COMPARSION OF THREE PORT LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY WITH FUNDAL SUTURING V/S FOUR PORT LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY

Journal Title: Journal of Advanced Medical and Dental Sciences Research - Year 2017, Vol 5, Issue 5

Abstract

Introduction: The main objective of our work was to try evaluate the feasibility of the three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy with fundal suturing and also to evaluate if there was potential advantages over the standard four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Material and Methods: 60 patients of either sex admitted to surgical ward no. 7 of Rajindra Hospital Patiala, Punjab were taken up for present study. All patients were randomly assigned into two groups by using lottery system. Variables such as operating time, conversion to open procedure, intraoperative and postoperative complications, analgesia requirements and cosmetic appearance were compared. Results: Operative time of 3 port LC with fundal suturing is comparable with 4 port LC and the difference was statistically insignificant. Conversion to open procedure was done in 1 patient in both the groups. Conversion rate was 3.3%. Adhesion was the major cause of conversion. Both the groups were comparable in intraoperative complications in terms of bleeding, content leak from the GB, stone spillage. There were no major post operative complications in both the groups..Mean Hospital stay in 3 port LC with fundal suturing was 2.33 days. Which when compared with 4 port LC found to be statistically insignificant. 3 port LC with fundal suturing does not reduce the analgesia requirement of the patient post operatively. Three port LC with fundal suturing has less no. of ports so better cosmetic appearance. There was no mortality in both the groups. Conclusion: Hence from this study we concluded that Three port LC with fundal suturing is technically feasible, safe with good results as achieved with the four-port technique. It involves less number of assistants; patients get less number of scars and hence relatively better cosmetic appearance. Key words: Cholelithiasis, Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

Authors and Affiliations

Vivek Pahuja, Prem Chand, Goldendeep Singh, Vinod Kumar, Vikram Singh

Keywords

Related Articles

Association of ABO Blood Group and Malaria

Background: Malaria is an infection caused by intracellular protozoan parasites of the genus Plasmodium and transmitted by the bite of infectedfemale Anopheles mosquitoes. The present study was conducted to evaluate asso...

Comparative evaluation of sealing efficacy of Thermafil and Obtura II obturating techniques: An in- vitro study

Background: Success of root canal therapy depends upon the accuracy by which, its component steps are being performed. Hence; we planned the present study to assess and compare the efficacy of obtura II and Thermafil obt...

ASSESSMENT OF VARIOUS TREATMENT MODALITIES FOR THE TREATMENT OF ORAL SUBMUCOUS FIBROSIS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

Background: Oral submucous fibrosis is chronic progressive diseases of the oral cavity with potential of malignant transformation. For the treatment of this pathologic condition, a wide range of modalities consisting of...

A Rare Case of Midline Dermoid Cyst of the Upper Lip: Case Report

Dermoid cysts usually occur in patients at their second or third decade of life. Clinically, the lesion presents as a slow-growing asymptomatic mass, usually located in the midline. Because they are almost always asympto...

Etiology of Temporomandibular Disorder- A Brief Review: Part I

The temporomandibular joint receives its name from the two bones that enter into its formation, namely the temporal bone and the mandible. This complex synovial system is composed of two temporomandibular joints together...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP557873
  • DOI -
  • Views 108
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Vivek Pahuja, Prem Chand, Goldendeep Singh, Vinod Kumar, Vikram Singh (2017). COMPARSION OF THREE PORT LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY WITH FUNDAL SUTURING V/S FOUR PORT LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY. Journal of Advanced Medical and Dental Sciences Research, 5(5), 49-52. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-557873