Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2017 Aug 22;17(1):91.
doi: 10.1186/s12893-017-0287-x.

Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Xuan Tan  1 , Guobin Wang  2 , Yong Tang  3 , Jie Bai  3 , Kaixiong Tao  3 , Lin Ye  4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Minilaparoscopic versus single incision cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Xuan Tan et al. BMC Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Over the past decade, mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MLC) and single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) have been the two main successful mini-invasive surgical interventions for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis since the advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to compare the two treatment alternatives.

Methods: We searched PubMed, CNKI and the Cochrane library for trials that compared MLC and SILC. Risk difference (RD) and mean difference (MD) were calculated with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results: Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 non-randomized comparative studies (nRCSs) involving 2764 patients were identified. A longer operating time (MD -10.49; 95% CI -18.10, -2.88; P = 0.007) and a shorter wound length (MD 3.65; 95% CI 0.51, 6.78; P = 0.02) were found to be associated with SILC compared with MLC. No significant differences were revealed in conversion, hospital stay, pain relief and cosmetic results. Although a lower incidence of complications was observed with MLC (8.2%) compared with SILC (15.9%), but the difference was not statistically significant (RD -0.06; 95% CI -0.12, 0.00; P = 0.07).

Conclusions: MLC has an advantage over SILC in terms of operating time rather than hospital stay, pain relief, cosmetic results. Though conversion and complication rates were higher with SILC, there existed no statistically differences in the two measures between the two procedures. Whether MLC confers any benefits in terms of conversion or complications still warrants further studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study has been approved by the ethic committee of Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong university of Science and Technology.

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

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

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of included studies
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot on MLC vs. SILC in terms of operating time
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot on MLC vs SILC in terms of conversion
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Forest plot on MLC vs SILC in terms of hospital stay
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot on MLC vs SILC in terms of total complications
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Forest plot on MLC vs SILC considering pain relief
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Forest plot on MLC vs SILC considering cosmetic score
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Forest plot on MLC vs SILC considering wound length
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Reynolds W., Jr The first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JSLS. 2001;5(1):89–94. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gaillard M, Tranchart H, Lainas P, Dagher I. New minimally invasive approaches for cholecystectomy: review of literature. World journal of gastrointestinal surgery. 2015;7(10):243–248. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v7.i10.243. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kimura T. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy using fine-caliber instruments. Surg Endosc. 1998;12(12):1449. doi: 10.1007/s004649900880. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Reardon PR, Kamelgard JI, Applebaum B, Rossman L, Brunicardi FC. Feasibility of laparoscopic cholecystectomy with miniaturized instrumentation in 50 consecutive cases. World J Surg. 1999;23(2):128–131. doi: 10.1007/PL00013163. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Podolsky ER, Rottman SJ, Poblete H, King SA, Curcillo PG. Single port access (SPA) cholecystectomy: a completely transumbilical approach, journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A. 2009;19(2):219–222. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources