Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Source
    • Language
15,240 result(s) for "Cholecystectomy"
Sort by:
The Analysis of Risk Factors in the Conversion from Laparoscopic to Open Cholecystectomy
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a standard treatment for cholelithiasis. In situations where laparoscopic cholecystectomy is dangerous, a surgeon may be forced to change from laparoscopy to an open procedure. Data from the literature shows that 2 to 15% of laparoscopic cholecystectomies are converted to open surgery during surgery for various reasons. The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for the conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery. A retrospective analysis of medical records and operation protocols was performed. The study group consisted of 263 patients who were converted into open surgery during laparoscopic surgery, and 264 randomly selected patients in the control group. Conversion risk factors were assessed using logistic regression analysis that modeled the probability of a certain event as a function of independent factors. Statistically significant factors in the regression model with all explanatory variables were age, emergency treatment, acute cholecystitis, peritoneal adhesions, chronic cholecystitis, and inflammatory infiltration. The use of predictive risk assessments or nomograms can be the most helpful tool for risk stratification in a clinical scenario. With such predictive tools, clinicians can optimize care based on the known risk factors for the conversion, and patients can be better informed about the risks of their surgery.
Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is superior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the initial training for surgical novices in an ex vivo porcine model: a randomized crossover study
BackgroundRobotic-assisted surgery (RAS) potentially reduces workload and shortens the surgical learning curve compared to conventional laparoscopy (CL). The present study aimed to compare robotic-assisted cholecystectomy (RAC) to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in the initial learning phase for novices.MethodsIn a randomized crossover study, medical students (n = 40) in their clinical years performed both LC and RAC on a cadaveric porcine model. After standardized instructions and basic skill training, group 1 started with RAC and then performed LC, while group 2 started with LC and then performed RAC. The primary endpoint was surgical performance measured with Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) score, secondary endpoints included operating time, complications (liver damage, gallbladder perforations, vessel damage), force applied to tissue, and subjective workload assessment.ResultsSurgical performance was better for RAC than for LC for total OSATS (RAC = 77.4 ± 7.9 vs. LC = 73.8 ± 9.4; p = 0.025, global OSATS (RAC = 27.2 ± 1.0 vs. LC = 26.5 ± 1.6; p = 0.012, and task specific OSATS score (RAC = 50.5 ± 7.5 vs. LC = 47.1 ± 8.5; p = 0.037). There were less complications with RAC than with LC (10 (25.6%) vs. 26 (65.0%), p = 0.006) but no difference in operating times (RAC = 77.0 ± 15.3 vs. LC = 75.5 ± 15.3 min; p = 0.517). Force applied to tissue was similar. Students found RAC less physical demanding and less frustrating than LC.ConclusionsNovices performed their first cholecystectomies with better performance and less complications with RAS than with CL, while operating time showed no differences. Students perceived less subjective workload for RAS than for CL. Unlike our expectations, the lack of haptic feedback on the robotic system did not lead to higher force application during RAC than LC and did not increase tissue damage. These results show potential advantages for RAS over CL for surgical novices while performing their first RAC and LC using an ex vivo cadaveric porcine model.Registration numberresearchregistry6029Graphic abstract
Cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and quality of life after da Vinci Single-Site cholecystectomy and multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy: short-term results from a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial
Background Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy evolved from the traditional multiport laparoscopic technique. Prior trials have demonstrated improved cosmesis with the single-incision technique. Robotic single-site surgery minimizes the technical difficulties associated with laparoscopic single-incision approach. This is the first prospective, randomized, controlled study comparing robotic single-site cholecystectomy (RSSC) and multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MPLC) in terms of cosmesis and patient satisfaction. Methods Patients with symptomatic benign gallbladder disease were randomized to RSSC or MPLC. Data included perioperative variables such as operative time, conversion and complications and cosmesis satisfaction, body image perception, quality of life using validated questionnaires, at postoperative visits of 2, 6 weeks and 3 months. Results One hundred thirty-six patients were randomized to RSSC ( N  = 83) and MPLC ( N  = 53) at 8 institutions. Both cohorts were dominated by higher enrollment of females (RSSC = 78%, MPLC = 92%). The RSSC and MPLC cohorts were otherwise statistically matched. Operative time was longer for RSSC (61 min vs. 44 min, P  < 0.0001). There were no differences in complication rates. RSSC demonstrated a significant superiority in cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception ( P value < 0.05 at every follow-up). There was no statistically significant difference in patient-reported quality of life. Multivariate analysis of female patients demonstrated significantly higher preference for RSSC over MPLC in cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception with no difference seen in overall quality of life. Conclusions Results from this trial show that RSSC is associated with improved cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception without a difference in observed complication rate. The uncompromised safety and the improved cosmesis satisfaction and body image perception provided by RSSC for female patients support consideration of the robotic single-site approach. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01932216.
Oncologic safety of robotic extended cholecystectomy for gallbladder cancer
BackgroundAlthough laparoscopic cholecystectomy is applicable for the treatment of early gallbladder cancer (GBC), minimally invasive surgery is not widely used for advanced GBC. This is because advanced GBCs necessitate complicated surgical techniques, including lymph node dissection and liver resection. Robotic extended cholecystectomy (REC) is thought to overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery, but oncological safety studies are lacking. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to evaluate the oncologic outcomes of REC compared with those of open extended cholecystectomy (OEC).MethodsA total of 125 patients, who underwent extended cholecystectomy for GBC with tentative T2 or higher stage between 2018 and 2021, were included and stratified by surgical methods. To minimize the confounding factors, 1:1 propensity-score matching was performed between the patients who underwent REC and those who underwent OEC.ResultsRegarding short-term outcomes, the REC group showed significantly lower estimated blood loss (382.7 vs. 717.2 mL, P = 0.020) and shorter hospital stay (6.9 vs. 8.5 days, P = 0.042) than the OEC group. In addition, the REC group had significantly lower subjective pain scores than the OEC group from the day of surgery through the 5th postoperative day (P = 0.006). Regarding long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in the 3-year [5-year] overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates between the REC group [OS, 92.3% (92.3%); DFS, 84.6% (72.5%)] and the OEC group [OS, 96.8% (96.8%); DFS, 78.2% (78.2%)] (P = 0.807 for OS and 0.991 for DFS).ConclusionsIn this study, REC showed superior short-term outcomes to OEC and no difference in long-term survival outcomes. Additionally, REC was superior to OEC in terms of postoperative pain. Therefore, REC may be a feasible option with early recovery compared with OEC for patients with advanced GBC.
Achieving the critical view of safety in the difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective study of predictors of failure
BackgroundBile duct injury rates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remain higher than during open cholecystectomy. The “culture of safety” concept is based on demonstrating the critical view of safety (CVS) and/or correctly interpreting intraoperative cholangiography (IOC). However, the CVS may not always be achievable due to difficult anatomy or pathology. Safety may be enhanced if surgeons assess difficulties objectively, recognise instances where a CVS is unachievable and be familiar with recovery strategies.Aims and methodsA prospective study was conducted to evaluate the achievability of the CVS during all consecutive LC performed over four years. The primary aim was to study the association between the inability to obtain the CVS and an objective measure of operative difficulty. The secondary aim was to identify preoperative and operative predictors indicating the use of alternate strategies to complete the operation safely.ResultsThe study included 1060 consecutive LC. The median age was 53 years, male to female ratio was 1:2.1 and 54.9% were emergency admissions. CVS was obtained in 84.2%, the majority being difficulty grade I or II (70.7%). Displaying the CVS failed in 167 LC (15.8%): including 55.6% of all difficulty grade IV LC and 92.3% of difficulty grade V. There were no biliary injuries or conversions.ConclusionAll three components of the critical view of safety could not be demonstrated in one out of 6 consecutive laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Preoperative factors and operative difficulty grading can predict cases where the CVS may not be achievable. Adapting instrument selection and alternate dissection strategies would then need to be considered.
Open conversion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration: subspecialisation safely reduces the conversion rates
BackgroundOpen conversion rates during laparoscopic cholecystectomy vary depending on many factors. Surgeon experience and operative difficulty influence the decision to convert on the grounds of patient safety but occasionally due to technical factors. We aim to evaluate the difficulties leading to conversion, the strategies used to minimise this event and how subspecialisation influenced conversion rates over time.MethodsProspectively collected data from 5738 laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by a single surgeon over 28 years was analysed. Routine intraoperative cholangiography and common bile duct exploration when indicated are utilised. Patients undergoing conversion, fundus first dissection or subtotal cholecystectomy were identified and the causes and outcomes compared to those in the literature.Results28 patients underwent conversion to open cholecystectomy (0.49%). Morbidity was relatively high (33%). 16 of the 28 patients (57%) had undergone bile duct exploration. The most common causes of conversion in our series were dense adhesions (9/28, 32%) and impacted bile duct stones (7/28, 25%). 173 patients underwent fundus first cholecystectomy (FFC) (3%) and 6 subtotal cholecystectomy (0.1%). Morbidity was 17.3% for the FFC and no complications were encountered in the subtotal cholecystectomy patients. These salvage techniques have reduced our conversion rate from a potential 3.5% to 0.49%.ConclusionAlthough open conversion should not be seen as a failure, it carries a high morbidity and should only be performed when other strategies have failed. Subspecialisation and a high emergency case volume together with FFC and subtotal cholecystectomy as salvage strategies can reduce conversion and its morbidity in difficult cholecystectomies.
Increasing resident utilization and recognition of the critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a pilot study from an academic medical center
Background Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a commonly performed surgical procedure; however, it is associated with an increased rate of bile duct injury (BDI) when compared to the open approach. The critical view of safety (CVS) provides a secure method of ductal identification to help avoid BDI. CVS is not universally utilized by practicing surgeons and/or taught to surgical residents. We aimed to pilot a safe cholecystectomy curriculum to demonstrate that educational interventions could improve resident adherence to and recognition of the CVS during LC. Methods Forty-three general surgery residents at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital were prospectively studied. Fifty-one consecutive LC cases were recorded during the pre-intervention period, while the residents were blinded to the outcome measured (CVS score). As an intervention, a comprehensive lecture on safe cholecystectomy was given to all residents. Fifty consecutive LC cases were recorded post-intervention, while the residents were empowered to “time-out” and document the CVS with a doublet photograph. Two independent surgeons scored the videos and photographs using a 6-point scale. Residents were surveyed pre- and post-intervention to determine objective knowledge and self-reported comfort using a 5-point Likert scale. Results In the 18-week study period, 101 consecutive LCs were adequately captured and included (51 pre-intervention, 50 post-intervention). Patient demographics and clinical data were similar. The mean CVS score improved from 2.3 to 4.3 ( p  < 0.001). The number of videos with CVS score >4 increased from 15.7 to 52 % ( p  < 0.001). There was strong inter-observer agreement between reviewers. The pre- and post-intervention questionnaire response rates were 90.7 and 83.7 %, respectively. A greater number of residents correctly identified all criteria of the CVS post-intervention (41–93 %, p  < 0.001) and offered appropriate bailout techniques (77–94 %, p  < 0.001). Residents strongly agreed that the CVS education should be included in general surgery residency curriculum (mean Likert score = 4.71, SD = 0.54). Residents also agreed that they are more comfortable with their LC skills after the intervention (4.27, σ  = 0.83). Conclusion The combination of focused education along with intraoperative time-out significantly improved CVS scores and knowledge during LC in our institution.