Minimally Invasive Single-Site Cholecystectomy in Obese Patients: Laparoscopic vs. Robotic
10.7602/jmis.2019.22.3.101
- Author:
Kyu Min LEE
1
;
Dae Hun HAN
;
Seoung Yoon ROH
;
Ho Kyoung HWANG
;
Woo Jung LEE
;
Chang Moo KANG
Author Information
1. Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Korea. CMKANG@yuhs.ac
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Obesity;
Cholecystectomy;
Laparoscopy;
Robotic surgical procedures
- MeSH:
Cholecystectomy;
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic;
Gallbladder;
Gallbladder Diseases;
Humans;
Laparoscopy;
Medical Records;
Methods;
Obesity;
Pain, Postoperative;
Retrospective Studies;
Robotic Surgical Procedures
- From:Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery
2019;22(3):101-105
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is treatment method for management of benign gallbladder diseases. Further attempts are made to operate single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the procedure remains technically difficult, especially in obese patient. Recently, a robotic surgical system for minimal invasive surgery was introduced to overcome the limitations of conventional laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: From April 2009 to August 2017, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with single-site, minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) cholecystectomy with high BMI (>25 kg/m2). We analyzed general characteristics and perioperative outcomes between the single-fulcrum laparoscopic cholecystectomy group and the robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) group. RESULTS: Operation time (57.56±11.10 vs 98.5±12.28 p<0.001) was significantly longer and postoperative pain score (3.61 vs 5.15 p=0.000) was significantly higher in the robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) group, but the actual dissection time (25.85±11.09 vs 25.79±13.35 p=0.978) was not significantly different between the two approaches. Iatrogenic gallbladder perforation, (13 vs 6 p=0.005), patients undergoing RSSC showed a significantly smaller amount than did those undergoing single-fulcrum laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SFLC). CONCLUSION: It is difficult to say for certain that RSSC is clearly better than SFLC in obese patients. However, because of the technical convenience and efficiency of surgery with RSSC, RSSC can be practically worthwhile. Further study is mandatory.
