User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
 Views 14
 Downloands 1
Retrieval of Gallbladder Through Epigastric Vs Umbilical Port After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
2022
Journal:  
Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal
Author:  
Abstract:

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of epigastrics vs. umbilical port after laparoscopic cholecystectomy by measuring the time taken to retrieve the gall bladder, post-operative pain, and infection. Study Design: Comparative prospective study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Surgery Combined Military Hospital Abbottabad, from Jan to Jun 2019. Methodology: A total of 106 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Inclusion criteria were patients with symptomatic gallstones. Exclusion criteria were patients with comorbid medical conditions, acute cholecystitis, Empyema gall bladder, bile or stone spillage, and BMI >40. Time taken to retrieve the gall bladder, pain, and wound infection were used to compare the effectiveness of port sites. The results were collected on proforma and analyzed by using SPSS version 23. Results: Total 106 patients, having mean age of 45.90 ± 14.49 years. Gender distribution was similar (p=0.314). Retrieval time of gall bladder in epigastric group was 9.2 ± 2.98 and in umbilical group 9.73 ± 3.57 this difference was insignificant (p=0.516). In epigastric group pain was perceived in 3.69 ± 1.77 and in umbilical group 3.28 ± 1.39 with p-value of 0.062 which was nonsignificant. Wound infection in epigastric group was 1.07 ± 0.266 and in umbilical group 1.05 ± 0.233 with p-value of 0.439 which was in significant. Conclusion: Both port sites are equally effective and depend on Surgeon’s preference.

Keywords:

2022
Author:  
Citation Owners
Information: There is no ciation to this publication.
Similar Articles












Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal

Field :   Sağlık Bilimleri

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 2.236
Cite : 131
2023 Impact : 0.002
Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal