Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy with inflexible laparoscopic instruments and laparoscopy: a single-center experience of 533 cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has been widely performed as the gold standard for BGDs. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) was considered as an option for minimizing surgical injuries and improving outcomes. However, the benefit of this novel technique, especially with conventional and inflexible instruments and laparoscopy, is still controversial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 958 consecutive cases (533 SILC vs. 425 CLC) from January 2023 to March 2024. SILC was performed via a single transumbilical incision with straight and inflexible instruments whereas CLC with traditional three-port strategy. Information of patients' demographic characteristics and pathological diagnoses was collected and analyzed. Comparative outcomes assessment included validated measures: SF-36 QoL indices, VAS pain scores, Vancouver Scar Scale assessments, hospitalization duration, and Clavien-Dindo complication grading. RESULTS: Cases from two groups showed similar demographic characteristics and pathological diagnoses. They also had comparable surgical time, estimated intraoperative blood loss and hospital costs. Sixteen cases required supplementary trocars for technical challenges. The SILC group exhibited superior scar satisfaction, though no significant intergroup differences existed in hospitalization duration, postoperative pain scores, or wound infection rates. Longitudinal analysis revealed reduced chronic pain and diarrhea incidence in SILC patients. Six-month postoperative SF-36 assessments showed significant improvements in SILC recipients for Bodily Pain, Vitality, and Role-Emotional domains. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated SILC with conventional and inflexible instruments to be safe and feasible. SILC was found to be non-inferior to CLC. This technique demonstrated certain advantages, particularly in improving patient satisfaction with wound pain and appearance, while maintaining comparable surgical outcomes, hospital stay duration, and postoperative complication rates to those of CLC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".