IMPACT OF ENDOGLOVES ON PORT SITE INFECTION RATE IN LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY

Main Article Content

Muhammad Kamil Zulfiquar
Muhammad Saulat Naeem
Usama Rafi
Zeeshan Ahmad
Muhammad Adil Zulfiquar
Ayesha Farooq
Muhammad Awais

Keywords

Endogloves, Port site infection, Laparoscopy, Cholecystectomy

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the most common procedure performed to rectify Cholecystitis or Cholelithiasis. In laparoscopic cholecystectomy, four small incisions made in the anterior abdominal and gallbladder containing stones is removed. But there are chances of port site infection. Endogloves have been introduced to reduce the chance of infection


Methodology: A Quasi experimental study was done at Services Hospital, Lahore from July 2019 to Jan 2020, after approval from ethical review board of institute. A sample size of 360 cases was calculated by EpiInfo (7.2.5) with 160 cases each in group A (with endogloves) and group B (without endogloves). Patients were randomly divided into two groups by using lottery method. In group A, patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy by using endogloves. In group B, patients underwent conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy without endogloves. After surgery, patients were shifted to post-surgical wards and were discharged from there after 24 hours. Then patients were followed-up in OPD for 7 days. Wound site was evaluated for presence or absence of port site infection. All this information will be recorded on proforma. Data was analyzed in SPSS 26 to calculate means and standard deviations for age, BMI, and symptom duration, and frequencies for gender and port site infection. A chi-square test was conducted for port site infection, with significance set at p ≤ 0.05.


Results: In endogloves group, the mean age of patients was 50.29±15.78 years and without endogloves group was 50.44±15.05 years. The port site infection was found in 1 (0.6%) patient with endogloves while in 12 (7.5%) without endogloves. Significant difference has been obtained between both groups (P<0.05).


Conclusion: This study showed that the use of endogloves during laparoscopic surgery significantly reduces the port site infection as compare to without endogloves laparoscopic surgery.

Abstract 215 | pdf Downloads 40

References

Sasmal PK, Mishra TS, Rath S, Meher S, Mohapatra D. Port site infection in laparoscopic surgery: A review of its management. World Journal of Clinical Cases: WJCC. 2015;3(10):864.
2. Akhtar N, Kiyani ZA, Ahmed N, Sabir F, Imran MN, Gillani I. Comparison of port site wound infection with and without endogloves techniques for retrieval of gallbladder after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Pakistan Journal of Physiology. 2022;18(1):23-5.
3. Makhsosi BR, Azadmehr A, Rezaei MA, Salimi M, Darabi B. The Effect of Endo-bag on Postoperative Complications in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery. Tabari Biomedical Student Research Journal. 2024;6(2):10-6.
4. Gupta V, Jain G. Safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Adoption of universal culture of safety in cholecystectomy. World journal of gastrointestinal surgery. 2019;11(2):62.
5. Majumder A, Altieri MS, Brunt LM. How do I do it: laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Annals of Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Surgery. 2020;5.
6. HADI A, AQEEL MTB, SHAHBAZ M. PROLONGED POST–OPERATIVE HOSPITALIZATION PREDICTS HIGH BURDEN OF UMBLICAL PORT SITE INFECTION IN LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY. 2019.
7. Rehman H, Siddiqa M, Ul Munam A, Khan S. Frequency of port site wound infection after gall bladder removal with or without retrieval bag in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JPMA. 2020;70(1533).
8. Tuveri M, Tuveri A. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: complications and conversions with the 3-trocar technique: a 10-year review. Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques. 2007;17(5):380-4.
9. Fletcher E, Seabold E, Herzing K, Markert R, Gans A, Ekeh AP. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the Acute Care Surgery model: risk factors for complications. Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open. 2019;4(1):e000312.
10. Pesce A, Fabbri N, Feo CV. Vascular injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: An often-overlooked complication. World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. 2023;15(3):338.
11. Ahmad M, Ullah H, Hamza A, Din A, Khan A, Shah SMA. The Efficacy of Using a Sterile Glove Technique for Retrieval of the Gall Bladder Through the Epigastric Port in Preventing Post-Operative Infections During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Pakistan Journal of Medical & Health Sciences. 2023;17(01):360-.
12. Manivasagam SS, Choudhary S, Manocha P, Reddy BH, ChandraJ N, REDDY Jr BH. Insights Into Laparoscopic Port Site Complications: A Comprehensive Review. Cureus. 2024;16(6).
13. Alam MR, Nuruzzaman M, Begum M, Alim MA, Rahman MM, Karim MR, et al. The frequency of port-site infection in laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Med Today. 2021;33(1):22-6.
14. Vettoretto N, Agresta F, Tugnoli G, Jovine E. Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy with a Low-Cost Technique and Surgical-Glove Port:“How To Do It” with Comparison of the Outcomes and Costs in a Consecutive Single-Operator Series of 45 Cases.
15. Jan QA, Khan MY, Haq IU, Naeem M, Khalil AUR. Frequency and common risk factors in umbilical port site infection in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. KJMS. 2016;9(3):408.
16. AHMED N, RAHA MS, SETH US, KAMAL MT, ALI AN, WYNE A. Frequency of Port Site Wound Infection with and Without End Gloves Techniques of Retrieval of Gallbladder in Pouch after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Chronic Calculus Cholecystitis.
17. Chinnaswami A, Purushothaman P, Duthaluri N, Arcot R. Comparison of bag and non‐bag extraction of gall stones through laparoscopy. Int J Cur Res Rev. 2021;13(20):102.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>