Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs. conventional multiport cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has gained increasing attention due to the potential to maximize the benefits of laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this systematic review and pooled analysis was to compare clinical outcome following SILS and standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the treatment of gallstone-related disease.
An electronic search of Embase and Medline databases for articles from 1966 to 2011 was performed. Publications were included if they were randomised controlled studies in which patients underwent either single-incision or multiport cholecystectomy. The primary outcome measures for the meta-analysis were postoperative complications and postoperative pain score [visual analogue scale (VAS) on the day of surgery]. Secondary outcome measures were operating time and length of hospital stay. Weighted mean difference was calculated for the effect size of SILS on continuous variables, and pooled odds ratios were calculated for discrete variables.
In total, 375 cholecystectomy operations from 7 randomised controlled trials were included, 195 by single-incision (SILS) and 180 by conventional multiport. Operating time was significantly longer in the SILS group compared to the standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy group (weighted mean difference = 2.13; P = 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications, postoperative pain score (VAS), or the length of hospital stay between the two groups.
The results of this meta-analysis demonstrate that single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated gallstone disease, with postoperative outcome similar to that of standard multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Future high-powered randomized studies should be focused on elucidating subtle differences in postoperative complications, reported postoperative pain, and cosmesis following SILS cholecystectomy in more severe biliary disease.
- Bittner, R (2004) The standard of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 389: pp. 157-163 CrossRef
- Muhe, E (1986) The first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 369: pp. 804
- Kaiser, AM, Corman, ML (2001) History of laparoscopy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 10: pp. 483-492
- Keus F, de Jong JA, Gooszen HG, can Laarhoven CJ (2006) Laparoscopic vs open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Sys Rev (4):CD006231
- DerSimonian, R, Laird, N (1986) Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7: pp. 177-188 CrossRef
- Aprea, G, Coppola Bottazzi, E, Guida, F, Masone, S, Persico, G (2011) Laparoendoscopic single site (LESS) versus classic video-laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized prospective study. J Surg Res 166: pp. e109-e112 CrossRef
- Asakuma, M, Hayashi, M, Komeda, K, Shimizu, T, Hirokawa, F, Miyamoto, Y, Okuda, J, Tanigawa, N (2011) Impact of single-port cholecystectomy on postoperative pain. Br J Surg 98: pp. 991-995 CrossRef
- Ma, J, Cassera, MA, Spaun, GO, Hammill, CW, Hansen, PD, Aliabadi-Wahle, S (2011) Randomized controlled trial comparing single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 254: pp. 22-27 CrossRef
- Lee, PC, Lo, C, Lai, PS, Chang, JJ, Huang, SJ, Lin, MT, Lee, PH (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97: pp. 1007-1012 CrossRef
- Lirici, MM, Califano, AD, Angelini, P, Corcione, F (2011) Laparo-endoscopic single site cholecystectomy versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of a pilot randomized trial. Am J Surg 202: pp. 45-52 CrossRef
- Marks, J, Tacchino, R, Roberts, K, Onders, R, Denoto, G, Paraskeva, P, Rivas, H, Soper, N, Rosemurgy, A, Shah, S (2011) Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data. Am J Surg 201: pp. 369-372 CrossRef
- Tsimoyiannis, EC, Tsimogiannis, KE, Pappas-Gogos, G, Farantos, C, Benetatos, N, Mavridou, P, Manataki, A (2010) Different pain scores in single transumbilical incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomize controlled trial. Surg Endosc 24: pp. 1842-1848 CrossRef
- Chow, A, Purkayastha, S, Aziz, O, Pefanis, D, Paraskeva, P (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for cholecystectomy: a retrospective comparison with 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 145: pp. 1187-1191 CrossRef
- Rasic, Z, Schwarz, D, Nesek, VA, Zoricic, I, Sever, M, Rasic, D, Lojo, N (2010) Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy–a new advantage of gallbladder surgery. Coll Antropol 34: pp. 595-598
- Chang, SK, Tay, CW, Bicol, RA, Lee, YY, Madhavan, K (2011) A case-control study of single-incision versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg 35: pp. 289-293 CrossRef
- Love, KM, Durham, CA, Meara, MP, Mays, AC, Bower, CE (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a cost comparison. Surg Endosc 25: pp. 1553-1558 CrossRef
- Fronza, JS, Linn, JG, Nagle, AP, Soper, NJ (2010) A single institution’s experience with single incision cholecystectomy compared to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 148: pp. 731-734 CrossRef
- Qiu, Z, Sun, J, Pu, Y, Jiang, T, Cao, J, Wu, W (2011) Learning curve of transumbilical single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILS): a preliminary study of 80 selected patients with benign gallbladder diseases. World J Surg 35: pp. 2092-2101 CrossRef
- Antoniou, SA, Pointner, R, Granderath, FA (2011) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 25: pp. 367-377 CrossRef
- Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) vs. conventional multiport cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis
Volume 26, Issue 5 , pp 1205-1213
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors