Epidural versus general anesthesia for laparo-endoscopic single-site cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Sharona B. Ross,Maria Christodoulou,Nicole Ross,Iswanto Sucandy,Kenneth Lubrice,Sneha Saravanan,Alexander Rosemurgy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-10628-3

2024-01-05

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:This study compares outcomes after LESS cholecystectomy utilizing epidural versus general anesthesia.

surgery

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Comparison of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Combined with Intraoperative Endoscopic Sphincterotomy and Laparoscopic Exploration of the Common Bile Duct for Cholecystocholedocholithiasis

D.-F. Hong,Y. Xin,D.-W. Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-8248-8

2006-01-01

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:Background Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOEST) was compared with laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LCBDE) for cholecystocholedocholithiasis in an attempt tried to find the best mini-invasive treatment for the cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Methods For this study, 234 patients with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis diagnosed by preoperative B-ultrasonography and intraoperative cholangiogram were divided at random into an LC-LCBDE group (141cases) and an LC-IOEST group (93 cases). The surgical times, surgical success rates, number of stone extractions, postoperative complications, retained common bile duct stones, postoperative lengths of stay, and hospital charges were compared prospectively. Results There were no differences between the two groups in terms of surgical time, surgical success rate, number of stone extractions, postoperative complications, retained common bile duct stones, postoperative length of stay, and hospital charge. Conclusion Both LC-IOEST and LC-LCBDE were shown to be safe, effective, minimally invasive treatments for cholecystocholedocholithiasis.
The Effects of a Laparoscopy by Single-port Endoscopic Access in Benign Adnexal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Andy Schmitt,Patrice Crochet,Audrey Pivano,Claire Tourette,Cindy Faust,Karine Baumstarck,Aubert Agostini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2024.01.017

IF: 4.314

2024-02-01

Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology

Abstract:STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) offers advantages over conventional laparoscopy (CL) in benign adnexal surgery.DESIGN: Randomized controlled study.SETTING: Gynecology-Obstetrics Unit of the University Hospital of the Conception in Marseille, France.PATIENTS: Patients older than 18 years requiring ovarian cystectomy or salpingo-oophorectomy by laparoscopy for symptomatic ovarian cysts requiring benign or prophylactic surgery.INTERVENTIONS: In the case of ovarian cysts, premenopausal patients typically undergo a unilateral cystectomy, whereas postmenopausal patients undergo a unilateral or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy upon a patient's request. In cases requiring prophylactic surgery, a bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was performed. All participants were randomly assigned to either the LESS or the CL group.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients in both groups reported similar levels of pain at 24 hours: Simple Numerical Scale was 1.3 (standard deviation, 1.5) in the LESS group vs 1.7 (standard deviation, 1.5) in the CL group (p = .12), and there were no significant differences in postoperative pain at 2 hours, 4 hours, 6 hours, and 7 days. Furthermore, there was no difference in analgesic consumption. Regarding intraoperative criteria, the only difference was the longer operating time in the LESS group than the CL group. We also found that patients' satisfaction with their scar at 1 month may be higher with LESS than with CL.CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference between the 2 techniques in postoperative pain, although the LESS technique necessitated a longer operative time than the CL technique, while providing better aesthetic result patients.

obstetrics & gynecology
Pain Relief in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Pre-emptive Versus Post-operative Local Anaesthetic Infiltration—A Randomized Control Trial

Gagan Soni,Devender Singh,Amol Sood,Yashwant Singh Rathore,Piyush Ranjan,Ankita Singh,Nitin Choudhary,Sunil Chumber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-024-04127-5

2024-08-19

Indian Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a widely performed procedure globally, often results in post-operative pain, which impacts the length of hospital stay and imposes financial burdens. This randomised controlled trial aimed to compare the effects of pre-emptive versus post-operative local anaesthetic infiltration at port-site incisions on post-operative pain in laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients.

surgery
Systemic lidocaine versus erector spinae plane block for improving quality of recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled trial

Zhiwei Lin,Chanjuan Chen,Shengyuan Xie,Lei Chen,Yusheng Yao,Bin Qian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111528

Abstract:Study objective: To compare intravenous lidocaine, ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB), and placebo on the quality of recovery and analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Design: A prospective, triple-arm, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled non-inferiority trial. Setting: A single tertiary academic medical center. Patients: 126 adults aged 18-65 years undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups: intravenous lidocaine infusion (1.5 mg/kg bolus followed by 2 mg/kg/h) plus bilateral ESPB with saline (25 mL per side); bilateral ESPB with 0.25% ropivacaine (25 ml per side) plus placebo infusion; or bilateral ESPB with saline (25 ml per side) plus placebo infusion. Measurements: The primary outcome was the 24-h postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score. The non-inferiority of lidocaine versus ESPB was assessed with a margin of -6 points and 97.5% confidence interval (CI). Secondary outcomes included 24-h area under the curve (AUC) for pain scores, morphine consumption, and adverse events. Main results: 124 patients completed the study. Median (IQR) 24-h QoR-15 scores were 123 (117-127) for lidocaine, 124 (119-126) for ESPB, and 112 (108-117) for placebo. Lidocaine was non-inferior to ESPB (median difference -1, 97.5% CI: -4 to ∞). Both lidocaine (median difference 9, 95% CI: 6-12, P < 0.001) and ESPB (median difference 10, 95% CI: 7-13, P < 0.001) were superior to placebo. AUC for pain scores and morphine use were lower with lidocaine and ESPB versus placebo (P < 0.001 for all), with no significant differences between lidocaine and ESPB. One ESPB patient reported a transient metallic taste; no other block-related complications occurred. Conclusions: For patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, intravenous lidocaine provides a non-inferior quality of recovery compared to ESPB without requiring specialized regional anesthesia procedures. Lidocaine may offer a practical and accessible alternative within multimodal analgesia pathways.
A randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of ERAS (Enhanced recovery after surgery) on Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Rajareddy GV,Athish Shetty,Santhosh CS,Prem A,Sunil V,Mallikarjuna Manangi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5455/ijsm.136-1668533468

2023-01-01

International Journal of Surgery and Medicine

Abstract:BACKGROUND Gallstone disease represents a significant burden for health-care systems making laparoscopic cholecystectomy one of the most common surgical procedures performed in the world. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES To compare the outcome of Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program and conventional care in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with respect to their post-operative pain, bowel movements, complications and the post-operative length of stay. METHODS A prospective study was conducted on 40 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Victoria Hospital, from the month of November 2019 to May 2021. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed electively on patients diagnosed with symptomatic cholelithiasis. ERAS protocol implemented for Group A with 20 patients whereas Conventional care followed for Group B with 20 patients, all chosen and allocated randomly. RESULT ERAS protocol resulted in better post-operative analgesia and decreased post-operative length of stay in comparison to Conventional care. IX CONCLUSION ERAS protocol in laparoscopic cholecystectomy has a positive impact on the patient and the healthcare system and therefore, needs to be followed in all cases henceforth.
To Compare Isobaric Thoracic Spinal Anesthesia Versus General Anesthesia in Laparascopy Cholecystectomy

Nivedika Kumbhare,Anuj Dubey,Chandra Sekhar Mishra,Vinay Yadav,Nupur Chakravarty,,,,,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.10123.2

2023-03-15

Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia

Abstract:Background: The laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure is typically carried out under general anesthesia, but regional techniques, such as low thoracic isobaric spinal anesthesia, have been used to manage patients with significant medical problem like coexisting systemic disease, who are deemed to be high risk in general anesthesia. Segmental spinal anesthesia has great outcomes in terms of post-operative discomfort, the need for analgesics, relatively fewer complications, and shorter hospital stays. Thus the aim of this study to avoid and minimize the risk of general anesthesia who does not have any significant comorbidity. So it might be a substitute for a standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Material and Methods: Total 60 adult patient with ASA1 & I I, 18-60 years, with normal coagulation profile, is divided into 2 groups. Group IS (Isobaric) - given 2.5 ml of isobaric preservative free bupivacaine 0.5% (levobupivacaine) + 0.5 mg of Fentanyl at T9-T10/T10-T11 into sub arachnoid space. Group GA – given general anesthesia using propofol, fentanyl citrate and atracurium besylate. After intubation, ventilation was controlled and balanced anesthesia was continued with isoflurane. After completion, neuromuscular block was anatagonized neostigmine methylsulfate and glycopyrrolate at the end of surgery. Results: Isobaric spinal anesthesia showed good control in intraoperative as well as postoperative pain control as compared to general anesthesia. In few patients, there were minor degrees of nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, shoulder pain, patient anxiety or itchng which were treated with standard medication like fentanyl and midazolam. All patients can resume oral intake on the day of surgery. Conclusions: In conclusion, this study provide evidence that segmental spinal anesthesia can be used in place of general anesthesia in healthy individuals also.
Intraoperative ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis

Gao Min,Zhou Wen,Shi Jian-ming,Hong De-fei,Mu Yi-ping,Wang Jian-guo,Wang Yao-dong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.2000.0456

2000-01-01

Abstract:Objective: To evaluate the benefit of intraoperative ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the treatment of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis. Methods: Fifty-two patients with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis (as determined by intraoperative cholangiography) were randomly divided into 2 groups during LC. In group A (27 patients), common bile duct stones were extracted by intraoperative EST during LC. In group B(25 patients), common bile duct (CBD) stones were extracted by conversion to open CBD exploration and cholecyctectomy. Results: The success rate was 26/27 (96.3%) in group A and 25/25 (100%) in group B (0.25< P <0.5); The mean postoperative hospitalization was 3.32±0.56 days in group A and 17.5±4.61 days in group B ( P <0.001). In group A, two cases were complicated transient hyperamylasemia after the combined procedure. In group B, one case of bile leakage and one case of duodenal ulcer occurred after conversion to open cholecystectomy with CBD exploration. There were no retained stones in group A but 2 cases in group B. Conclusion: Intraoperative ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy combined with LC for treatment of cholelithiasis and chiledochlithiasis is safe, effective and results in shorter hospitalization and fewer complications than traditional open cholecystectomy with CBD exploration.
Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for enhanced recovery after surgery: A prospective randomised controlled clinical trial

Sucheta Gaiwal,J H Palep,Rohini Mirkute,Nimitha Prasad,Mehta Kush

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.jmas_69_24

2024-07-30

Abstract:Background: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs represent a shift in perioperative care, combining evidence-based interventions to reduce surgical stress to expedite recovery. ERAS requires cohesive team efforts to facilitate early discharge and reduce hospital stays. Anaesthesia and pneumoperitoneum management within ERAS play crucial roles in influencing postoperative outcomes. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is widely acknowledged as the foremost approach for managing symptomatic gallstone disease due to its minimally invasive nature and favourable recovery. It has been demonstrated that increased abdominal pressures with prolonged CO2 exposure produce changes in cardio-vascular and pulmonary dynamics, which can be minimized by insufflating at minimum pressure required for adequate exposure, as advocated by European endoscopic guidelines. Dexmedetomidine, a highly selective alpha-2 adrenoreceptor agonist, has gained attention in anaesthesia armamentarium due to its sedative, analgesic, sympatholytic, and opioid-sparing properties. For multimodal opioid sparing postoperative pain management it's advantageous. Aim: To evaluate combined effect of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum and intra-operative dexmedetomidine infusion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for ERAS. Patients and methods: 160 patients of American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score 1 and 2, undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into low pressure pneumoperitoneum (10-12 mmHg) and standard pressure pneumoperitoneum (13-15 mmHg) groups. Each group is subdivided into, no Dexmedetomidine (ND) and with Dexmedetomidine (WD) infusion (0.7 mcg/kg/hr) intra-operatively. Thus, 40 patients in each of the 4 study arms. Perioperative variables were collected and analysed. Results and conclusions: Low pressure pneumoperitoneum with intra-operative Dexmedetomidine infusion (0.7 mcg/kg/hr) resulted in stable hemodynamics, reduced post-operative pain, no requirement of additional analgesics and early discharge. Thus, synergistic impact of these interventions significantly improved postoperative outcomes when used as part of ERAS protocols.
Comparison of analgesic efficacy of combined external oblique intercostal and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia at port site in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Vaishnovi Gangadhar,Anju Gupta,Suman Saini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17085/apm.24002

Abstract:Background: Conventional fascial plane block approaches for upper abdominal surgeries spare the lateral cutaneous nerve. An external oblique intercostal block (EOIB) may be suitable for upper abdominal incisions as it blocks the lateral and anterior branches of the intercostal nerves T6-T10. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating this block in clinical settings. The study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of combined EOIB and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: After obtaining written informed consent, 70 patients were randomly allocated to undergo right-sided EOIB with 20 ml and left-sided RSB with 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery (group ER, n = 35). Patients in the LIA group (n = 35) underwent local infiltration at the port site using 20 ml of the same solution (group LIA, n=35). Results: The visual analog scale scores with combined EOI and RSB were significantly lower than those with LIA at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h (P < 0.001). Rescue analgesics were required by 65.7% and 14.3% of the patients in the LIA and block groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The time to first rescue analgesic was significantly greater in the ER group than that in the LIA group (2.8 ± 1.10 vs. 1.6 ± 0.50 h; P = 0.012). The number of times rescue analgesia was required was significantly lower in the ER group than that in the LIA group (1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.83 ± 0.72; P = 0.015). Nausea and vomiting scores were higher in the LIA group than those in the ER group (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were higher in the ER group than those in the LIA group. Conclusions: EOIB combined with RSB provides superior analgesia compared with LIA and should be considered for LC.
Comparative outcomes of needlescopic, single-incision laparoscopic, standard laparoscopic, mini-laparotomy, and open cholecystectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of 96 randomized controlled trials with 11,083 patients

Joseph J Zhao,Nicholas L Syn,Cheryl Chong,Hwee Leong Tan,Julia Yu Xin Ng,Ashton Yap,Tousif Kabir,Brian K P Goh,Joseph J. Zhao,Nicholas L. Syn,Brian K.P. Goh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2021.04.004

IF: 4.348

2021-10-01

Surgery

Abstract:<h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3><p>Most randomized trials on minimally invasive cholecystectomy have been conducted with standard (3/4-port) laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy serving as the control group. However, there exists a dearth of head-to-head trials that directly compare different minimally invasive techniques for cholecystectomy (eg, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus needlescopic cholecystectomy). Hence, it remains largely unknown how the different minimally invasive cholecystectomy techniques fare up against one another.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Methods</h3><p>To minimize selection and confounding biases, only randomized controlled trials were considered for inclusion. Perioperative outcomes were compared using frequentist network meta-analyses. The interpretation of the results was driven by treatment effects and surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. A sensitivity analysis was also undertaken focusing on a subgroup of randomized controlled trials, which recruited patients with only uncomplicated cholecystitis.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Results</h3><p>Ninety-six eligible randomized controlled trials comprising 11,083 patients were identified. Risk of intra-abdominal infection or abscess, bile duct injury, bile leak, and open conversion did not differ significantly between minimally invasive techniques. Needlescopic cholecystectomy was associated with the lowest rates of wound infection (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.977) with an odds ratio of 0.095 (95% confidence interval: 0.023–0.39), 0.32 (95% confidence interval: 0.11–0.98), 0.33 (95% confidence interval: 0.11–0.99), 0.36 (95% confidence interval: 0.14–0.98) compared to open cholecystectomy, single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, mini-laparotomy, and standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy, respectively. Mini-laparotomy was associated with the shortest operative time (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.981) by a mean difference of 22.20 (95% confidence interval: 13.79–30.62), 12.17 (95% confidence interval: 1.80–22.54), 9.07 (95% confidence interval: 1.59–16.54), and 8.36 (95% confidence interval: –1.79 to 18.52) minutes when compared to single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, needlescopic cholecystectomy, standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and open cholecystectomy, respectively. Needlescopic cholecystectomy appeared to be associated with the shortest hospitalization (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.717) and lowest postoperative pain (surface under the cumulative ranking curve value = 0.928).</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Conclusion</h3><p>Perioperative outcomes differed across minimally invasive techniques and, in some instances, afforded superior outcomes compared to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. These findings suggest that there may be equipoise for exploring further the utility of novel minimally invasive techniques and potentially incorporating them into the general surgery training curriculum.</p>

surgery
Monopolar electrocautery versus ultrasonic dissection of the gallbladder from the gallbladder bed in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Varun Mahabaleshwar,Lileswar Kaman,Javid Iqbal,Rajinder Singh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cjs.000411

2012-10-01

Canadian Journal of Surgery

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Ultrasonic dissection has been suggested as an alternative to monopolar electrocautery in laparoscopic cholecystectomy because it generates less tissue damage and may have a lower incidence of gallbladder perforation. We compared the 2 methods to determine the incidence of gallbladder perforation and its intraoperative consequences.METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial between July 2008 and December 2009 involving adult patients with symptomatic gall stone disease who were eligible for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were randomly assigned before administration of anesthesia to electrocautery or ultrasonic dissection. Both groups were compared for incidence of gallbladder perforation during dissection, bile leak, stones spillage, lens cleaning, duration of surgery and estimation of risk of gallbladder in the presence of complicating factors.RESULTS: We included 60 adult patients in our study. The groups were comparable with respect to demographic characteristics, symptomatology, comorbidities, previous abdominal surgeries, preoperative ultrasonography findings and intraoperative complications. The overall incidence of gallbladder perforation was 28.3% (40.0% in the electrocautery v. 16.7% in the ultrasonic dissection group, p = 0.045). Bile leak occurred in 40.0% of patients in the electrocautery group and 16.7% of patients in ultrasonic group (p = 0.045). Lens cleaning time (p = 0.015) and duration of surgery (p = 0.001) were longer in the electrocautery than the ultrasonic dissection group. There was no statistical difference in stone spillage between the groups (p = 0.62).CONCLUSION: Ultrasonic dissection is safe and effective, and it improves the operative course of laparoscopic cholecystectomy by reducing the incidence of gallbladder perforation.

surgery
Comparison of inflammatory markers in low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with deep neuromuscular block versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum among patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstone disease: a randomized control trial

Muppana Veerabhadra Venkata Sai Srikanth,Prasanna Ramana Arumugaswamy,Yashwant Singh Rathore,Sunil Chumber,Rajkumar Yadav,Souvik Maitra,Hemanga Kumar Bhattacharjee,Sandeep Aggarwal,Krishna Asuri,Kamal Kataria,Piyush Ranjan,Devender Singh,Ankita Singh,M A Khan,Sumit Kumar Das

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11026-z

Abstract:Background: Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum (LPP) is an attempt to improve laparoscopic surgery. Lower pressure causes lesser inflammation and better hemodynamics. There is a lack of literature comparing inflammatory markers in LPP with deep NMB to standard pressure pneumoperitoneum (SPP) with moderate NMB in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methodology: This was a single institutional prospective randomized control trial. Participants included all patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gall stone disease. Participants were divided into 2 groups group A and B. Group A-Low-pressure group in which pneumoperitoneum pressure was kept low (8-10 mmHg) with deep Neuromuscular blockade (NMB) and Group B-Normal pressure group (12-14 mmHg) with moderate NMB. A convenience sample size of 80 with 40 in each group was selected. Lab investigations like CBC, LFT, RFT and serum IL-1, IL-6, IL-17, TNF alpha levels were measured at base line and 24 h after surgery and compared using appropriate statistical tests. Other parameters like length of hospital stay, post-operative pain score, conversion rate (low-pressure to standard pressure), and complications were also compared. Results: Eighty participants were analysed with 40 in each group. Baseline characteristics and investigations were statistically similar. Difference (post-operative-pre-operative) of inflammatory markers were compared between both groups. Numerically there was a slightly higher rise in most of the inflammatory markers (TLC, ESR, CRP, IL-6, TNFα) in Group B compared to Group A but not statistically significant. Albumin showed significant fall (p < 0.001) in Group B compared to Group A. Post-operative pain was also significantly less (p < 0.001) in Group A compared to Group B at 6 h and 24 h. There were no differences in length of hospital stay and incidence of complications. There was no conversion from low-pressure to standard pressure. Conclusion: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed under low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with deep NMB may have lesser inflammation and lesser post-operative pain compared to standard pressure pneumoperitoneum with moderate NMB. Future studies with larger sample size need to be designed to support these findings.
Single-shot regional anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomies: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Alessandro De Cassai,Nicolò Sella,Federico Geraldini,Serkan Tulgar,Ali Ahiskalioglu,Burhan Dost,Silvia Manfrin,Yunus Emre Karapinar,Greta Paganini,Muzeyyen Beldagli,Vittoria Luoni,Busra Burcu Kucuk Ordulu,Annalisa Boscolo,Paolo Navalesi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4097/kja.22366

Abstract:Background: Different regional anesthesia (RA) techniques have been used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), but there is no consensus on their comparative effectiveness. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of RA techniques on patients undergoing LC using a network meta-analysis approach. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Scopus, and Web of Science (Science and Social Science Citation Index) using the following PICOS criteria: (P) adult patients undergoing LC; (I) any RA single-shot technique with injection of local anesthetics; (C) placebo or no intervention; (O) postoperative opioid consumption expressed as morphine milligram equivalents (MME), rest pain at 12 h and 24 h post-operation, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), length of stay; and (S) randomized controlled trials. Results: A total of 84 studies were included. With the exception of the rectus sheath block (P = 0.301), the RA techniques were superior to placebo at reducing opioid consumption. Regarding postoperative pain, the transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block (-1.80 on an 11-point pain scale) and erector spinae plane (ESP) block (-1.33 on an 11-point pain scale) were the most effective at 12 and 24 h. The TAP block was also associated with the greatest reduction in PONV. Conclusions: RA techniques are effective at reducing intraoperative opioid use, postoperative pain, and PONV in patients undergoing LC. Patients benefit the most from the bilateral paravertebral, ESP, quadratus lumborum, and TAP blocks.
Reduced Laparoscopic Intra-abdominal Pressure During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Its Effect on Post-operative Pain: a Double-Blinded Randomised Control Trial

Elliot Gin,Darren Lowen,Mark Tacey,Russell Hodgson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-04919-0

2021-02-09

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery

Abstract:Laparoscopic surgery is regarded as the gold standard for the surgical management of cholelithiasis. To improve post-operative pain, low-pressure laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LPLC) have been trialed. A recent systematic review found that LPLC reduced pain; however, many of the randomised control trials were at a high risk of bias and the overall quality of evidence was low.

gastroenterology & hepatology,surgery
A systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence comparing laparoendoscopic single-site adrenalectomy and conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy.

Qingfeng Hu,Yuancheng Gou,Chuanyu Sun,Ke Xu,Guowei Xia,Qiang Ding

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2012.0687

2013-01-01

Journal of Endourology

Abstract:Purpose: To assess the efficacy and safety of laparoendoscopic single-site adrenalectomy (LESS-A) and conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) as a systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence. Methods: We conducted a thorough search for comparative studies that compared LESS-A and conventional LA in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library. Studies were reviewed independently and rated by Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. The operative time, estimated blood loss in operation, the time to resume oral intake after surgery, postoperative hospital stay, and the visual analog pain scale (VAPS) score were included for analysis to compare the efficacy, while the complications together with the analgesia use were included for analysis to compare the safety. Results: Nine studies with 171 LESS-A cases and 272 conventional LA cases were identified. Although operative time was longer in LESS-A (mean difference [MD] 15.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 11.18 to 19.74), estimated blood loss (MD 4.72, 95% CI 12.08 to 21.52) and the time to resume oral intake (MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.11) were similar; LESS-A presented a shorter postoperative stay in hospital (MD -0.60, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.35) and lower VAPS score (MD -1.21, 95% CI -1.44 to -0.97). Besides, the risk of minor postoperative complications (risk ratio [RR] 1.74, 95% CI 0.78 to 3.87) was similar. The postoperative analgesia demand in total (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.81) together with the analgesia usage lasting more than 24 hours after surgery (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.58) were associated with lower risk in LESS-A, however. Conclusions: Based on current evidence, the operative time seems to be longer in LESS-A; however, operative blood loss and complications are similar. In addition, LESS-A presents a shorter hospital stay after surgery and more acceptable perception of pain than conventional LA.
External Oblique Intercostal Plane Block Versus Port-Site Infiltration for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study

Omer Doymus,Ali Ahiskalioglu,Ahmet Kaciroglu,Zehra Bedir,Serkan Tayar,Mustafa Yeni,Erdem Karadeniz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-024-07219-z

Abstract:Purpose: Although laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is a minimally invasive surgery, postoperative pain is common. A novel block, the external oblique intercostal (EOI) block, can be used as part of multimodal analgesia for upper abdominal surgeries. The aim of our study is to investigate the effectiveness of EOI block in patients undergoing LSG. Materials and methods: Sixty patients were assigned into two groups either EOI or port-site infiltration (PSI). The EOI group received ultrasound-guided 30 ml 0.25% bupivacaine, while the PSI group received 5 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine at each port sites by the surgeon. Data on clinical and demographic were collected and analyzed. Results: There were no statistical differences in terms of demographic details (p > 0.05). VAS scores were statistically lower during resting at PACU, 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h postoperatively in the EOI group than PSI group (p < 0.05), The VAS scores were also lower during active movement at PACU, 1, 2, 4, and 8 h postoperatively in the EOI group than PSI group (p < 0.05). Twenty-four-hour fentanyl consumption was lower in the EOI than in the PSI group (505.83 ± 178.56 vs. 880.83 ± 256.78 μg, respectively, p < 0.001). Rescue analgesia was higher in PSI group than EOI group (26/30 vs. 14/30, respectively, p = 0.001). Conclusion: EOI block can be used as a part of multimodal analgesia due to its simplicity and effective postoperative analgesia in LSG.
The evaluation of feasibility of ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy using intraoperative instillation of bupivacaine: a retrospective observational study

Min-Ho Shin,Seong-Pyo Mun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2024.107.1.35

Abstract:Purpose: This study aimed to compare outcomes of opioid patients-controlled anesthesia (PCA) and intraoperative local anesthesia in terms of postoperative pain, lab results, patient surveys, and discharge scores to evaluate the feasibility of ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: Patients who underwent LC for acute cholecystitis were assigned to the outpatient surgery (OPS) group or inpatient surgery (IPS) group according to the surgeon. In the OPS group, a mixture of bupivacaine and epinephrine was injected into trocar sites and sprayed on the surgical dissection field. Oral opioid and analgesics were given twice a day. In the IPS group, patients received opioid PCA. Numeric rating scale (NRS) for walking, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), CRP, self-assessed survey on general physical condition and discharge, and discharge score of ambulatory surgery were assessed postoperatively. Results: NRS was significantly lower in the OPS group. There were no significant differences in ESR and CRP between the groups. Self-assessed survey on general conditions and the possibility of discharge were significantly better in the OPS group. The discharge scores at 3, 6, and 9 hours were significantly higher in the OPS group. Conclusion: Intraoperative instillation of bupivacaine at port sites and dissection fields had a better effect on short-term postoperative pain, patient surveys, and discharge criteria of ambulatory surgery than opioid PCA.
The comparison of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective randomized study

Ugur Deveci,Umut Barbaros,Mahmut Sertan Kapakli,Manuk Norayk Manukyan,Selçuk Şimşek,Abut Kebudi,Selçuk Mercan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4174/jkss.2013.85.6.275

2013-01-01

Journal of the Korean Surgical Society

Abstract:PURPOSE: Laparoscopic techniques have allowed surgeons to perform complicated intra-abdominal surgery with minimal trauma. Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) was developed with the aim of reducing the invasiveness of conventional laparoscopy. In this study we aimed to compare results of SILS cholecystectomy and three port conventional laparoscopic (TPCL) cholecystectomy prospectively.METHODS: In this prospective study, 100 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallbladder disease were randomly allocated to SILS cholecystectomy (group 1) or TPCL cholecystectomy (group 2). Demographics, pathologic diagnosis, operating time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, pain score, conversion rate, and satisfaction of cosmetic outcome were recorded.RESULTS: Forty-four SILS cholesystectomies (88%) and 42 TPCL cholecystectomies (84%) were completed successfully. Conversion to open surgery was required for 4 cases in group 1 and 6 cases in group 2. Operating time was significantly longer in group 1 compared with group 2 (73 minutes vs. 48 minutes; P < 0.05). Higher pain scores were observed in group 1 versus group 2 in postoperative day 1 (P < 0.05). There was higher cosmetic satisfaction in group 1 (P < 0.05).CONCLUSION: SILS cholecystectomy performed by experienced surgeons is at least as successful, feasible, effective and safe as a TPCL cholecystectomy. Surgeons performing SILS should have a firm foundation of advanced minimal access surgical skills and a cautious, gradated approach to attempt the various procedures. Prospective randomized studies comparing single access versus conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with large volumes and long-term follow-up, are needed to confirm our initial experience. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01772745.).
Systematic Review of Utilized Ports in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Pushing the Boundaries

Shadi A Alshammary,Dhuha N Boumarah

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/9961528

2024-05-23

Abstract:Introduction: Surgical procedures have undergone a paradigm shift in the last 3 decades, with minimally invasive surgery becoming standard of care for a number of surgeries, including the treatment of benign gallbladder diseases. By providing a thorough and impartial summary of the earlier published systematic reviews, the current systematic review is the first to present comparison results. This review illustrates the data of intraoperative and postoperative results of each laparoscopic cholecystectomy technique. Materials and methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was meticulously followed to conduct the present systematic review. MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science were searched for eligible publications, and a total of 14 systematic reviews were included. A newly developed extraction table was utilized to obtain the predefined parameters from eligible systematic reviews, including operative time, conversion rate, estimated blood loss, bile leak, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, and cosmetic results. All statistical analyses were conducted using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software, version 26.0. The analysis of dichotomous results was summarized using relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), and continuous results were summarized using mean differences and 95% CIs. The proportions were compared using a single proportion z-test. Results: The analysis of our primary and secondary outcomes revealed a statistically significant improvement in aesthetic results after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) in comparison to the multiport approach of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This, however, is accompanied by extended operative timing and subsequently, prolonged exposure to anesthesia. Conclusion: Patients should be carefully selected for SILC to minimize technical difficulties and prevent complications both intraoperatively and shortly after the procedure. This trial is registered with CRD42023392037.
Epidural versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on pain relief and recovery after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: randomized clinical trial

Satoru Kikuchi,Takashi Matsusaki,Toshiharu Mitsuhashi,Shinji Kuroda,Hajime Kashima,Nobuo Takata,Ema Mitsui,Yoshihiko Kakiuchi,Kazuhiro Noma,Yuzo Umeda,Hiroshi Morimatsu,Toshiyoshi Fujiwara

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsopen/zrad161

2024-01-03

BJS Open

Abstract:Abstract Background Epidural analgesia (EDA) is a main modality for postoperative pain relief in major open abdominal surgery within the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol. However, it remains unclear whether EDA is an imperative modality in laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). This study examined non-inferiority of patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) to EDA in terms of postoperative pain and recovery in patients who underwent LG. Methods In this open-label, non-inferiority, parallel, individually randomized clinical trial, patients who underwent elective LG for gastric cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive either EDA or PCIA after surgery. The primary endpoint was pain score using the Numerical Rating Scale at rest 24 h after surgery, analysed both according to the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle and per protocol. The non-inferiority margin for pain score was set at 1. Secondary outcomes were postoperative parameters related to recovery and adverse events related to analgesia. Results Between 3 July 2017 and 29 September 2020, 132 patients were randomized to receive either EDA (n = 66) or PCIA (n = 66). After exclusions, 64 patients were included in the EDA group and 65 patients in the PCIA group for the ITT analysis. Pain score at rest 24 h after surgery was 1.94 (s.d. 2.07) in the EDA group and 2.63 (s.d. 1.76) in the PCIA group (P = 0.043). PCIA was not non-inferior to EDA for the primary endpoint (difference 0.69, one side 95% c.i. 1.25, P = 0.184) in ITT analysis. Postoperative parameters related to recovery were similar between groups. More EDA patients (21 (32.8%) versus 1 (1.5%), P < 0.001) developed postoperative hypotension as an adverse event. Conclusions PCIA was not non-inferior to EDA in terms of early-phase pain relief after LG. Registration number: UMIN000027643 (https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index-j.htm).

surgery

Epidural versus general anesthesia for laparo-endoscopic single-site cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Comparison of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Combined with Intraoperative Endoscopic Sphincterotomy and Laparoscopic Exploration of the Common Bile Duct for Cholecystocholedocholithiasis

The Effects of a Laparoscopy by Single-port Endoscopic Access in Benign Adnexal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Pain Relief in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Pre-emptive Versus Post-operative Local Anaesthetic Infiltration—A Randomized Control Trial

Systemic lidocaine versus erector spinae plane block for improving quality of recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized controlled trial

A randomized controlled trial to assess the impact of ERAS (Enhanced recovery after surgery) on Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

To Compare Isobaric Thoracic Spinal Anesthesia Versus General Anesthesia in Laparascopy Cholecystectomy

Intraoperative ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis

Low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with intraoperative dexmedetomidine infusion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for enhanced recovery after surgery: A prospective randomised controlled clinical trial

Comparison of analgesic efficacy of combined external oblique intercostal and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia at port site in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Comparative outcomes of needlescopic, single-incision laparoscopic, standard laparoscopic, mini-laparotomy, and open cholecystectomy: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of 96 randomized controlled trials with 11,083 patients

Monopolar electrocautery versus ultrasonic dissection of the gallbladder from the gallbladder bed in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Comparison of inflammatory markers in low-pressure pneumoperitoneum with deep neuromuscular block versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum among patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstone disease: a randomized control trial

Single-shot regional anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomies: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Reduced Laparoscopic Intra-abdominal Pressure During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Its Effect on Post-operative Pain: a Double-Blinded Randomised Control Trial

A systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence comparing laparoendoscopic single-site adrenalectomy and conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy.

External Oblique Intercostal Plane Block Versus Port-Site Infiltration for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study

The evaluation of feasibility of ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy using intraoperative instillation of bupivacaine: a retrospective observational study

The comparison of single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prospective randomized study

Systematic Review of Utilized Ports in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Pushing the Boundaries

Epidural versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia on pain relief and recovery after laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: randomized clinical trial