INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a well standardized technique. There are two main approaches, proposed by French and American Schools. They have similar operative times, but different arrangements for site ports insertions and for patients and operators' position at operative bed. Although we can foresee new scenarios for the next future (robotics, SILS, NOTES, minilaparoscopy), it seemed interesting to describe a simple variation to LC introduced in the last years in our experience relative to the positioning of operators and patient during standard American technique. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of 140 patients operated on for LC in the last two years (70 with French technique and 70 with 'American modified" technique) we compared the following parameters: laparotomic conversion, duration of operation, hospital stay, morbidity and mortality rates. RESULTS: Conversion to laparotomy, length of operative time and hospital stay were similar. Morbidity rates were slightly different, but it did not show statistically significant differences between the two groups. Mortality was nil. CONSIDERATIONS: Our variant to LC seems to be almost a compromise between the two main techniques. Our operators' arrangement gave a greater comfort for surgeons during LC and our results were similar to those reported with adoption of French and American approaches. These considerations led us to judge our variation safe and reliable.
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: technical compromise between French and American approach / Carlomagno, Nicola; Santangelo, Michele; Giuseppe, Romagnuolo***; Carmine, Antropoli***; Cristina La, Tessa*; Renda, Andrea. - In: ANNALI ITALIANI DI CHIRURGIA. - ISSN 0003-469X. - 85:1(2014), pp. 93-100.
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: technical compromise between French and American approach.
CARLOMAGNO, NICOLA;SANTANGELO, MICHELE;RENDA, ANDREA
2014
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a well standardized technique. There are two main approaches, proposed by French and American Schools. They have similar operative times, but different arrangements for site ports insertions and for patients and operators' position at operative bed. Although we can foresee new scenarios for the next future (robotics, SILS, NOTES, minilaparoscopy), it seemed interesting to describe a simple variation to LC introduced in the last years in our experience relative to the positioning of operators and patient during standard American technique. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of 140 patients operated on for LC in the last two years (70 with French technique and 70 with 'American modified" technique) we compared the following parameters: laparotomic conversion, duration of operation, hospital stay, morbidity and mortality rates. RESULTS: Conversion to laparotomy, length of operative time and hospital stay were similar. Morbidity rates were slightly different, but it did not show statistically significant differences between the two groups. Mortality was nil. CONSIDERATIONS: Our variant to LC seems to be almost a compromise between the two main techniques. Our operators' arrangement gave a greater comfort for surgeons during LC and our results were similar to those reported with adoption of French and American approaches. These considerations led us to judge our variation safe and reliable.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.