Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 7/2017

24.10.2016

Multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy: results of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (MUSIC trial)

verfasst von: Alberto Arezzo, Roberto Passera, Alberto Bullano, Yoav Mintz, Asaf Kedar, Luigi Boni, Elisa Cassinotti, Riccardo Rosati, Uberto Fumagalli Romario, Mario Sorrentino, Marco Brizzolari, Nicola Di Lorenzo, Achille Lucio Gaspari, Dario Andreone, Elena De Stefani, Giuseppe Navarra, Salvatore Lazzara, Maurizio Degiuli, Kirill Shishin, Igor Khatkov, Ivan Kazakov, Rudolf Schrittwieser, Thomas Carus, Alessio Corradi, Guenther Sitzman, Antonio Lacy, Selman Uranues, Amir Szold, Mario Morino

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 7/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Single-port laparoscopic surgery as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign disease has not yet been accepted as a standard procedure. The aim of the multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy trial was to compare morbidity rates after single-access (SPC) and standard laparoscopy (MPC).

Methods

This non-inferiority phase 3 trial was conducted at 20 hospital surgical departments in six countries. At each centre, patients were randomly assigned to undergo either SPC or MPC. The primary outcome was overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery. Analysis was by intention to treat. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01104727).

Results

The study was conducted between April 2011 and May 2015. A total of 600 patients were randomly assigned to receive either SPC (n = 297) or MPC (n = 303) and were eligible for data analysis. Postsurgical complications within 60 days were recorded in 13 patients (4.7 %) in the SPC group and in 16 (6.1 %) in the MPC group (P = 0.468); however, single-access procedures took longer [70 min (range 25–265) vs. 55 min (range 22–185); P < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in hospital length of stay or pain VAS scores between the two groups. An incisional hernia developed within 1 year in six patients in the SPC group and in three in the MPC group (P = 0.331). Patients were more satisfied with aesthetic results after SPC, whereas surgeons rated the aesthetic results higher after MPC. No difference in quality of life scores, as measured by the gastrointestinal quality of life index at 60 days after surgery, was observed between the two groups.

Conclusions

In selected patients undergoing cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease, SPC is non-inferior to MPC in terms of safety but it entails a longer operative time. Possible concerns about a higher risk of incisional hernia following SPC do not appear to be justified. Patient satisfaction with aesthetic results was greater after SPC than after MPC.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Pelosi MA, Pelosi MA III (1992) Laparoscopic appendectomy using a single umbilical puncture (minilaparoscopy). J Reprod Med 37:588–594PubMed Pelosi MA, Pelosi MA III (1992) Laparoscopic appendectomy using a single umbilical puncture (minilaparoscopy). J Reprod Med 37:588–594PubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S, Carcoforo P, Donini I (1997) One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84:695CrossRefPubMed Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S, Carcoforo P, Donini I (1997) One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84:695CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Allemann P, Schafer M, Demartines N (2010) Critical appraisal of single port access cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97:1476–1480CrossRefPubMed Allemann P, Schafer M, Demartines N (2010) Critical appraisal of single port access cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97:1476–1480CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Joseph M, Phillips MR, Farrell TM, Rupp CC (2012) Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a higher bile duct injury rate. A review and a word of caution. Ann Surg 256:1195–1200CrossRef Joseph M, Phillips MR, Farrell TM, Rupp CC (2012) Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with a higher bile duct injury rate. A review and a word of caution. Ann Surg 256:1195–1200CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Asakuma M, Hayashi M, Komeda K, Shimizu T, Hirokawa F, Miyamoto Y, Okuda J, Tanigawa N (2011) Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain. Br J Surg 98:991–995CrossRefPubMed Asakuma M, Hayashi M, Komeda K, Shimizu T, Hirokawa F, Miyamoto Y, Okuda J, Tanigawa N (2011) Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain. Br J Surg 98:991–995CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Ma J, Cassera MA, Spaun GO, Hammill CW, Hansen PD, Aliabadi-Wahle S (2011) Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 254:22–27CrossRefPubMed Ma J, Cassera MA, Spaun GO, Hammill CW, Hansen PD, Aliabadi-Wahle S (2011) Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 254:22–27CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee PC, Lo C, Lai PS, Chang JJ, Huang SJ, Lin MT, Lee PH (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97:1007–1012CrossRefPubMed Lee PC, Lo C, Lai PS, Chang JJ, Huang SJ, Lin MT, Lee PH (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97:1007–1012CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Lirici MM, Califano AD, Angelini P, Corcione F (2011) Laparo-endoscopic single site cholecystectomy versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a pilot randomized trial. Am J Surg 202:45–52CrossRefPubMed Lirici MM, Califano AD, Angelini P, Corcione F (2011) Laparo-endoscopic single site cholecystectomy versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a pilot randomized trial. Am J Surg 202:45–52CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Marks JM, Phillips MS, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, DeNoto G, Gecelter G, Rubach E, Rivas H, Islam A, Soper N, Paraskeva P, Rosemurgy A, Ross S, Shah S (2013) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1-year results of a prospective randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 216:1037–1047CrossRefPubMed Marks JM, Phillips MS, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, DeNoto G, Gecelter G, Rubach E, Rivas H, Islam A, Soper N, Paraskeva P, Rosemurgy A, Ross S, Shah S (2013) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved cosmesis scoring at the cost of significantly higher hernia rates: 1-year results of a prospective randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial of traditional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 216:1037–1047CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Edwards C, Bradshaw A, Ahearne P, Dematos P, Humble T, Johnson R, Mauterer D, Soosaar P (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is feasible: initial experience with 80 cases. Surg Endosc 24:2241–2247CrossRefPubMed Edwards C, Bradshaw A, Ahearne P, Dematos P, Humble T, Johnson R, Mauterer D, Soosaar P (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is feasible: initial experience with 80 cases. Surg Endosc 24:2241–2247CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Vettoretto N, Arezzo A (2010) Human natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery: on the way to two different philosophies? Surg Endosc 24:490–492CrossRefPubMed Vettoretto N, Arezzo A (2010) Human natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery: on the way to two different philosophies? Surg Endosc 24:490–492CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Lirici MM, Arezzo A (2006) Surgery without scars: the new frontier of minimally invasive surgery? Controversies, concerns and expectations in advanced operative endoscopy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 15:323–324CrossRefPubMed Lirici MM, Arezzo A (2006) Surgery without scars: the new frontier of minimally invasive surgery? Controversies, concerns and expectations in advanced operative endoscopy. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 15:323–324CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Moher D, Hopewell S (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340:c869CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Moher D, Hopewell S (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 340:c869CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Rimonda R, Brown S, Tang B, Cuschieri A (2012) Ergonomic performance with crossed and uncrossed instruments in single port laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 26:3605–3611CrossRefPubMed Rimonda R, Brown S, Tang B, Cuschieri A (2012) Ergonomic performance with crossed and uncrossed instruments in single port laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 26:3605–3611CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Multi-port versus single-port cholecystectomy: results of a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial (MUSIC trial)
verfasst von
Alberto Arezzo
Roberto Passera
Alberto Bullano
Yoav Mintz
Asaf Kedar
Luigi Boni
Elisa Cassinotti
Riccardo Rosati
Uberto Fumagalli Romario
Mario Sorrentino
Marco Brizzolari
Nicola Di Lorenzo
Achille Lucio Gaspari
Dario Andreone
Elena De Stefani
Giuseppe Navarra
Salvatore Lazzara
Maurizio Degiuli
Kirill Shishin
Igor Khatkov
Ivan Kazakov
Rudolf Schrittwieser
Thomas Carus
Alessio Corradi
Guenther Sitzman
Antonio Lacy
Selman Uranues
Amir Szold
Mario Morino
Publikationsdatum
24.10.2016
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 7/2017
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5298-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 7/2017

Surgical Endoscopy 7/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

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

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.