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

Log in
  • Search
    • Search All SAGES Content
    • Search SAGES Guidelines
    • Search the Video Library
    • Search the Image Library
    • Search the Abstracts Archive
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • Search
    • 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
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2026 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
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • 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
      • 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
  • Opportunities
    • 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 and Humanitarian Efforts
  • OWLS/FLS
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Single-port access cholecystectomy. A comparative study of 150 patients with the gold standard

Single-port access cholecystectomy. A comparative study of 150 patients with the gold standard

Jesus Garijo, MD, Martin Gascon, MD. Hospital de Torrejon, Madrid, Spain.

INTRODUCTION
Single Port Access (SPA) surgery, also known as Single Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) or One Port Umbilical Surgery (OPUS), amongst others, is an advanced, minimally invasive surgical procedure in which the surgeon operates exclusively through a single access port. Since the whole procedure is performed typically through the umbilicus, it does not leave any visible scar, unlike traditional laparoscopic surgery. Patients should benefit from less post-operative pain, less blood loss, faster recovery time, fewer complications and better cosmetic results.
We present preliminary results of our experience in single-port access cholecystectomy compared with a simultaneous series of conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed during the same period of time.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES
We communicate a retrospective analysis of collected data from 150 patients subjected to SPA (SPAC) or multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) during 2008 and 2012. Selection criteria included absense of previous cholecystitis and/ or cholelythiasis that required hospital treatment, no previous supramesocolic surgeries and BMI< 35 kgr/m².
Three conventional trocars were utilized in the LC group. SPAC were performed with an R-Port™ (Advanced Surgical Concepts; Whilock, Brey, Ireland). The R-Port™ consists of an external disc which has three valves with a gel interface, which fits onto a double-layered plastic cylinder that serves as the common channel or a single port. The plastic cylinder, when deployed, is held in place by an inner ring very much like a miniature hand port. Three separate valves allow insertion of one 12 mm and two 5 mm or three 5 mm instruments at the same time. A 5 mm 30 degree videolaparoscope was used, combined with 5 mm conventional laparoscopic instruments in both groups.

RESULTS
150 LC and 150 SPAC surgeries were performed. In the SPAC group mean age was 34´8 (range 21- 53), mean weight was 65´1 kg (range 49- 110) mean BMI 24´8 (range 18´7-39´6), mean operative time 58´2 , mean hospital stay 25´2 hours and 4 complications were reported. In the LC group, mean age was 48´9 (range 19-76), mean weight 78´4 (range 55- 102), BMI 29´8 (23´1- 40), mean operative time 67´4 (range 28- 125), mean hospital stay 45´5 (range 22- 98) and 3 complications were described. SPAC comprised younger patients with minor BMI values. Complications rates and operative time did not differ significantly between groups. SPAC was associated with reduced postoperative hospital stay (p< 0´05).

CONCLUSIONS
Data obtained present selection bias, which we consider still necessary to evaluate SPA technique. Despite, results show the benefits of SPAC in terms of hospital stay. Compared to LC, SPAC showed no disadvantage concerning risk profiles and operative times.
We consider SPA cholecystectomies safe and feasible. Cosmetic results are better than in conventional multi-port laparoscopic technique. Wether this approach turns to be superior to conventional laparoscopy remains subject to more substantial research.

 

View Poster

80

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window) Pinterest
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window) Pocket
  • Click to share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
  • Click to share on Threads (Opens in new window) Threads
  • Click to share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky

Related


sages_adbutler_leaderboard

Hours & Info

11300 West Olympic Blvd, Suite 600
Los Angeles, CA 90064

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2025 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals