Currently, researches about single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) are various, but long-term reviews assessing relevant complications after SILC with considerable amount of case series are rare.

We retrospectively reviewed a large series of 529 patients undergoing SILC to assess the long-term postoperative recovery, including postoperative complications, retained symptoms, and quality of life. Finally, we assessed its associated risk factors related to SILC patients' recovery in the long term.

During a mean follow-up period of 36.8 ± 8.8 months after SILC, 402 (76.0 %) patients underwent complete resolution. Frequent diarrhea (12.1 %) and recurrent omphalitis (5.9 %) were most commonly seen among other complications and retained symptoms within overall the patients. We identified 1 (0.3 %) incision hernia and 1 (0.3 %) intra-abdominal abscess among overall the patients, while 3 (0.8 %) common bile duct stones and 1 (0.3 %) biliary pancreatitis among the patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis during long-term review period. No significant differences were identified between patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis and gallbladder polyps when considering other incidences (all p > 0.05). Patients undergoing SILC with older age (p = 0.023) or female gender (p = 0.020) contributed to complete resolution.

SILC via traditional devices is feasible and safe with acceptable postoperative incidence rate in the long run. Patients with older age or female gender, who have no severe systemic diseases, tend to benefit more from the surgical intervention.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), or laparoendoscopic single-site surgery, has been employed in various fields to minimize traumatic effects over the last two decades. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has been the most frequently studied SILS to date. Hundreds of studies on SILC have failed to present conclusive results. Most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been small in scale and have been conducted under ideal operative conditions. The role of SILC in complicated scenarios remains uncertain. As common bile duct exploration (CBDE) methods have been used for more than one hundred years, laparoscopic CBDE (LCBDE) has emerged as an effective, demanding, and infrequent technique employed during the laparoscopic era. Likewise, laparoscopic biliary-enteric anastomosis is difficult to carry out, with only a few studies have been published on the approach. The application of SILS to CBDE and biliary-enteric anastomosis is extremely rare, and such innovative procedures are only carried out by a number of specialized groups across the globe. Herein we present a thorough and detailed analysis of SILC in terms of operative techniques, training and learning curves, safety and efficacy levels, recovery trends, and costs by reviewing RCTs conducted over the past three years and two recently updated meta-analyses. All existing literature on single-incision LCBDE and single-incision laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy has been reviewed to describe these two demanding techniques.

The focus of biliary dyskinesia (BD) shifted within the last 30 years, moving from symptoms after cholecystectomy (CCY) to symptoms with morphological normal gallbladder, but low gallbladder ejection fraction.

We searched the pubmed database to systematically review studies focusing on the diagnosis and treatment of gallbladder dysfunction.

Impaired gallbladder contraction can be found in about 20% of healthy controls and an even higher number of patients with various other disorders. Surgery for BD increased after introduction of laparoscopic CCY, with BD now accounting for >20% of CCY in adults and up to 60% in pediatric patients. The majority of cases reported were operated in the USA, which differs from surgical series for cholelithiasis. Postoperative outcomes do not differ between groups with abnormal or normal gallbladder function.

Functional gallbladder testing should not be seen as an indicator of relevant biliary tract disease or prognostic marker to identify patients who may benefit from operative intervention. Instead biliary dyskinesia should be considered as a part of a spectrum of functional disorders, which are generally managed conservatively. Small proof of concept studies have demonstrated effects of medical therapy on biliary dysfunction and should thus be never tested in appropriately designed trials.

The advantages of single-incision surgery for the treatment of gallstone disease is debated. Previous meta-analyses comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and standard laparoscopic multiport cholecystectomy (SLMC) included few and underpowered trials. To overcome this limitation, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized studies.

A MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library literature search of studies published in and comparing SILC with SLMC was performed. The primary outcome was safety of SILC as measured by the overall rate of postoperative complications and biliary spillage. Feasibility was another primary outcome as measured by the conversion and operative time. Postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, perioperative blood loss, time to return to normal activity, and cosmetic satisfaction were secondary outcomes.

We identified 43 studies of which 30 were observational reports and 13 experimental trials, for a total of 7489 patients (2090 SILC and 5389 SLMC). The overall rate of complications was comparable between groups (relative risk [RR] = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.87-1.35; P = .46), as were the rates of biliary spillage (RR = 1.16; 95% CI = 0.73-1.84; P = .53) and conversion rate (RR = 0.88; 95% CI = 0.53-1.46; P = .62). Operative time was in favor of SLMC (weighted mean difference = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.67-0.79; P < .0001). Secondary outcomes favored SILC, but with marginal advantages.

SILC is a feasible technique but without any significant advantage over SLMC for relevant end points. Although secondary outcomes favored SILC, the small magnitude of the advantage and the low quality of assessment methods question the clinical significance of these benefits.

Single-incision surgery has gained in popularity, and the recent development of specialized robotic and laparoscopic instruments may remove some of the ergonomic and technical difficulties associated with this approach. However, questions of cost and efficiency remain.

We prospectively collected perioperative outcome and efficiency (operative time, case volume) data for our single-site robotic cholecystectomy cases and retrospectively reviewed data for our single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy cases.

There were no differences in patient characteristics or perioperative outcomes between the robotic (n = 20) and laparoscopic (n = 10) groups; operative times were equivalent (84.6 vs 85.5 min; p = 0.8737) and blood loss and complications were minimal. There was a higher robotic case volume, with an average of two robotic cases (range 1-4)/day vs one/day for laparoscopic cases (range 1-1; p = 0.0306). Streamlined instrument costs were essentially equivalent.

Robotic single-site cholecystectomy is a safe, cost-effective alternative to single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a robot-existing model.

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has been increasingly performed as a potentially less invasive alternative to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, recent evidences suggest a higher incidence of complications, notably bile duct injuries, in SILC. We reviewed our experiences with routine intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) during SILC to investigate its feasibility and usefulness.

Among 228 patients who underwent SILC at our institution from September 2009 to July 2012, a total of 196 patients in which an IOC was attempted were retrospectively reviewed.

IOC was successful in 178 of 196 patients, yielding a success rate of 90.8 %. There were no IOC-related complications. Common bile duct (CBD) stones were detected by IOC in 16 patients (8.2 %), all of which were treated by subsequent single-incision laparoscopic CBD exploration or postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stone extraction. In addition, IOC revealed filling defects in the cystic duct (four patients) and poor passage of contrast medium into the duodenum (one patient). In one patient with severe acute cholecystitis, cholangiography via an endoscopic nasobiliary drainage tube revealed misinterpretation of CBD as cystic duct.

We, thus, conclude that routine IOC during SILC is feasible and useful to detect biliary stones and to gain an accurate picture of biliary anatomy.

To compare the incidence of bile duct injuries during single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) in relation to the accepted historic rate of 0.4% to 0.5% for standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC).

Technically, SILC is more challenging than SLC. The role and benefit of SILC in patient care has yet to be defined. Bile duct injuries have been reported in several series of SILC.

A comprehensive database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed Central was performed to generate all reported cases of SILC to present. The search was limited to reports of 20 or more patients based on current literature of existing SILC learning curves. Data were analyzed using the Student t test and χ analyses where appropriate.

A total of 76 candidate studies were identified; 45 studies met inclusion criteria for an aggregate total of 2626 patients. Most SILCs were performed in the absence of acute cholecystitis (90.6%). The aggregate complication rate was 4.2%, and complications were graded according to the Dindo-Clavien Classification System. Nineteen bile duct injuries were identified for a SILC-associated bile duct injury rate of 0.72%.

There seems to be an increase in the rate of bile duct injuries during SILC when compared with historic rates during SLC. Because most SILCs are performed in optimal conditions, such as lack of acute inflammation, we urge caution in applying this technique to inflamed gallbladder pathology. Controlled trials are needed before conclusions are made regarding safety of SILC.

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and single-incision surgery (SIS) are less invasive alternatives to traditional laparoscopic techniques. Concerns exist over the safety of these new approaches, and randomized controlled trials have yet to confirm a net benefit. If NOTES and SIS techniques are to become standard practice, then they should be shown to be safe and hold clear benefits to patients. We aim at comparing the available results by using these techniques in a standard laparoscopic operation (cholecystectomy).

A systematic review using available databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register) and the published English language medical literature was performed. All the archived articles were cross-referenced. Outcome data obtained from a Cochrane review of laparoscopic cholecystectomy were used as the control group. All the operations performed via a single incision were grouped under SIS, and operations in which a natural orifice (alone or as a hybrid technique) was analyzed, under NOTES group. Mortality and complications were the primary outcome measures.

One hundred thirty-five papers including 4703 patients (714 NOTES, 3989 SIS) were selected for analysis. Overall complication rate was 4.2% in the NOTES group versus 4.3% in the SIS group, with a distinct complication profile. No mortality was reported in either group. NOTES procedures had a longer mean operative time than SIS techniques (107 versus 79 minutes). The conversion rate between NOTES and SILS was similar (3.4% versus 3.3%, respectively).

No difference in the incidence of complications was observed with the newer techniques. Adequately powered randomized control trials are needed to clarify whether SIS/NOTES cholecystectomy has a similar length of hospital stay to traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The increased occurrence of specific types of complications and their use in acute pathology needs further investigation to warrant further use in routine surgical practice.

Cholecystectomy is one of the most common abdominal surgical procedures. No formal agreement has been reached about the routine practice of intraoperative cholangiography (IOC). The purpose of this survey was to describe the practices and the opinions of surgeons in western France. A survey was conducted among 300 visceral surgeons practicing in western France who were asked to respond to a questionnaire with objective and subjective items. One hundred forty-eight answers were interpretable. Among these 148 surgeons, 125 (83.4%) performed IOC routinely (IOCr group) and 23 (15.4%) selectively (IOCs group). Mean age of responding surgeons was 49.3 years. Groups IOCr and IOCs were not significantly different concerning surgical experience. Surgeons in both groups responded that IOC effectively screens for intraoperative bile duct injury. In our survey, routine practice of IOC was more common than reported by our English-speaking colleagues. The routine users responded that IOC can screen for intraoperative bile duct injury or choledocholithiasis. The selective users responded that IOC has its own morbidity. IOC is commonly performed in France during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Although it may not be indispensable, it allows rapid screening for intraoperative bile duct injury. It also provides documented proof of good surgical practice in the event of a litigation claim after bile duct injury.