• 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 / Comparison of Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Comparison of Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Pankaj Garg, MBBS MS, Vikas Gupta, MBBS MS MCH, Jai D Thakur, MBBS, Geetha R Menon, PhD. 1. Fortis Super Speciality Hospital, Mohali, India & MMIMS, Mullana, India, 2. PGIMER, Chandigarh, India, 3. Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana, USA , 4. ICMR, New Delhi, India

 

Background
Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy(SILC) has been developed as a step forward in minimal access surgery. The principal benefit of SILC is supposed to be better cosmesis and reduced pain. The purpose of this study was to compare different morbidity parameters between SILC and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).
Methods
The databases- Pubmed, Ovid, Embase SCI database, Cochrane & Google Scholar were searched for single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and all related terms. The studies between 1995 to September, 2011 were extracted by two independent reviewers. Out of 2057 yielded studies, 14 studies comparing SILC & CLC were extracted and out of these, 5 randomized controlled trials (RCT) were selected for meta-analysis. The assessment of risk of bias in the trials was based on adequate sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, whether incomplete outcome data was addressed and selective outcome reporting. For continuous variables, statistical analysis was carried out using the weighted mean difference(WMD) as the summary statistic and for categorical variables, odds ratio was used as the summary statistic. The primary endpoint analyzed was pain at 24 hours after the operation and the secondary end points were cosmetic satisfaction, operating time, hospital stay and incidence of post operative complications namely bile leak, hernia formation and wound infection.
Results
A total of 287 patients (SILC-150, CLC-137) were analyzed from 5 randomized controlled trials (RCT). The operating time was significantly longer in SILC (mean difference=15.54, 95% CI: 11.01 to 20.08, p< 0.00001). The objective post operative pain scores at 24 hours, though less in SILC group, was not statistically different between the two groups (mean difference =0.27, 95% CI: -0.55 to 0.01, p=0.06, not significant). SILC group had significantly favorable cosmetic scoring compared to CLC (mean difference-1.16, 95% CI: 0.75 to 1.56, p< 0.00001). The hospital stay was similar in both the group (mean difference= -0.15, 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.05, p=0.15). All the post operative complications, though higher in SILC group, were statistically comparable in both the groups- bile leak (RR=1.17, 95% CI: 0.37 to 3.75, p= 0.79, not significant), wound infection (RR=1.49, 95% CI: 0.29 to 7.63, p= 0.63, not significant) & hernia formation (RR=2.58, 95% CI: 0.26 to 25.60, p= 0.42, not significant).
Conclusions
Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy(SILC) has cosmetic benefit over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). SILC had significantly longer operating time which is perhaps due to the learning curve. However, there is no difference between other morbidity parameters such as post operative pain at 24 hours, and the hospital stay. Post operative complications such as bile leak, wound infection and hernia formation, though higher in SILC, were statistically similar in both the groups. Though SILS has cosmetic benefit over CLC, studies have demonstrated that cosmesis after CLC is also remarkable and acceptable. Against this background, the future of SILC depends on the long term safety of SILC especially the hernia formation and biliary injuries.
 


Session Number: Poster – Poster Presentations
Program Number: P239
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