Search

Purpose: The safety of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) for acute cholecystitis (AC) has not yet been confirmed., Methods: This single-center retrospective study included patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for AC between April 2010 and December 2020. Propensity scores were used to match patients who underwent SILC with those who underwent conventional multiport LC (CMLC) in the entire cohort and in the two subgroups., Results: A total of 1,876 patients underwent LC for AC, and 427 (22.8%) underwent SILC. In the propensity score-matched analysis of the entire cohort (404 patients in each group), the length of hospital stay (2.9 days vs. 3.5 days, p = 0.029) was shorter in the SILC group than in the CMLC group. No significant differences were observed in other surgical outcomes. In grade I AC (336 patients in each group), the SILC group showed poorer surgical outcomes than the CMLC group, regarding operation time (57.6 minutes vs. 52.4 minutes, p = 0.001) and estimated blood loss (22.9 mL vs. 13.1 mL, p = 0.006). In grade II/III AC (58 patients in each group), there were no significant differences in surgical outcomes between the two groups. Postoperative pain outcomes were also not significantly different in the two groups, regardless of severity., Conclusion: This study demonstrated that SILC had similar surgical and pain outcomes to CMLC in patients with AC; however, subgroup analysis showed that SILC was associated with poor surgical outcomes than CMLC in grade I AC. Therefore, SILC should be carefully performed in patients with AC by experienced hepatobiliary surgeons.

Purpose: The optimal indications for single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) have not yet been established., Methods: This single-center retrospective study included consecutive patients who underwent SILC between April 2010 and June 2020. Difficult surgery (DS) (conversion to multiport or open cholecystectomy, adjacent organ injury, operation time of ≥90 minutes, or estimated blood loss of ≥100 mL) and poor postoperative outcome (PPO) (postoperative hospital stay ≥ 7 days or Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ II postoperative complications) were defined to comprehensively evaluate surgical difficulty and postoperative outcomes, respectively., Results: Of 1,405 patients (mean age, 51.2 years; 802 female [57.1%]), 427 (grade I, n = 358; grade II/III, n = 69) underwent SILC for acute cholecystitis (AC), 34 (2.4%) needed conversion to multiport (n = 33) or open cholecystectomy (n = 1), 7 (0.5%) had adjacent organ injury during surgery, and 49 (3.5%) developed postoperative complications. Of the patients, 89 and 52 had DS and PPO, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, grade I AC, grade II/III AC, and body mass index of ≥30 kg/m 2 were significant predictors of DS. Age of ≥70 years and DS were significant predictors of PPO. In a subgroup analysis of patients with AC, DS (9.5% vs. 27.5%, p < 0.001) and PPO (5.0% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.001) were more frequent in patients with grade II/III AC than in those with grade I AC., Conclusion: SILC is not recommended in patients with grade II/III AC and should be carefully performed by experienced and well-trained surgeons., (Copyright © 2022 The Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: This study was performed to investigate the effect of drain placement on complicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy (cLC) for acute cholecystitis (AC)., Methods: This single-center retrospective study reviewed patients with AC who underwent cLC between January 2010 and December 2020. cLC was defined as open conversion, subtotal cholecystectomy, adjacent organ injury during surgery, operation time of ≥90 minutes, or estimated blood loss of ≥100 mL. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare the surgical outcomes between patients with and without drain on cLC., Results: A total of 216 patients (mean age, 65.8 years; 75 female patients [34.7%]) underwent cLC, and 126 (58.3%) underwent intraoperative abdominal drainage. In the propensity score-matched cohort (61 patients in each group), early drain removal (≤postoperative day 3) was performed in 42 patients (68.9%). The overall rate of surgical site infection (SSI) was 10.7%. Late drain removal demonstrated significantly worse surgical outcomes than no drain placement and early drain removal for overall complications (13.1% vs. 21.4% vs. 47.4%, p = 0.006), postoperative hospital stay (3.8 days vs. 4.4 days vs. 12.7 days, p < 0.001), and SSI (4.9% vs. 11.9% vs. 31.6%, p = 0.006). In the multivariate analysis, late drain removal was the most significant risk factor for organ space SSI., Conclusion: This study demonstrated that drain placement is not routinely recommended, even after cLC for AC. When placing a drain, early drain removal is recommended because late drain removal is associated with a higher risk of organ space SSI., Competing Interests: All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Korean Society of Endo-Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgery.)

Purpose: In colorectal cancer surgery, it is important to have accurate resection margins. However, it is challenging to localize lesions during laparoscopy. Therefore, to reduce surgical errors, many preoperative localizing methods have been introduced. In this study, we aimed to assess the preoperative feasibility and safety of autologous blood tattooing., Methods: A total of 11 patients underwent preoperative colonoscopic autologous blood tattooing from August 2017 to February 2020. At the start of the surgery, the surgeon assessed the patients for the precision of visibility and other complications such as abscess or spillage. The patients' characteristics, outcomes, and complications were collected retrospectively., Results: The study comprised 8 men and 3 women, with an average age of 63 years. Ten patients showed precise visibility, and no localization errors were observed during surgery. No complication was observed in all patients., Conclusion: Preoperative autologous blood tattooing is a very useful and safe technique because it has high visibility with no complications. This method does not require additional agents or facilities. A large-scale study will be required to develop standard guidelines., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST None., (Copyright © 2020 The Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Obturator hernia is a difficult disease to diagnose. If a surgical treatment is delayed in obturator hernia, a bowel resection may be required due to strangulation. The surgical treatment of this disease is to use a classical laparotomy. Recently, the laparoscopic approach has been reported and reviewed for efficiency. We checked the indicators that determine the most appropriate surgical method according to the patient's condition., Methods: In the study, a single-institution, retrospective analysis of surgical patients undergoing an obturator hernia surgery between 2003 and 2018 was performed. The patients were divided into a laparoscopic group (5 patients underwent laparoscopic repair; no intestinal resection) and an open group (13 patients who underwent open repair; 10 with and 3 without intestinal resection). The outcomes were compared between the groups. We analyzed the relevant factors that could predict the proper method of surgery., Results: A total 18 patients were included in the study. All patients were female, with body mass index (BMI) of under 21 kg/m 2 . Of the various factors, only the WBC and CRP counts were the factors that had shown significant differences between the two groups. It is noted that patients with open surgery had a higher WBC counts (10406 versus 6520/μl; p =0.011) and CRP counts (7.84 vs. 0.32 mg/dl; p =0.027)., Conclusion: Obturator hernia can be treated with a laparoscopic surgery. The choice of surgical treatment can be considered in advance through the review of the patient's WBC count or CRP count., Competing Interests: CONFLICT OF INTEREST None., (Copyright © 2020 The Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery. All rights reserved.)