Three-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute and chronic cholecystitis
2007

Three-port vs Four-port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Sample size: 495 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Al-Azawi Dhafir, Houssein Nariman, Rayis Abu Bakir, McMahon Donal, Hehir Dermot J

Primary Institution: Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland

Hypothesis

Is the three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy as safe and effective as the four-port technique for treating acute and chronic cholecystitis?

Conclusion

Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe procedure that reduces analgesia requirements and length of hospital stay compared to the four-port technique.

Supporting Evidence

  • Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy required less pethidine than the four-port technique.
  • The average hospital stay was shorter for the three-port group (2.8 days) compared to the four-port group (3.7 days).
  • There were no significant differences in complications between the two techniques.

Takeaway

Doctors can use fewer holes in the tummy to remove the gallbladder, which means less pain and a shorter hospital stay for patients.

Methodology

The study reviewed medical records of 495 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, comparing outcomes between three-port and four-port techniques.

Potential Biases

Potential bias due to the non-randomized nature of the study and reliance on medical records.

Limitations

The study is a retrospective review and may have biases related to patient selection and data collection.

Participant Demographics

399 females and 96 males, age range 16–83 years, mean age 50 years.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.0001

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1186/1471-2482-7-8

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication