Minimizing ports to improve laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND

Minimizing the number and scope of ports used to perform laparoscopic cholecystectomy attempts to build on the improvements in postoperative pain control, rapid return to activity and work, patient satisfaction, and cosmetic result achieved by the laparoscopic method.

METHODS

We studied 141 patients in two sequential studies: the first a prospective randomized trial with 41 patients, and the second an examination of the more minimal procedure in 100 patients. In the randomized trial, patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with three ports: three 5-mm ports or two 10-mm ports and one 5-mm port. The 100 patients underwent the three 5-mm port procedure.

RESULTS

In the randomized trial, differences were not statistically significant. However, on the average, the group with three 5-mm ports required less medication over less time, had less postoperative pain, and took less time to return to activity than the second group with larger ports. A statistically significant difference was found in incisional pain between the smaller group (21 patients) with two 10-mm ports and one 5-mm port and the larger group (100 patients) with three 5-mm ports, whether the measure was overall incisional pain (p = 0.014) or a comparison based on specific ports (p = 0.001). The percentage of cases requiring port enlargement to remove the gallbladder was not significantly different between the groups. There were no conversions to an open procedure, no fourth trocars added, and no complications. No patient required overnight hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing the number and size of ports in laparoscopic cholecystectomy sustains or enhances the improvements initiated by performing laparoscopic rather than open cholecystectomy. In a comparison of microlaparoscopic procedures, patients undergoing the procedure with the shorter incisions experienced significantly less pain.