A Study to Compare Local Complications in Use of Disposable versus Reusable Metallic Ports in Laparoscopic Surgeries - A Randomised Controlled Trial - General Surgery

Introduction: Minimally invasive surgeries encompass surgical techniques that limit the size of incisions needed and so lessen wound healing time, associated pain, risk of infection and shorter hospital stay, quick recovery and a cosmetic scar. It has been enabled by advance of various medical technologies. Aim of study: To compare local complications in use of disposable versus metallic reusable ports in laparoscopic surgeries performed in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Material and methods: Total of 343 patients were included in the study. It was a randomized control trial and was carried for a duration of two years. All cases undergoing laparoscopic surgery at command hospital pune were included. Excluding immune compromised and those converted to open surgery. Results: There was a significant difference between the 3 groups in terms of Port Site Insertion Difficulty Score (p = less than0.001), with the median Port Site Insertion Difficulty Score being highest in the overweight group. Post op pain, erythema and bleeding complication were significantly higher in overweight reusable ports compared to other BMI groups. Port site insertion difficulty was seen more in reusable group but with a non-significant difference. Conclusion: There was difference between the two groups (disposable and reusable groups) in terms of port site insertion difficulty, port site complications (erythema, bleeding and discharge), BMI, post-op pain but the difference was non-significant with regard to post-operative complications, port site pain port site insertion difficulty in either of the group. However, higher BMI associated with adverse perioperative outcomes irrespective of using either disposable or reusable instruments. To conclude, the study did not find any significant difference in using either reusable laparoscopic ports or the disposable ports.