Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Robotic single-site cholecystectomy is better in reducing postoperative pain than single-incision and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

To compare the short-term outcomes of robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) with single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC), focusing on postoperative pain outcomes.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included consecutive patients with benign gallbladder disease who underwent cholecystectomy by a single surgeon between June 2019 and December 2021. Exclusion criteria were acute cholecystitis (AC) and other combined surgeries. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed between the RSSC and SILC or CMLC.

Results

Of the 157 patients included, 39 (24.8%) underwent RSSC, 32 (20.4%) underwent SILC, and 86 (54.8%) underwent CMLC. In a propensity score-matched cohort between RSSC and SILC (32 patients in each group), the number of additional analgesic injections was significantly lower in the RSSC group than in the SILC group (0.7 vs. 1.3, p = 0.002), and postoperative pain scores were also significantly lower at 6 h (2.8 vs. 3.6, p = 0.004) and 24 h (2.6 vs. 3.3, p = 0.021) after surgery in the RSSC group than in the SILC group. In a propensity score-matched cohort between RSSC and CMLC (23 patients in each group), the number of additional analgesic injections was significantly lower in the RSSC group than in the CMLC group (0.7 vs. 1.3, p = 0.005), and postoperative pain scores were also significantly lower at 6 h after surgery (2.9 vs. 3.7, p = 0.025) in the RSSC group than in the CMLC group.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that RSSC is helpful in reducing postoperative pain and the use of additional analgesics compared to both SILC and CMLC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Stinton LM, Shaffer EA (2012) Epidemiology of gallbladder disease: cholelithiasis and cancer. Gut Liver 6:172–187

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Begos DG, Modlin IM (1994) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: from gimmick to gold standard. J Clin Gastroenterol 19:325–330

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mühe E (1991) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Z Gastroenterol Verh 26:204–206

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Navarra G, Pozza E, Occhionorelli S, Carcoforo P, Donini I (1997) One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84:695

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chow A, Purkayastha S, Aziz O, Paraskeva P (2010) Single-incision laparoscopic surgery for cholecystectomy: an evolving technique. Surg Endosc 24:709–714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chaudhary S, Bhullar JS, Subhas G, Mittal VK, Kolachalam R (2013) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) using non-articulating instruments and conventional trocars-single surgeon experience. J Gastrointest Surg 17:809–813

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Huang Y, Chua TC, Maddern GJ, Samra JS (2017) Robotic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis. Surgery 161:628–636

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sun N, Zhang J, Zhang C, Shi Y (2018) Single-site robotic cholecystectomy versus multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg 216:1205–1211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Su WL, Huang JW, Wang SN, Lee KT (2017) Comparison study of clinical outcomes between single-site robotic cholecystectomy and single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Asian J Surg 40:424–428

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Han DH, Choi SH, Kang CM, Lee WJ (2020) Propensity score-matching analysis for single-site robotic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg 78:138–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Um MH, Lee SJ, Choi IS, Moon JI, Lee SE, Sung NS, Kwon SU, Bae IE, Rho SJ, Kim SG, Yoon DS, Choi WJ (2022) Completion of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using the modified Konyang standard method. Surg Endosc 36:4992–5001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Strasberg SM, Hertl M, Soper NJ (1995) An analysis of the problem of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 180:101–125

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Mangieri CW, Hendren BP, Strode MA, Bandera BC, Faler BJ (2019) Bile duct injuries (BDI) in the advanced laparoscopic cholecystectomy era. Surg Endosc 33:724–730

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Barrett M, Asbun HJ, Chien HL, Brunt LM, Telem DA (2018) Bile duct injury and morbidity following cholecystectomy: a need for improvement. Surg Endosc 32:1683–1688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hoffman AB, Myneni AA, Towle-Miller LM, Karim SA, Train AT, Burstein M, Schwaitzberg SD, Noyes K (2021) The Early (2009–2017) experience with robot-assisted cholecystectomy in New York State. Ann Surg 274:e245–e252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lin H, Zhang J, Li X, Li Y, Su S (2022) Comparative outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic, mini-laparoscopic, four-port laparoscopic, three-port laparoscopic, and single-incision robotic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Updates Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-022-01387-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wakabayashi G, Iwashita Y, Hibi T, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Asbun HJ, Endo I, Umezawa A, Asai K, Suzuki K, Mori Y, Okamoto K, Pitt HA, Han HS, Hwang TL, Yoon YS, Yoon DS, Choi IS, Huang WS, Giménez ME, Garden OJ, Gouma DJ, Belli G, Dervenis C, Jagannath P, Chan ACW, Lau WY, Liu KH, Su CH, Misawa T, Nakamura M, Horiguchi A, Tagaya N, Fujioka S, Higuchi R, Shikata S, Noguchi Y, Ukai T, Yokoe M, Cherqui D, Honda G, Sugioka A, de Santibañes E, Supe AN, Tokumura H, Kimura T, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Kitano S, Inomata M, Hirata K, Sumiyama Y, Inui K, Yamamoto M (2018) Tokyo Guidelines 2018: surgical management of acute cholecystitis: safe steps in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 25:73–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Spiers AJ, Baillie S, Pipe TG, Asimakopolous G (2017) Negating the fulcrum effect in manual laparoscopic surgery: investigating skill acquisition with a haptic simulator. Int J Med Robot 13(4):e1837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Batley SE, Prasad V, Vasdev N, Mohan SG (2016) Post-operative pain management in patients undergoing robotic urological surgery. Curr Urol 9:5–11

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Watanabe G, Ishizawa T, Yamamoto S, Kokudo T, Nishioka Y, Ichida A, Akamatsu N, Kaneko J, Arita J, Hasegawa K (2021) Impact of abdominal incision type on postoperative pain and quality of life following hepatectomy. World J Surg 45:1887–1896

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nisky I, Huang F, Milstein A, Pugh CM, Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Karniel A (2012) Perception of stiffness in laparoscopy—the fulcrum effect. Stud Health Technol Inform 173:313–319

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Grape S, Kirkham KR, Akiki L, Albrecht E (2021) Transversus abdominis plane block versus local anesthetic wound infiltration for optimal analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. J Clin Anesth 75:110450

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Raval AD, Deshpande S, Koufopoulou M, Rabar S, Neupane B, Iheanacho I, Bash LD, Horrow J, Fuchs-Buder T (2020) The impact of intra-abdominal pressure on perioperative outcomes in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc 34:2878–2890

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Migliore M, Arezzo A, Arolfo S, Passera R, Morino M (2018) Safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 32:4716–4727

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Konyang University Hospital, Konyang University College of Medicine, 158, Gwanjeodong-ro, Seo-gu, Daejeon, 35365, Korea

    Seung Jae Lee, Ju Ik Moon & In Seok Choi

Authors
  1. Seung Jae Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ju Ik Moon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. In Seok Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ju Ik Moon.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Drs. Seung Jae Lee, In Seok Choi, and Ju Ik Moon have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lee, S.J., Moon, J.I. & Choi, I.S. Robotic single-site cholecystectomy is better in reducing postoperative pain than single-incision and conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 37, 3548–3556 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09846-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09846-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation