Gil HGE, Dueñas JF, Fragoso DMG, Maldonado OZE

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 55-58
PDF size: 211.12 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the first option for the treatment of chronic lithiasic cholecystitis. Modifications have been attempted regarding the number of ports, port sizes and placement sites. New instruments less than 3 mm has led us to minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. Material and methods: This is a retrospective-descriptive study of those patients undergoing minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy in a period of two years. Age, sex, body mass index, surgical time, bleeding, complications, conversions to ports of 5 mm and open surgery were the variables evaluated. Results: Minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed in 60 patients, 66.6% women, 33.3% men, with an average age of 35 years and an average body mass index of 35.5 for women and 32.5 for men. The average surgical time in the case of women was 55 minutes and in men of 62 minutes, conversion was made to 5 mm ports in two male patients due to difficulty in traction of the gallbladder. Transoperative cholangiography was performed in six cases (four men, two women). Bleeding in women of 20 ± 50 mL, men 30 ± 63 mL. There were no cases of conversion to open surgery or the need to re-operate. Conclusions: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with mini-instruments retains the same advantages as conventional laparoscopic procedures in terms of safety and efficacy. Using the mini-instruments, significantly reduces surgical trauma with a good visibility and traction force even in obese patients, which translates into less pain. It is an option similar to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy with cosmetic and recovery advantages, provided that it is done with a prepared and trained team.

REFERENCES

1. García RA, Sereno TS. Colecistectomía laparoscópica más allá de la «curva de aprendizaje». Rev Mex Cir Endoscop. 2010; 11: 63-70.

2. Bisgaard T, Klarskov B, Trap R, Kehlet H, Rosenberg J. Microlaparoscopic vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized double-blind trial. Surg Endosc. 2002; 16: 458-464.

3. Carvalho GL, Loureiro PM, Bonin E. Renaissance of minilaparoscopy in the NOTES and single port era: a tale of simplicity. JSLS. 2011; 15: 585-588.

4. Thakur V, Schlachta CM, Jayaraman S. Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011; 253: 244-258.

5. Moreno PE, Aragón LA, Toledo C, Arrangoiz R, Cordera F, Luque E y cols. Experiencia del uso de minilaparoscopía en el Centro Médico ABC. Rev Mex Cir Endoscop. 2013; 14: 114-118.

6. Dávila F, Tsin D. Mini laparoscopía cirugía sin huella. Cap. 9, 2a. ed., Editorial Amolca, Colombia, 2014.

7. Moreno PE, Carvalho GL. Mini laparoscopía en la era de cirugía de accesos mínimos. Cir Gen. 2014; 36: 192-194.

8. Jarquín AA, Vásquez CS, Díaz HP, Muñoz HO, Sánchez GR, Geminiano ME y cols. Evaluación de la morbilidad y mortalidad de la colecistectomía laparoscópica con técnica de tres puertos en el Hospital Regional de Alta Especialidad de Oaxaca. Cir Cir. 2013; 35: 32-35.

9. Velázquez J, Villagran F, González A. Colescistectomía por minilaparotomía versus laparoscópica. Resutados de un ensayo clínico controlado. Cir Cir. 2012; 80: 115-121.

10. Look M, Chew SP, Tan YC, Liew SE, Cheong DM, Tan JC et al. Post-operative pain in needlescopic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomised trial. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 2001; 46: 138-142.