Three Port Versus Four Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the outcome of three vs four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and detect safety of three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) as routine procedure. Study Design: Simple comparative study. Setting: One year starting from June 2010 to May 2011. Sample size: 100 patients Methods: All patients were divided into two groups. Group A: three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy was done. Group B: Conventional four port laparoscopic cholecystectomy was done. Outcome is determined in terms of postoperative pain (determined by visual pain scale) and complications (bleeding, infection, bile duct injury). Results:  35 patients in Group A had low pain score and 15 were high pain score. In group B, 24 had low pain score and 26 high pain score. In group A only 10 patient needed nalbuphine as compared to 35 patient in group B. Both groups have almost same operating time (48.5min A and 48min B). Hospital stay is same (48h). Complications like port site bleeding (2 patient in A and 4 in B), wound infection (2 in A and 3 patients in B), abdominal pain (3 in group A and 4 in group B) of three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy are comparable with four port cholecystectomy. No patient in both groups suffered bile duct injury. Conclusion: The three-port technique is as safe as the standard four-port for LC. The main advantages of the three-port technique are that it is less painful, safe, less chances of wound infection and leaves fewer scars. Key Words: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy – three port cholecystectomy, four port cholecystectomy