• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Comparative Pateint Reported Well Being After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Performed with or Without Energised Dissection-A Case Controlled Study

Comparative Pateint Reported Well Being After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Performed with or Without Energised Dissection-A Case Controlled Study

Objective of Study
Post-operative pain, fatigue, circadian disturbances & well-being are cardinal patient reported outcome (PRO) measures indicating desired/ expected Health related Quality of Life (HrQoL) improvement after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC). These PROs result from a cascade of inflammatory and metabolic stress responses to surgery. Energised dissection (ED) in LC may excite these inflammatory & stress pathways as ED isn’t physiologically inert. We studied the effect of ED on PROs after LC.
Methods and procedures
Consecutive unselected candidates for day care LC (March 2007-Feb 2009) were enrolled following Ethics/ Informed Consent Protocol to be allocated to Study group i.e. LC without ED (LC-ED; those consulting us in the morning clinic) and the Control Group i.e. LC with ED (LC+ED; those consulting us in the evening clinic). A standard anesthesia / antibiotic/ analgesia / surgery & discharge protocol was followed.

Study End Point Measuring Scale
HrQoL 100-point; 36-items;8-subscale SF-36 generic measure
Nausea 0-no nausea; 1-some; 2-moderate; 3-severe; 4-vomiting
Pain no pain-worst @100 point visual analog scale (VAS)
Sleep Quality worst – best sleep @ 0-100-mm VAS-assessed at 8am.
Well Being 100-mm VAS-assessed in evening at 8pm.
Discharge Willingness 4 point Likert scale i.e.1-donot want to go; 2-will go if all is definitely well; 3-will go if doctor insists; 4-want to go
Fatigue 10-point Christensen fatigue scale; 1 = fit, 10 = fatigued

Prospective data collected pre-operatively (P0) & post-operatively on Day1 (D1), Day2 (D2), Day3 (D3), 1st week (W1), 2nd week (W2) & 3rd week (W3).

Results
The Study (53) & Control (93) groups were well matched for demographic, activity, co-morbidity and gallbladder inflammation parameters. There were no adverse events or failure to discharge from day care although control group patients were extremely reluctant. Patient noncompliance led to withdrawal of 9 & 17 patients leaving 44 (study) & 76 (control) for analysis. Only patients of LC+ED reported right sided scapulo-costal & shoulder tip pain predominating up to D3, patients of LC-ED didn’t report this at all.

Post-operative mean scores

Nausea
Pain
Fatigue
Follow-up D1
D2 D3
D3 W1
W3
D3
W1 W3
Control (LC+ED) 3 2 0.5 66 40 20 10 9 4
Study (LC-ED) 1.5 0.5 0 42 21 18 6 3 1.2
Mean Scores- Sleep, Well-being & Discharge Willingness

Group
/Follow-up
Sleep Quality
General Well-Being

Discharge

Willingness

D1 D2 D3 D3 W1
W3
Control (LC+ED) 22 45 60 50 60 82 1.8
Study (LC-ED) 28 70 90 70 84 94 3.6

Mean HrQoL scores*–Control (Study)

* PF RP BP GHP VI SF RE MH
P0 80(90) 70(75) 60(60) 66(65) 55(60) 45(65) 80(75) 80(78)
W1 60(80) 35(65) 60(80) 70(90) 45(65) 50(90) 80(80) 80(80)
W3 65(85) 45(70) 90(95) 75(95) 55(65) 70(95) 80(80) 80(80)

*PF-physical functioning; RP-role physical; BP-bodily pain; GHP-general health perception; VI-vitality; SF-social functioning; RE-role emotional; MH-mental health

Conclusion
Patient reported outcomes are better after laparoscopic cholecystectomy without energized dissection benefitting the global sense of well being.


Session: Poster

Program Number: P421

View Poster

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search