Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40614033›Full record

ArticleUpdates in surgery2026

Comparative study of three-port vs four-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a cohort study: a surgical task load survey.

Ali Javidi, Erfan Sheikhbahaei, Ashkan Mortazavi, Farjam Khosravi, Ali Mohammad Mokhtari, Mohammad Eslamian

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Updates in surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Ali JavidiDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, Gonabad University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran.
Erfan SheikhbahaeiDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Hezar Jerib Blvd. Azadi Sq, Esfahan, Iran.
Ashkan MortazaviSchool of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Farjam KhosraviSchool of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Ali Mohammad MokhtariEpidemiology, School of Health, Gonabad University of Medical Sciences, Gonabad, Iran.
Mohammad EslamianDepartment of Surgery, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Hezar Jerib Blvd. Azadi Sq, Esfahan, Iran. mr.esl67@gmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The three-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) approach is gaining attention for its perceived benefits, although it is not widely accepted outside of clinical trials. The present investigation aims to compare the outcomes of three-port LC (3PLC) and four-port LC (4PLC) methods, focusing on their safety, efficacy, and workload. This multicenter investigation was performed between March 2021 and April 2022. Demographic data, procedural outcomes, visual analog scale regarding postoperative pain, and the level of satisfaction were collected and compared. In addition, the Surgery-TLX and Borg's CR10 tools were utilized to assess the surgeon's workload. Of 169 patients who enrolled in the study, 84 individuals underwent 3PLC, and 85 cases had 4PLC. The three-port LC indicated a significantly shorter duration of operation compared to the four-port (63.55 vs. 69.08 min respectively, p = 0.001). The hospital length of stay and the mean pain score on day 1 were also lower in the 3PLC (1.14 days vs. 1.79 days, p < 0.001 and 1.85 vs. 2.52, p = 0.004, respectively). The mean level of satisfaction on day 7 was higher in the 3PLC. The Borg's CR10 scale showed that surgeons experienced more physical discomfort and pain in the left shoulder, left forearm, and trunk after 4PLC. The surgery-TLX scale in our study indicated increased mental demands and distraction, but less situational awareness in the surgeons after 4PLC. The 3PLC technique could serve as a safe and feasible laparoscopic technique and does not cause more complications than the conventional 4PLC.

Indexed as

Cholecystectomy, LaparoscopicWorkloadAdultAgedCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePain MeasurementPostoperative PainSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeFour-port laparoscopic cholecystectomyLaparoscopic cholecystectomySurgery-TLXThree-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.