Open AccessSURGICAL INCISION;
Author(s) -
Mohammad Touseef Asghar,
Rizwan Khan,
Sadaf Ishaque,
Danish Imtiaz,
Salman Abdul Basit
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
the professional medical journal/the professional medical journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2071-7733
pISSN - 1024-8919
DOI - 10.29309/tpmj/2018.25.06.260
Subject(s) - medicine , surgery , blood loss , cholecystectomy , laparoscopic cholecystectomy , patient satisfaction , randomized controlled trial
Objectives: To compare the outcome variables among patients undergoinglaparoscopic cholecystectomy using horizontal and vertical incisions for epigastric port incision.Study Design: Randomized control trial. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Surgery,Shalamar Hospital, Lahore from July 2016 to December 2016. Methodology: A total of 100patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were selected and equally divided intotwo groups. Epigastric port insertion was done using horizontal incision (group A) and verticalincision (group B). Electrocautery use, incision extension, use of secondary intervention forbleeding control, blood loss and patient satisfaction regarding scar were noted in both groupsand compared. Results: In this study, we found that 15 out of 50 required electrocautery ingroup A while only 4 patients required in group B. Incision extension was needed in 8% ofpatients in group A while only 2% patients needed it in group B. Blood loss was 4.62 ± 2.64ml in group A while in group B, it was 1.70 ±0.81 ml. Also 80 % patients were satisfied withhorizontal scar while 76 % patients in vertical group. Conclusion: Vertical incision for epigastricport insertion is better than horizontal incision in terms of blood loss, bleeding control whencompared in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.