To compare the incidence of bile duct injuries during single incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) in relation to the accepted historic rate of 0.4% to 0.5% for standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC). Technically, SILC is more challenging than SLC. The role and benefit of SILC in patient care has yet to be defined. Bile duct injuries have been reported in several series of SILC. A comprehensive database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PubMed Central was performed to generate all reported cases of SILC to present. The search was limited to reports of 20 or more patients based on current literature of existing SILC learning curves. Data were analyzed using the Student t test and χ analyses where appropriate. A total of 76 candidate studies were identified; 45 studies met inclusion criteria for an aggregate total of 2626 patients. Most SILCs were performed in the absence of acute cholecystitis (90.6%). The aggregate complication rate was 4.2%, and complications were graded according to the Dindo-Clavien Classification System. Nineteen bile duct injuries were identified for a SILC-associated bile duct injury rate of 0.72%. There seems to be an increase in the rate of bile duct injuries during SILC when compared with historic rates during SLC. Because most SILCs are performed in optimal conditions, such as lack of acute inflammation, we urge caution in applying this technique to inflamed gallbladder pathology. Controlled trials are needed before conclusions are made regarding safety of SILC.

The purpose of this study was to create a technical skills assessment toolbox for 35 basic and advanced skills/procedures that comprise the American College of Surgeons (ACS)/Association of Program Directors in Surgery (APDS) surgical skills curriculum and to provide a critical appraisal of the included tools, using contemporary framework of validity. Competency-based training has become the predominant model in surgical education and assessment of performance is an essential component. Assessment methods must produce valid results to accurately determine the level of competency. A search was performed, using PubMed and Google Scholar, to identify tools that have been developed for assessment of the targeted technical skills. A total of 23 assessment tools for the 35 ACS/APDS skills modules were identified. Some tools, such as Operative Performance Rating System (OSATS) and Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (OPRS), have been tested for more than 1 procedure. Therefore, 30 modules had at least 1 assessment tool, with some common surgical procedures being addressed by several tools. Five modules had none. Only 3 studies used Messick's framework to design their validity studies. The remaining studies used an outdated framework on the basis of "types of validity." When analyzed using the contemporary framework, few of these studies demonstrated validity for content, internal structure, and relationship to other variables. This study provides an assessment toolbox for common surgical skills/procedures. Our review shows that few authors have used the contemporary unitary concept of validity for development of their assessment tools. As we progress toward competency-based training, future studies should provide evidence for various sources of validity using the contemporary framework.