Zehetner Joerg, Pelipad Diana, Darehzereshki Ali, Mason Rodney J, Lipham John C, Katkhouda Namir
Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of USC, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2013 Jun;23(3):235-43. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0b013e31828b8b4e.
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery has been proposed as a minimally invasive technique with the advantages of fewer scars and reduced pain. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective randomized clinical trials of single-access laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SALC) versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).
All randomized controlled trials were identified through electronic searches (MEDLINE, PubMed, SAGES, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) up to October 2011. Methodologically appropriate clinical trials identified in the search process were included in a meta-analysis to provide a pooled estimate of effect.
Nine true randomized controlled trials were included in the analysis and reported a total of 695 patients, divided into the SALC group of 362 patients and the CLC group of 333 patients. Median operating time was longer with 57 minutes in SALC versus 45 minutes in CLC (P=0.00001). There was no significant difference in length of stay (SALC 1.36 d vs. CLC 1.15 d, P=0.18). Conversion to laparotomy in either group was similar; however, in 18 of 66 SALC patients an additional instrument was used, compared with 1 of 67 CLC patients (P=0.0003). Complications were not significant different [16% in SALC vs. 12% in the CLC group (P=0.74)]. Median postoperative pain with the visual analog scale score was 3.8 points in SALC versus 3.15 points in the CLC group (P=0.48). Cosmetic satisfaction was significantly more satisfying with 9 points favoring SALC versus 0 points favoring CLC (P=0.0005) in contrast to the quality-of-life questionnaire where there was no significant difference in patient overall satisfaction between SALC and CLC groups (P=0.0515).
SALC required longer operative times than CLC without significant benefits in patient overall satisfaction, postoperative pain, and hospital stay. Only satisfaction with the cosmetic result showed a significantly higher preference towards SALC.
单切口腹腔镜手术已被提出作为一种微创技术,具有疤痕更少和疼痛减轻的优点。本研究的目的是对单通道腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SALC)与经典腹腔镜胆囊切除术(CLC)的前瞻性随机临床试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析。
通过电子检索(MEDLINE、PubMed、SAGES和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库)确定截至2011年10月的所有随机对照试验。在检索过程中确定的方法学上合适的临床试验被纳入荟萃分析,以提供合并效应估计值。
分析纳入了9项真正的随机对照试验,共报告695例患者,分为SALC组362例患者和CLC组333例患者。SALC的中位手术时间较长,为57分钟,而CLC为45分钟(P=0.00001)。住院时间无显著差异(SALC为1.36天,CLC为1.15天,P=0.18)。两组中转开腹情况相似;然而,66例SALC患者中有18例使用了额外的器械,而67例CLC患者中有1例(P=0.0003)。并发症无显著差异[SALC组为16%,CLC组为12%(P=0.74)]。SALC术后视觉模拟量表评分的中位疼痛为3.8分,而CLC组为3.15分(P=0.48)。美容满意度方面,SALC明显更令人满意,支持SALC的得分为9分,支持CLC的得分为0分(P=0.0005);相比之下,在生活质量问卷中,SALC组和CLC组患者的总体满意度无显著差异(P=0.0515)。
SALC所需的手术时间比CLC长,在患者总体满意度、术后疼痛和住院时间方面无显著益处。仅美容效果满意度显示对SALC的偏好明显更高。