Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with curved versus linear instruments assessed by systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials
- 456 Downloads
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery poses significant ergonomic limitations. Curved instruments have been developed in order to address the issue of lack of triangulation. Direct comparison between single-incision laparoscopic surgeries with conventional linear and curved instruments has not been performed to date.
MEDLINE, CENTRAL and OpenGrey were searched to identify relevant randomized trials. A network meta-analysis was applied to compare operative risks, conversion, duration of surgery and the need for placement of an adjunct trocar in single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with linear and curved instruments. The random-effects model was applied for two sets of comparisons, with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy as the reference treatment. Odds ratios, mean differences and 95 % confidence intervals were calculated.
Twenty-three randomized trials encompassing 1737 patients were included. The use of curved instruments was associated with increased operative time (mean difference 32.53 min, 95 % CI 24.23–40.83) and higher odds for the use of an adjunct trocar (odds ratio 22.81, 95 % CI 16.69–28.94) compared to the use of linear instruments. Perioperative risks could not be comparatively assessed due to the low number of events.
Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with curved instruments may be associated with an increased level of operative difficulty, as reflected by the need for auxiliary measures for exposure and increased operative time as compared to the use of linear instruments. Current instrumentation requires further improvement, tailored to the features of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (CRD42015015721).
KeywordsSingle-incision SILS Cholecystectomy Laparoscopic Instruments technical
Stavros A. Antoniou, Salvador Morales-Conde, George A. Antoniou, Rudolph Pointner and Frank-Alexander Granderath have no competing interests.
- 5.Morales-Conde S, Barranco A, Socas M, Méndez C, Alarcón I, Cañete J, Padillo FJ (2012) Improving the advantages of single port in right hemicolectomy: analysis of the results of pure transumbilical approach with intracorporeal anastomosis. Minim Invasive Surg 2012:874172PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.University of York, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. PROSPERO; International Prospective Register of systematic reviews. http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/. Accessed January 2014
- 12.Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62(10):e1–e34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 26.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 randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 24(8):1842–1848CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.Herrero Fonollosa E, Cugat Andorrà E, García Domingo MI, Camps Lasa J, Porta Castejón R, Carvajal López F, Rodríguez Campos A (2012) A randomised prospective comparative study between laparoscopic cholecystectomy and single port cholecystectomy in a major outpatient surgery unit. Cir Esp. 90(10):641–646CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 34.Luna RA, Nogueira DB, Varela PS, Rodrigues Neto Ede O, Norton MJ, Ribeiro Ldo C, Peixoto AM, de Mendonça YL, Bendet I, Fiorelli RA, Dolan JP (2013) A prospective, randomized comparison of pain, inflammatory response, and short-term outcomes between single port and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 27(4):1254–1259CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 36.Noguera J, Tejada S, Tortajada C, Sánchez A, Muñoz J (2013) Prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing the use of a single-port device with that of a flexible endoscope with no other device for transumbilical cholecystectomy: LLATZER-FSIS pilot study. Surg Endosc 27(11):4284–4290CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 37.Zapf M, Yetasook A, Leung D, Salabat R, Denham W, Barrera E, Butt Z, Carbray J, Du H, Wang CE, Ujiki M (2013) Single-incision results in similar pain and quality of life scores compared with multi-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a blinded prospective randomized trial of 100 patients. Surgery 154(4):662–670; discussion 670–671Google Scholar
- 51.Shemilt I, Mugford M, Byford S, Drummond M, Eisenstein E, Knapp M, Mallender J, McDaid D, Vale L, Walker D (2011) Chapter 15: incorporating economics evidence. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org