Improved outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy with ultrasonic dissection: a randomized multicenter trial.
BACKGROUND
In conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, dissection with electrocautery starts at the triangle of Calot. In a randomized single-center trial, the fundus-first method (dome down) using ultrasonic dissection was faster, involved less pain or nausea, and had a shorter postoperative sick leave. This may relate to the fundus-first method or to the ultrasonic dissection.


METHODS
In a multicenter trial, 243 elective patients were randomized to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy using electrocautery (n = 85) or the fundus-first method using either electrocautery (n = 81) or ultrasonic dissection (n = 77).


RESULTS
The fundus-first method had a shorter operating time with ultrasonic dissection (58 min) than with electrocautery (74 min; p = 0.002). The fundus-first method using ultrasonic dissection compared with electrocautery or the conventional method produced less blood loss (12 vs. 53 or 36 ml; p < 0.001) and fewer gallbladder perforations (26% vs. 46% or 49%; p = 0.005). Also, the pain and nausea scores at 4 and 6 h were lower, and the sick leave was shorter (6.1 vs. 9.4 and 9 days, respectively; p < 0.001).


CONCLUSIONS
The fundus-first method using ultrasonic dissection is associated with less blood loss, fewer gallbladder perforations, less pain and nausea, and shorter sick leave than the conventional and fundus-first method using electrocautery. The difference seems related to the use of ultrasonic dissection.
Cengiz
Yucel
Y
Department of Surgery, Sundsvall Hospital, 851 86 Sundsvall, Sweden. Yucel.Cengiz@lvn.se
Dalenbäck
Jan
J
Edlund
Gunnar
G
Israelsson
Leif A
LA
Jänes
Arthur
A
Möller
Mats
M
Thorell
Anders
A
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D016063:Blood Loss, Surgical / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017081:Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; D002764:Cholecystitis / Q000601:surgery*; D004210:Dissection / Q000295:instrumentation; D004564:Electrocoagulation / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007431:Intraoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology; D020250:Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting / Q000453:epidemiology; D012307:Risk Factors; D018582:Sick Leave / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D018709:Statistics, Nonparametric; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014464:Ultrasonic Therapy
Br J Surg. 2003 Jul;90(7):799-803
12854103
Br J Surg. 2005 Jun;92(6):772-7
15856482
Br J Surg. 2005 Jul;92(7):810-3
15880649
Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1992 Sep;2(3):191-8
1341530
J Am Coll Surg. 2000 Dec;191(6):661-7
11129816
Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1995 Aug;5(4):255-62
7551275
Br J Surg. 2004 Mar;91(3):312-6
14991631
Surg Endosc. 1999 Apr;13(4):412-7
10094760
Surg Endosc. 2000 Nov;14(11):1070-3
11116422
Aust N Z J Surg. 1999 Dec;69(12):841-3
10613279
Br J Surg. 2006 Jan;93(1):40-5
16329083
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2008 Aug;18(4):593-8
18721011
World J Surg. 2002 Sep;26(9):1117-21
12209240
Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1998 Dec;8(6):421-4
9864107
Arch Surg. 1992 Oct;127(10):1195-8; discussion 1198-9
1417485
Scand J Surg. 2004;93(1):48-51
15116820
Am J Surg. 1993 Apr;165(4):444-9
8480879
Ann Surg. 1998 Dec;228(6):734-40
9860471