Users Online : 6068 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   |   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 ¤   Next article
 ¤   Previous article
 ¤   Table of Contents

 ¤   Similar in PUBMED
 ¤  Search Pubmed for
 ¤  Search in Google Scholar for
 ¤Related articles
 ¤   Citation Manager
 ¤   Access Statistics
 ¤   Reader Comments
 ¤   Email Alert *
 ¤   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded217    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 6    

Recommend this journal


Year : 2016  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 325-329

Laparoscopic modified subtotal cholecystectomy for difficult gall bladders: A single-centre experience

1 Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital, Margate, UK
2 Department of Surgery, William Harvey Hospital, Ashford, Kent, UK

Correspondence Address:
Mohan Raj Harilingam
Department of Surgery, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Hospital, St. Peter's Road, Margate, CT9 4AN
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0972-9941.181323

Rights and Permissions

Aim: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered the 'gold standard' intervention for gall bladder (GB) diseases. However, to avoid serious biliovascular injury, conversion is advocated for distorted anatomy at the Calot's triangle. The aim is to find out whether our technique of laparoscopic modified subtotal cholecystectomy (LMSC) is suitable, with an acceptable morbidity and outcome. Patients and Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 993 consecutive patients who underwent cholecystectomy was done at a large District General Hospital (DGH) between August 2007 and January 2015. The data are as follows: Patient's demographics, operative details including intra- and postoperative complications, postoperative stay including follow-up that was recorded and analysed. Results: A total of 993 patients (263 males and 730 female) were included. The median age was 52*(18-89) years. Out of the 993 patients, 979 (98.5%) and 14 (1.5%) were listed for laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy, respectively. Of the 979 patients, 902 (92%) and 64 (6.5%) patients underwent LC ± on-table cholangiography (OTC) and LMSC ± OTC, respectively, with a median stay of 1* (0-15) days. Of the 64 patients, 55 (86%) had dense adhesions, 22 (34%) had acute inflammation, 19 (30%) had severe contraction, 12 (19%) had empyema, 7 (11%) had Mirizzi's syndrome and 2 (3%) had gangrenous GB. The mean operative time was 120 × (50-180) min [Table 1]. Six (12%) patients required endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) postoperatively, and there were four (6%) readmissions in a follow-up of 30 × (8-76) months. The remaining 13 (1.3%) patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy converted to an open cholecystectomy. The median stay for open/laparoscopic cholecystectomy converted to open cholecystectomy was 5 × (1-12) days. Conclusion: Our technique of LMSC avoided conversion in 6.5% patients and believe that it is feasible and safe for difficult GBs with a positive outcome.


Print this article     Email this article

© 2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04