• 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 / Conventional 4-port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Versus SILS™ Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy- Early Results of the First Prospective Randomized Sham Controlled Trial

Conventional 4-port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Versus SILS™ Port Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy- Early Results of the First Prospective Randomized Sham Controlled Trial

Introduction: Laparoscopic surgery through a single incision (SILS™) aims to enhance the benefits of conventional minimally invasive surgery by reducing the number of required surgical incisions. To date, SILS™ has been utilized to accomplish cholecystectomy, gastric banding, Nissen fundoplication, appendectomy, nephrectomy, tubal ligation, gastric bypass, right colectomy, sleeve gastrectomy, and numerous other procedures. The initial experience with SILS™ suggests that it is technically feasible and safe and may offer select advantages over standard laparoscopic approaches.This is a preliminary report of an on-going multi-institutional study which we believe isthe first prospective randomized sham controlled trial, aimed at objectively analyzing the safety and efficacy of SILS™ Cholecystectomy.

Methods: The study is designed to randomize 200 patients in a 3:2 SILS™ cholecystectomy vs conventional 4 port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (“4PLC”) ratio at 9 centers. All patients, regardless of randomized procedure,receive 4 bandages at conventional locations to achieve a sham design. Patients are blinded until the bandages are removed after completion of the 1 week pain evaluation. Patients are contacted by phoneon days 1,3, and 5. Patients are seen in follow upat 1,2, 4,12, and 52 weeks post-operatively. Pain intensity numerical rating scale(PI-NRS), SF-8, and body image scoring are performed at each followup. In addition, analgesic usage, surgical complications, hernia development, and wound complications are recorded. Primary endpoints include feasibility, operative time, and EBL. Secondary endpoints includepain, cosmesis, andquality of life.

Preliminary Results: Between April 2009 and September 2009 twenty five (25) patients, 15 SILS™ and 10 4PLC, have been enrolled and have completed their 1 month follow-up visit. No significant adverse events have occurred. One SILS™ case was converted to a 4PLC secondary to adhesions. The mean operative time (54.9 minutes for SILS vs. 51.5 minutes for 4PLC) and mean intra-operative blood loss (16.2 ml vs. 13.8 ml) have trended similar between groups. The postoperative Pain Intensity Numerical scores at various time points are trending similar between groups at all time points.Cosmesis was evaluated utilizing three questionnaires at 1 month follow-up. Patient derived body image data indicates a positive trend for SILS™ versus 4PLC. 68% of the total patient population would have SILS™ if they had to have the procedure again.

Conclusion: In this prospective randomized sham controlled trial, early results are trending towards showing that SILS™ is a safe and effective procedure with select cosmetic advantages over conventional 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It is understood that the these are early results of a small patient population. On-going enrollment and follow-up will permit a more robust scientific analysis.


Session: Poster of Distinction

Program Number: P021

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