Skip to main content
Log in

Microlaparoscopic vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Background: Downsizing the port incisions may reduce pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: In a double-blind controlled study, 60 patients were randomized to undergo either microlaparoscopic cholecystectomy using one 10-mm and three 3.5-mm trocars (3.5-mm LC) or traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy using two 10-mm and two 5-mm trocars (LC). Incisional pain at each port incision and overall pain were recorded for 1 week after the operation. Fatigue, nausea and vomiting, pulmonary function, and cosmetic results were also measured. Results: Data from 52 patients were analyzed; eight patients were excluded from the study for various reasons. One patient was converted from 3.5-mm LC to LC due to technical problems with the 3.5-mm optic. In the 3.5-mm LC group (n = 25), incisional pain was significantly decreased in the 1st postoperative week as compared with the LC group (n = 27) (p <0.01). In both groups, pain scores at the supraumbilical 10-mm port were significantly higher compared with other port sites (p <0.05). The cosmetic results were significantly better in the 3.5-mm LC group (p <0.01). There were no significant differences in any of the other variables. Conclusion: The use of 3.5-mm trocars is feasible in LC, and it both reduces incisional pain and improves the cosmetic result.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bisgaard, T., Klarskov, B., Trap, R. et al. Microlaparoscopic vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 16, 458–464 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-9026-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-001-9026-5

Navigation