[Ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy by minilaparoscopy versus traditional multiport ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Prospective randomized trial]. / Colecistectomía laparoscópica ambulatoria por minilaparoscopia versus colecistectomía laparoscópica ambulatoria multipuerto tradicional. Estudio prospectivo aleatorizado.

OBJECTIVE: Difference analysis of ambulatorization rate, pain, analgesic requirements and daily activities recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with standard multiport access (CLMP) versus a minilaparoscopic, 3mm size, technique. METHODS: Prospective randomized trial of 40 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Comparison criteria included predictive ultrasound factors of difficult cholecystectomy, previous history of complicated biliary disease and demographics. Results are analyzed in terms of ambulatorization rate, pain, analgesic requirements, postoperative recovery, technical difficulty, hemorrhage intensity, overnight stay, readmission rate and total or partial conversion. RESULTS: Both procedures were similar in surgery time, technical score and hemorrhage score. MLC was associated with similar ambulatorization rate, 85%, and over-night stay 15%, with only 15% partial conversion rate. MLC showed less postoperative pain (P=.026), less analgesic consumption (P=.006) and similar DAR (P=.879). CONCLUSIONS: MLC is similar to CLMP in terms of ambulatorization with less postoperative pain and analgesic requirements without differences in postoperative recovery.

[Ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A cohort study of 1,600 consecutive cases]. / Colecistectomía laparoscópica ambulatoria. Estudio de cohortes de 1.600 casos consecutivos.

OBJECTIVE: A descriptive analysis of day-case laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ALC) in a cohort of 1,600 consecutive patients performed in Instituto de Cirugía y Aparato Digestivo (ICAD), Clínica Quirón de Valencia in the period 1997-2010. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective observational study of 1,601 consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) provided by the regional health service and private health companies. MAIN MEASURES: Conversion rate, non-planned admissions, readmissions, surgery duration and demographics. RESULTS: ALC was successfully performed in 80.8% of cases. LC with over-night (ON) stay accounted for 13.4% of patients. Admission was necessary in 4.6%. Mortality was 0.13%, 0.08 in ALC and 0.5% in ON LC. Readmissions occurred in 2.1%, 1.6% in ALC group, 5.4% in ON stay and 4.2% in admission group. CONCLUSIONS: ALC is a reliable and safe procedure. Minimization of admission rates is the key for cost-effective optimization in the management of cholelithiasis. ALC should be considered as the reference standard in gallbladder stone disease treatment.

Colecistectomía laparoscópica ambulatoria por minilaparoscopia versus colecistectomía laparoscópica ambulatoria multipuerto tradicional. Estudio prospectivo aleatorizado / Ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy by minilaparoscopy versus traditional multiport ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Prospective randomized trial

OBJETIVO: Determinar la existencia de diferencias en tasa de ambulatorización, dolor percibido, consumo de analgésicos y recuperación de las actividades de la vida diaria (AVD) en pacientes tratados mediante colecistectomía laparoscópica multipuerto (CLMP) y colecistectomía por minilaparoscopia con material de 3 mm (MLC). MÉTODO: Estudio prospectivo aleatorizado de 40 pacientes consecutivos tratados mediante colecistectomía laparoscópica. Los criterios de pareamiento incluyeron factores ecográficos predictivos de colecistectomía técnicamente dificultosa, historia previa de enfermedad biliar complicada y factores demográficos. Se analizan los resultados en términos de tasa de ambulatorización, dolor percibido, consumo de analgésicos, recuperación de las AVD, grado de dificultad técnica, grado de hemorragia asociada, tasa de ambulatorización, porcentaje de estancia over-night, reingresos y conversión parcial o total. RESULTADOS: Ambos procedimientos mostraron similar duración de intervención, puntuación de dificultad técnica y de hemorragia. La MLC mostró porcentaje similar de ambulatorización (85%) y de estancia over-night(15%), con solo un 15% de conversiones parciales y 0% de conversión a CLMP. La MLC mostró menor dolor postoperatorio (p = 0,026), menor consumo de analgésicos (p = 0,006) con similar recuperación de las AVD (p = 0,879). CONCLUSIONES: La MLC no es inferior a la CLMP en términos de ambulatorización, resultando en menor dolor postoperatorio y menor consumo de analgésicos, con similar resultado en cuanto a reincorporación a las AVD

OBJECTIVE: Difference analysis of ambulatorization rate, pain, analgesic requirements and daily activities recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with standard multiport access (CLMP) versus a minilaparoscopic, 3 mm size, technique. METHODS: Prospective randomized trial of 40 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Comparison criteria included predictive ultrasound factors of difficult cholecystectomy, previous history of complicated biliary disease and demographics. Results are analyzed in terms of ambulatorization rate, pain, analgesic requirements, postoperative recovery, technical difficulty, hemorrhage intensity, overnight stay, readmission rate and total or partial conversion. RESULTS: Both procedures were similar in surgery time, technical score and hemorrhage score. MLC was associated with similar ambulatorization rate, 85%, and over-night stay 15%, with only 15% partial conversion rate. MLC showed less postoperative pain (P=.026), less analgesic consumption (P=.006) and similar DAR (P=.879). CONCLUSIONS: MLC is similar to CLMP in terms of ambulatorization with less postoperative pain and analgesic requirements without differences in postoperative recovery

Colecistectomía laparoscópica ambulatoria. Estudio de cohortes de 1.600 casos consecutivos / Ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A cohort study of 1, 600 consecutive cases

Objetivo Describir la experiencia de nuestro grupo en colecistectomía laparoscópica ambulatoria en una cohorte de 1.600 casos consecutivos realizados en el Instituto de Cirugía y Aparato (CLA) Digestivo (ICAD) en la Clínica Quirón de Valencia durante el período 1997-2010.Pacientes y método Estudio prospectivo, observacional de 1.601 pacientes consecutivos remitidos para colecistectomía laparoscópica, procedentes de la Agencia Valenciana de Salud (AVS) y compañías aseguradoras privadas (CAP).Principales medidas de resultados: se evalúan los resultados con el análisis de índice de sustitución, tasa de ingresos no planeados, reingresos, estancia postoperatoria, duración de intervención y factores demográficos. Resultados El índice de sustitución de la serie fue de 80,8% con un porcentaje de pacientes intervenidos en régimen de estancia over-night (EON) de 13,4% y un porcentaje de ingresos en hospitalización convencional de 4,6%. La mortalidad de la serie fue de 0,13%, 0,08 en el grupo de CLA y 0,5% en el grupo de CL con EON. El índice de reingresos fue de 2,1% en la serie global, 1,6% en los pacientes ambulatorios, 5,4% en los pacientes con EON y 4,2% en los pacientes ingresados. Conclusiones La CLA es un procedimiento seguro y fiable. La reducción en la necesidad de ingreso de los pacientes es fundamental en la optimización coste efectividad del procedimiento de colecistectomía. La CLA debería ser considerada como el patrón oro del tratamiento de la colelitiasis sintomática (AU)

Objective A descriptive analysis of day-case laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ALC) in a cohort of 1,600 consecutive patients performed in Instituto de Cirugía y Aparato Digestivo (ICAD), Clínica Quirón de Valencia in the period 1997-2010.Patients and methods Prospective observational study of 1,601 consecutive patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) provided by the regional health service and private health companies. Main measures Conversion rate, non-planned admissions, readmissions, surgery duration and demographics. Results ALC was successfully performed in 80.8% of cases. LC with over-night (ON) stay accounted for 13.4% of patients. Admission was necessary in 4.6%. Mortality was 0.13%, 0.08 in ALC and 0.5% in ON LC. Readmissions occurred in 2.1%, 1.6% in ALC group, 5.4% in ON stay and 4.2% in admission group. Conclusions ALC is a reliable and safe procedure. Minimization of admission rates is the key for cost-effective optimization in the management of cholelithiasis. ALC should be considered as the reference standard in gallbladder stone disease treatment (AU)

Dolor percibido, consumo de analgésicos y recuperación de las actividades de la vida diaria en pacientes sometidos a hernioplastia inguinal ambulatoria laparoscópica tipo TEP versus hernioplastia Lichtenstein en régimen ambulatorio / Pain, analgesic consumption and daily life activities recovery in patients undergoing ambulatory totally extra-peritoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernioplasty versus ambulatory Lichtenstein hernioplasty

Introducción Aunque el patrón de comparación de la reparación de la hernia inguinal primaria es la técnica de Lichtenstein (LICH), la Hernioplastia inguinal laparoscópica totalmente extraperitoneal (TEP) muestra claras ventajas no sistemáticamente demostradas en cuanto a dolor percibido, consumo de analgésicos y recuperación de las actividades de la vida diaria. Objetivo Demostrar la existencia de diferencias en dolor percibido, consumo de analgésicos y recuperación de las actividades de la vida diaria entre la hernioplastia Lichtenstein versus la laparoscopia TEP. Material y métodos Estudio prospectivo, observacional no aleatorizado de 169 pacientes consecutivos sometidos a LICH vs. TEP. El LICH se realizó mediante anestesia local y sedación y el TEP con anestesia general, siendo ambos practicados en forma ambulatoria. Los puntos de análisis incluyeron: consumo de analgésicos, grado de dolor percibido y grado de recuperación de las actividades de la vida diaria. Resultados El consumo de analgésicos fue menor en el grupo TEP para los días 4 y 5 postoperatorio, al igual que el dolor percibido. En referencia a la recuperación de las actividades de la vida diaria se alcanzaron mínimas diferencias significativas en el 7.° día postoperatorio a favor del TEP. Conclusiones Nuestro estudio muestra una diferencia significativa en cuanto a dolor percibido y consumo de analgésicos, así como en el grado de recuperación de las actividades de la vida diaria al comparar ambos grupos. La hernioplastia tipo TEP debe ser también considerada en la hernia inguinal unilateral primaria no complicada (AU)

Introduction: Although the unique comparison standard of primary inguinal hernia repair is the Lichtenstein technique (LICH), totally extra-peritoneal (TEP) laparoscopic inguinalhernioplasty shows, although not systematically demonstrated, clear advantages as regards, perceived pain, analgesic use, and recovery of daily life activities. Objective: To demonstrate the differences in perceived pain, analgesic use, and recovery of daily life activities between Lichtenstein hernioplasty and TEP laparoscopy. Material and methods: A prospective, non-randomised observational study was conducted on 169 consecutive patients subjected to LICH vs TEP. The LICH was performed using local anaesthesia and sedation, and the TEP with general anaesthesia, both being performed as ambulatory surgery. The points of analysis included: analgesic use, level of perceived pain, and recovery of daily life activities. Results: Analgesic use was less in the TEP group for post-operative day 4 and 5, similar to the perceived pain. As regards recovery of daily life activities, the significantly minimum differences were achieved on post-operative day 7 in favour of TEP. Conclusions: Our study shows a significant difference as regards perceived pain and analgesicuse, as well as in the level of recovery of daily life activities, when comparing both groups.TEP hernioplasty should also be considered in the non-complicated primary unilateralinguinal hernia (AU)