hospital in eastern Nepal. JSLS 11:358–362PubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Sulu B, Diken T, Altun H et al (2014) A comparison of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an alternative technique without a suspension suture. Ulus Cer Derg 30:192–196. doi:10.5152/UCD.2014.2717 Sulu B, Diken T, Altun H et al (2014) A comparison of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and an alternative technique without a suspension suture. Ulus Cer Derg 30:192–196. doi:10.​5152/​UCD.​2014.​2717
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Sakran N, Goitein D, Raziel A et al (2014) Advantages of minimal incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. IMAJ 16:363–366PubMed Sakran N, Goitein D, Raziel A et al (2014) Advantages of minimal incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. IMAJ 16:363–366PubMed
13.
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Cerci C, Tarhan OR, Barut I et al (2007) Three-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Hepatogastroenterology 54:15–16PubMed Cerci C, Tarhan OR, Barut I et al (2007) Three-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Hepatogastroenterology 54:15–16PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Is the fourth port routinely required for laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Our three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy experience
verfasst von
A. Ciftci
M. B. Yazicioglu
C. Tiryaki
H. T. Turgut
O. Subasi
M. Ilgoz
O. Civil
S. Y. Yildiz
Publikationsdatum
31.08.2016
Verlag
Springer London
Erschienen in
Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) / Ausgabe 4/2016
Print ISSN: 0021-1265
Elektronische ISSN: 1863-4362
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-016-1493-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2016

Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -) 4/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.