Minilaparoscopic Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
NCT ID: NCT01397565
Last Updated: 2015-09-29
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE4
115 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2012-02-29
2015-09-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Most commonly, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed using a 10-12mm port in the umbilicus with 3 additional ports consisting of either three 5mm ports, or a combination of two 5mm ports and one 10mm port. A new technique called minilaparoscopic (also referred to as needlescopic) surgery has recently emerged. Minilaparoscopic surgery replaces 5mm trocars with smaller 3mm trocars. Surgery using these smaller trocars is hypothesized to further reduce postoperative pain and recovery time as well as improve cosmetic results following laparoscopic surgery. Our goal is to compare these outcomes in a randomized trial comparing conventional to minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Comparing Minilaparotomy and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy as a Day Surgery Procedure
NCT01873638
A Randomised Comparison Between Single Incision Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Standard Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
NCT01094379
A Comparison of Single Port and Four Port Laparoscopic Gallbladder Removal
NCT01489436
Conventional Versus Modified Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
NCT01312025
Comparing the Outcomes of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy vs. Robotic Cholecystectomy
NCT03160157
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Laparoscopic technology has evolved rapidly over the last 20 years. The quality of instruments, and especially of optics, has greatly improved since the first laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed. A significant trend in the development of new technologies has been the move toward smaller instruments and cameras. Where 10mm cameras were standard in the early years of laparoscopy, 5mm cameras now offer excellent optical quality and permit the use of fewer 10mm trocars. In this movement toward increasingly less invasive techniques, minilaparoscopic surgery has emerged. Minilaparoscopic surgery (also called needlescopic surgery) involves the use of smaller trocars and instruments, typically 3mm in size. It is hypothesized that smaller trocars cause less tissue damage and therefore result in improved post-operative pain and recovery, while offering the additional benefit of improved cosmesis.
Previous studies have found minilaparoscopic surgery to be safe, with complication rates no greater than those of conventional laparoscopic technique. In some studies, minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy has been associated with slightly increased operative time. Previous studies have also noted higher conversion rates (a change in the planned operative technique to another technique), however this conversion is typically from minilaparoscopy to conventional laparoscopy; the rate of conversion from minilaparoscopy to an open procedure is no higher than with conventional laparoscopy. However a recent meta-analysis performed by Thakur et al. (1) found that while some studies have shown these trends toward longer operative times and increased conversion rates, the overall evidence for this is weak.
While a number of previous studies have attempted evaluate the benefits that patients derive from minilaparoscopic surgery, including post-operative pain and recovery time, many of these studies have been flawed by methodological concerns. Thakur et al showed in their meta-analysis that minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy was associated with improved cosmesis at one month as well as reduced post-operative pain and faster recovery time. These benefits however were estimated to be minimal based on the available evidence. Unclear reporting of trials and flawed study design, specifically the lack of "intention to treat" analysis, make the interpretation of available data difficult and the meta-analysis concluded that "the evidence for using minicholecystecomy is unclear."
More high quality evidence is needed for the surgical community to determine the utility and benefits of minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy. It is our hope that through a rigorous methodological design we can add to the available literature and determine if minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy is a valuable technique that will benefit patients.
Hypothesis Minilaparoscopic surgery will reduce postoperative pain and recovery time, as well as improve cosmetic results in patients undergoing cholecystectomy.
Objectives
A randomized trial comparing minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy will be performed to:
1. Determine if minilaparoscopic surgery is associated with decreased postoperative pain
2. Determine if minilaparoscopic surgery results is associated with quicker recovery and return to usual activities
3. Determine if minilaparoscopic surgery is associated with in an improved cosmetic result
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Patients in this arm will undergo conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy
Patients in this arm will undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy using minilaparoscopic instruments
Minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed using minilaparoscopic instruments
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed using minilaparoscopic instruments
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* referred for elective cholecystectomy for benign biliary stone disease
Exclusion Criteria
* acute cholecystitis (past or present)
* American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class greater than or equal to 4
* pregnancy
* morbid obesity (BMI \> 35 kg/m2)
* inability to comprehend questionnaires in either English or French
* psychiatric conditions that preclude cooperation and/or comprehension of questionnaires
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
McGill University Health Centre/Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Dr. Liane S. Feldman
MD
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Liane Feldman, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
McGill University Health Centre/Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Montreal General Hospital
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Thakur V, Schlachta CM, Jayaraman S. Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011 Feb;253(2):244-58. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318207bf52.
Feldman LS, Kaneva P, Demyttenaere S, Carli F, Fried GM, Mayo NE. Validation of a physical activity questionnaire (CHAMPS) as an indicator of postoperative recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery. 2009 Jul;146(1):31-9. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2009.02.019.
Durani P, McGrouther DA, Ferguson MW. The Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire: a reliable and valid patient-reported outcomes measure for linear scars. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009 May;123(5):1481-1489. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181a205de.
Alhashemi M, Almahroos M, Fiore JF Jr, Kaneva P, Gutierrez JM, Neville A, Vassiliou MC, Fried GM, Feldman LS. Impact of miniport laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus standard port laparoscopic cholecystectomy on recovery of physical activity: a randomized trial. Surg Endosc. 2017 May;31(5):2299-2309. doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5232-z. Epub 2016 Sep 21.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
11-053-SDR
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.