• 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 / Cosmetic Outcome After Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: An Objective Comparison

Cosmetic Outcome After Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: An Objective Comparison

Pankaj Garg, MBBS MS, Vikas Gupta, MBBS MS MCH, Jai D Thakur, MBBS. 1.Fortis Super Speciality Hospital, Mohali, India, 1.MMIMS, Mullana, India 2.Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences & Research, Chandigarh, India, 3. 3. Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana, USA

 

Background
Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has been projected to have better cosmetic outcome as compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). However, there is scarce data that has objectively compared the patient’s perception of cosmetic outcome after SILC & CLC.
Methods
The SILC & CLC patients, who were operated in the last two years, were personally interviewed and assessed using the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire. The patient scar questionnaire was divided into the following ?ve categories (with possible scores in parentheses): appearance (1-5), symptoms (1-5), scar consciousness (1-4), satisfaction with appearance (1-4), and satisfaction with symptoms (1-4). Each category question could have five or four possible responses (First two questions had 5 and the next three questions could have four possible responses). A lower score indicates a favorable cosmetic outcome.
Results
52 patients were included in the study, (SILC=25, CLC=27). The age, sex distribution and BMI were similar in both the groups. The scores of different parameters assessed as per Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire – appearance (SILC- 1.08 ± 0.4, CLC-1.14 ± 0.5, p=0.57, not significant, two-sided t-test), symptoms (SILC- 1.16 ± 0.5, CLC- 1.18 ± 0.4, p=0.83, not significant, two-sided t-test), scar consciousness (SILC- 1.04 ± 0.2, CLC- 1.07 ± 0.3 , P= 0.6, not significant, two-sided t-test), satisfaction with symptoms (SILC- 1.12 ± 0.3, CLC- 1.18 ± 0.4, P= 0.52, not significant, two-sided t-test) and satisfaction with appearance (SILC-1.04 ± 0.2, CLC- 1.11 ± 0.3, P=0.34, not significant, two-sided t-test) – were similar in both the groups. The overall satisfaction scores were also statistically similar in both the groups (SILC- 5.44 ± 1.4, CLC- 5.70 ± 1.7, P=0.54, not significant, two-sided t-test). Overall, a majority of patients (>80%) in both the groups gave least score (1), indicating maximum satisfaction, in all the categories.
Conclusions
The patient perception regarding cosmetic outcome after single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy was similar in both the groups. Single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy doesn’t seem to offer any significant cosmetic advantage over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This finding is significant because cosmetic benefits are one of the major projected advantages of SILS over CLC. In case this is not so, then the case in favor of SILS would not remain strong considering the complexity associated with SILS, namely technically difficulty, higher risk of complications especially in patients with BMI>33, increased operating time, need for sophisticated instruments, no improvement in postoperative pain scores as compared to CLC and lack of long term data. This point needs to be assessed in detail by larger studies, as cosmetic benefit is projected as one of the major advantages of single incision surgery.

 


Session Number: Poster – Poster Presentations
Program Number: P237
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