An interventional study of three-ports laparoscopic cholecystectomy and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Cholelithiasis and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy, sponsored by Khyber Medical College, Peshawar. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 60 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-03-12.
Sponsored by Khyber Medical College, Peshawar · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is done traditionally with four ports. It has been observed that the same could be achieved using three ports. In this study we will study the outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy done with both techniques.
The gallbladder functions include the storage, concentration, and release of bile into the gut through synchronous contraction. Gallbladder disease is the predominant digestive disorder that may necessitate hospitalization. Gallbladder stones (cholelithiasis) are prevalent in adults, with a prevalence rate of 4.3% in India. The prevalence of gallstones, or cholelithiasis, in the adult population of ranges from 10% to 20% 1, 2.
In cases of chronic and acute calculus cholecystitis, complications arising from cholelithiasis, the preferred treatment is laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which offers diminished post-operative morbidity, lower complication rates, and expedited recovery, albeit with a slight elevation in conversion rates. Therefore, the preferred treatment for high-risk silent cholelithiasis, symptomatic cholelithiasis, persistent calculus cholelithiasis, as well as acute calculus cholelithiasis involves laparoscopic cholecystectomy 3, 4.
This method typically involves the creation of four small incisions in the abdomen, allowing for the introduction of a camera and surgical instruments to facilitate the dissection and removal of the gallbladder. The four-port technique offers several advantages, including improved visualization and maneuverability, which can be particularly beneficial in complex cases or when there are anatomical variations 5, 6. However, as surgical techniques evolve, the three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy has emerged as a viable alternative, offering the potential for even less invasiveness and quicker recovery times. Proponents of the three-port technique argue that it results in less postoperative pain, reduced narcotic use, and faster recovery due to fewer incisions and reduced tissue trauma. It is observed that experienced surgeons have implemented numerous changes in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, including a reduction in port size. A cholecystectomy can be performed successfully without the utilization of four ports 7-9. A study compared the outcomes of three-port and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy i.e Mean pain score (2.19 + 1.06, and 2.91 + 1.20), Return to normal activity (4.9 + 0.85, and 5.8 + 1.95 ), and Post-operative hospital stay (1.19 + 0.06, and 1.44 + 0.17) 10.
As the three-port approach gains popularity due to its potential benefits, it comprehensive comparisons with the traditional four-port technique is essential to determine which technique is more clinically significant. As no such study is available on this subject locally, that is why the goal of this study is to compare the outcomes of three-port and four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy at our health facility. Understanding the differences in overall patient outcomes can provide valuable insights for surgeons and patients alike, enabling informed decisions about the most appropriate surgical method based on individual patient conditions and the complexity of their gallbladder disease. This study will be helpful to bridge the knowledge gap regarding the efficacy and safety of both techniques, ultimately guiding clinical practice and enhancing patient care in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
189 studies on the registry are indexed under Cholelithiasis; 42 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 110 is above the median of 90 across 135 interventional studies indexed under Cholelithiasis.
Browse Cholelithiasis studies →Khyber Medical College, Peshawar is the lead sponsor of 5 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
in this arm, laparoscopic cholecystectomy will be done with three ports
Procedure: four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy
in this arm, laparoscopic cholecystectomy will be done with three ports
Procedure: three-ports laparoscopic cholecystectomy
in this arm, laparoscopic cholecystectomy will be done with three ports
in this arm, laparoscopic cholecystectomy will be done with four ports
Pain score
Mean pain score measured with a 0 to 10 scale visual analogue scale
Time frame: 48 hours
Operative Time
Number of minutes of operative time
Time frame: same day of surgery
Return to normal activity
Measured in number of days
Time frame: 2 weeks
hospital stay
post operative hospital stay measured in days
Time frame: 2 weeks
No study locations are listed for this record.
Plan to share: Yes — Patients demographics, operative data and outcome data
Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan
Time frame: 1 april 2025
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
Start is estimated for Jul 2025; primary completion for Dec 2025, 5 months later.
Of 54 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Cholelithiasis, half reached primary completion within 17 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 27. This study's planned 5 months is below that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 58 studies reached it within 15 months; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 24.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Mar 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Khyber Medical College, Peshawar