No abstract available.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*

No abstract available.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*

No abstract available.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*

No abstract available.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*

No abstract available.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*

No abstract available.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic*

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, although is less invasive than open surgery, is not completely pain free. The use of local anaesthesia to relieve pain following this procedure is a common practice. However, it remains debatable whether a pre- or post-operative drug administration is more effective. Here, we investigated the role of preemptive local anaesthetic infiltration given pre- or post-incisional, in relieving the pain during laparoscopic surgery. METHODOLOGY: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 96 patients receiving 0.5% Bupivacaine 100mg. Group A (n=48) received post-incisional skin infiltration whilst Group B (n=48) received pre-incisional infiltration. Incisional (somatic) and intra-abdominal (visceral) pain was assessed using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at day 0, day 1 and day 7 post-operative days. RESULT: Baseline characteristics between the two groups were similar. Incisional pain was lower in Group B as compared to Group A at day 0 (P=0.03) and day 1 (P<0.01). Intra-abdominal pain was also lower in Group B at day 0 and day 1 (P= 0.04). VAS score was similar at day 7 although analgesia requirement is higher in Group A (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Administration of pre-incisional local anaesthesia offers better pre-emptive pain relief measure than postincisional administration by reducing somatic and visceral pain in laparoscopic gall bladder surgery.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic

No abstract available.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic* ; Humans

No abstract available.
Child* ; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic* ; Humans

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the educational quality of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) videos accessible on YouTube, one of the most important sources of internet-based medical information. METHODS: The keyword 'laparoscopic cholecystectomy' was used to search on YouTube and the first 100 videos were analyzed. Among them, 27 videos were excluded and 73 videos were included in the study. An arbitrary score system for video quality, devised from existing LC guidelines, were used to evaluate the quality of the videos. Video demographics were analyzed by the quality and source of the video. Correlation analysis was performed. RESULTS: When analyzed by video quality, 11 (15.1%) were evaluated as 'good', 40 (54.8%) were 'moderate', and 22 (30.1%) were 'poor', and there were no differences in length, views per day, or number of likes, dislikes, and comments. When analyzed by source, 27 (37.0%) were uploaded by primary centers, 20 (27.4%) by secondary centers, 15 (20.5%) by tertiary centers, 5 (6.8%) by academic institutions, and 6 (8.2%) by commercial institutions. The mean score of the tertiary center group (6.0 +/- 2.0) was significantly higher than the secondary center group (3.9 +/- 1.4, P = 0.001). The video score had no correlation with views per day or number of likes. CONCLUSION: Many LC videos are accessible on YouTube with varying quality. Videos uploaded by tertiary centers showed the highest educational value. This discrepancy in video quality was not recognized by viewers. More videos with higher quality need to be uploaded, and an active filtering process is necessary.
Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic* ; Demography ; Gallbladder