Three Port versus Conventional Four-Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Comparative Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v74i2.7823Keywords:
Four port laparoscopy, Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, Three port laparoscopyAbstract
Objective: To compare the complications among patients undergoing three-port versus four-port laparoscopic
cholecystectomy at our tertiary care hospital.
Study Design: Comparative cross-sectional study.
Place and Duration of Study: Department of Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Quetta Pakistan, from Feb to Oct 2021.
Methodology: Study was conducted on 200 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for any benign gall bladder pathology during the study period. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group-A underwent a three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy, while Group-B underwent a four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Post-operative pain, surgical site infection, duration of hospital stay, and conversion to open method were compared in both groups.
Results: Out of 100 patients included in the final analysis, 33 were male, and 67 were female. The mean age of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for benign gall bladder pathologies in our study was 42.95±9.47 years. 43(43%) underwent three ports, while 57(57%) underwent four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Duration of hospital stay was statistically significantly less in patients with three-port laparoscopic surgery than in patients undergoing four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (p-value<0.05).
Conclusion: Three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy emerged as a better option than conventional four-port cholecystectomy in our study population in terms of the shorter duration of hospital stay. All other complications were not significantly different in both groups.
Downloads
References
Vitale A, Lai Q. New trends and perspectives in hepatobiliary
surgery: preface. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 3: 99.
https://doi.org/10.21037/tgh.2018.11.06
Artifon EL, Loureiro JF, Baron TH, Fernandes K, Kahaleh M,
Marson FP, et al. Surgery or EUS-guided
choledochoduodenostomy for malignant distal biliary
obstruction after ERCP failure. Endosc Ultrasound 2015; 4(3):
-243. https://doi.org/10.4103/2303-9027.163010.
Hong KS, Noh KT, Min SK, Lee HK. Selection of surgical
treatment types for intrahepatic duct stones. Korean J
Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2011; 15(3): 139-145.
https://doi.org/10.14701%2Fkjhbps.2011.15.3.139.
Haribhakti SP, Mistry JH. Techniques of laparoscopic
cholecystectomy: Nomenclature and selection. J Minim Access
Surg 2015; 11(2): 113-118.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-9941.140220.
Casaccia M, Palombo D, Razzore A, Firpo E, Gallo F, Fornaro R.
Laparoscopic Single-Port Versus Traditional Multi-Port
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. J Soc Lap Surg 2019; 23(3):
e2018.00102.
https://doi.org/10.4293%2FJSLS.2018.00102
Singal R, Sharma A, Zaman M. The Safety and Efficacy of
Clipless versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy -
our Experience in an Indian Rural Center. Maedica 2018; 13(1):
-43.
Hajong R, Khariong PD. A comparative study of two-port
versus three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Minim Access
Surg 2016; 12(4): 311-314.
https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-9941.181309.
Ciftci A, Yazicioglu MB, Tiryaki C, Turgut HT, Subasi O, Ilgoz
M, et al. Is the fourth port routinely required for laparoscopic
cholecystectomy? Our three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy
experience. Ir J Med Sci 2016; 185(4): 909-912.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-016-1493-8
Besler E, Koksal HM, Uludag M. A comparison study of lefthand three-port videoscopy, left-hand four-port videoscopy and
standard four-port videoscopy in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Ann Ital Chir 2019; 90: 341-349.
Tariq M, Hafeez M, Fatima F, Khalid U, Ateeque S, Zainab A, et
al. Three port vs four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy a twoyear experience at two armed forces tertiary care hospitals. Pak
Armed Forces Med J 2020; 70 (2): 402-408.
Farooq U, Rashid T, Naheed A, Barkat N, Iqbal M, Sultana Q, et
al. Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: An
experience of 247 cases. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2015;
(2): 407-410.
Trichak S. Three-port vs standard four-port laparoscopic
cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2003; 17(9): 1434-1436.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-8713-1.
Azawi DA, Houssein N, Rayis AB, McMahon D, Hehir DJ.
Three-port versus four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in
acute and chronic cholecystitis. BMC Surg 2007; 7: 1–6
Hassan RSEE, Osman SOS, Aabdeen MAS, Mohamed WEA,
Hassan RSEE, Mohamed SOO, et al. Incidence and root causes of
surgical site infections after gastrointestinal surgery at a public
teaching hospital in Sudan.Patient Saf Surg 2020; 14(1): 45.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13037-020-00272-4
Evers L, Bouvy N, Branje D, Peeters A. Single-incision
laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional four-port
laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Surg Endosc 2017; 31(9): 3437-3448.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5381-0.
Kumar M, Agrawal CS, Gupta RK. Three-port versus standard
four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized
controlled clinical trial in a community-based teaching hospital
in eastern Nepal. J Soc Lap Surg 2007; 11(3): 358-362.
Hajong R, Hajong D, Natung T, Anand M, Sharma G. A
Comparative Study of Single Incision versus Conventional Four
Ports Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;
(10): PC06-PC09.
https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/19982.8601.
Hajibandeh S, Finch DA, Mohamedahmed AYY, Iskandar A,
Venkatesan G, Hajibandeh S, et al. Meta-analysis and trial
sequential analysis of three-port vs four-port laparoscopic
cholecystectomy (level 1 evidence). Updates Surg 2021; 73(2):
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
