Prevalence of complications in laparoscopic cholecystectomy in extracting gallbladder by using supra-umbilical port versus epigastric port in Sulaimani teaching hospital : a prospective case series study

Abstract EN

Background: Depending on the surgeon's preference, different locations for trocar incision can be used to extract the gallbladder.

Some studies are claiming that epigastric port is better for retrieval due to easiness for the surgeon as there is no need to change the position of the telescope and readjustment of the surgeon’s position.

Other studies show the superiority of umbilical port in terms of pain.

Setting: Sulaimani Teaching Hospital.

Aims: The current work aims at evaluating the port site for gallbladder retrieval in LCin terms of time for extracting the specimen, frequency of port site pain, surgical site infection, and incisional hernia.

Patients and methods: This is a prospective randomized study including 108 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

It was conducted in Sulaimani Teaching Hospital from October 1st, 2020, to September 30th, 2021.

Patients were divided into two groups matched in gender and age: Group A: Gallbladder was extracted from the epigastric port while in Group B: Gallbladder was extracted from the supra-umbilical port.

Results: A two comparable groups of patients matched in gender and age were recruited with a mean age of 41.2 + 11.04 years ranged 20-68 years.

Overall, 52.78 % (n=57) were female and 47.22% (n=51) were male with F/M ratio of 1.11/1.

The time of the LCfor [21±4 min] was more in group B [n= 42, 38.9%] patients in contra to group A[n=37, 34.3%] patients, while for [33±2 minutes] it was more in group A [n= 6, 5.6% ] patients.

Retrieval of the almost all the excised gall bladder (n=54, 98.18% patients) via supraumbilical port needs less time (≤5 minutes) in comparison to epigastric port (n=40, 75.47% patients).

Conclusion: Based on these findings the safety and ease of supra-umbilical port for extraction of gallbladder during LChas been better than that in using epigastric port.

Furthermore, it has taken less operative time with less patients complained of pain or surgical site infection, abscess, and port site incisional hernia.