Cholecystitis
Conditions
Brief summary
Various modifications have been tried in laparoscopic cholecystectomy since its introduction. One, two and three port LC have been performed on limited scale. we aim to compare three port LC with four port LC in patients with cholelithiasis. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the outcome of 3 ports LC for treatment of cholelithiasis by comparing the result with 4 ports LC with respect to safety and efficacy.
Detailed description
Various modifications have been tried in laparoscopic cholecystectomy since its introduction. One, two and three port LC have been performed on limited scale. we aim was to compare three port LC with four port LC in patients with cholelithiasis. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the outcome of 3 ports LC for treatment of cholelithiasis by comparing the result with 4 To study the efficacy and feasibility of 3 port and 4 port lap cholecystetctomy. 1\. To compare the intraoperative and post-operative complications of 3 port and 4 port lap cholecystectomy 1. Operative time, 2. Days of hospital stay. 3. complication 4. post-operative pain ports LC with respect to safety and efficacy.
Interventions
PROCEDURElaparoscopic cholecystectomy
Both four port and three port LC is performed With the patient in supine position, with the surgeon and assistant on the left side and the monitor on the right side. Head up and right up position is employed during surgery in both the groups. Pneumoperitoneum of 12mmHg is created using open Hassan's method through the umbilical port. In 3 port a 5.5 mm umbilical visiport for 5 mm lens 30 degree A second 10 mm trocar is placed inferior to the sternum at the midline, while the third 5mm trocar is placed 4-5cm inferior to the right costal margin on the right midclavicular line. For the four port LC, additional 5mm port is placed in the sub costal region at the anterior axillary line. Posterior dissection and delineation of The Calot's triangle is done. Then, the cystic artery and cystic duct are identified, isolated, doubly clipped and divided. The gallbladder is removed through the umbilical port using a 10mm gallbladder extractor.
Sponsors
Assiut University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
SINGLE (Investigator)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
25 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
1. Age of patient between 25 and 65 years 2. Diagnosis of chronic cholecystitis, symptomatic cholelithiasis
Exclusion criteria
1. Choledocholithiasis 2. Severe Acute Calculus Pancreatitis 3. Severe co-morbid conditions (uncontrolled diabetes, Hypertension, severe direct hyper bilirubinemia) 4 . Previous operation or adhesion
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| compare between the prognosis of three port and four port laproscpic cholecyctectomy | 3 years |
Contacts
Primary Contactmohammed ali
Outcome results
None listed