Abstract
OBJECTIVE--To compare the three month outcome of open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. DESIGN--Prospective assessment of outcome for a series of patients encompassing the introduction of the laparoscopic technique. SETTING--One teaching hospital. PATIENTS--269 patients admitted for open cholecystectomy between January 1989 and March 1992 and 122 admitted for laparoscopic cholecystectomy between January 1991 and March 1992. MAIN MEASURES--Patients' reported symptoms and self assessed scores with the Nottingham health profile before operation and at three month follow up. Incidence of complications and adverse events after discharge. RESULTS--Similar improvements in symptom rates and health scores were seen regardless of surgical technique. A lower rate of postoperative complications was seen in the patients given laparoscopic surgery (6/95(6%) v 45/235(19%)), and their mean length of stay was lower (4.5 v 9.8 days). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to a subset of fairly uncomplicated cases (patients aged 60 or less without other illnesses on admission who were not undergoing emergency or urgent surgery), which constituted a larger proportion of the group given laparoscopy (35/95(37%) v 40/235(17%)). Between these two groups no significant difference was seen in the frequency of relevant readmissions to hospital or visits to general practitioners or accident and emergency departments. CONCLUSION--Ideally, a new surgical technique would be evaluated in a randomised trial. In the absence of such a trial, this observational study provides some evidence that the switch from open to laparoscopic cholecystectomy has brought benefits, particularly in terms of reduced length of stay in hospital. A range of clinical and patient derived indicators suggests that these gains have not been associated with a reduction in the quality of the outcome at three months.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Bardsley M. J., Coles J. M. Practical experiences in auditing patient outcomes. Qual Health Care. 1992 Jun;1(2):124–130. doi: 10.1136/qshc.1.2.124. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bardsley M. J., Venables C. W., Watson J., Goodfellow J., Wright P. D. Evidence for validity of a health status measure in assessing short term outcomes of cholecystectomy. Qual Health Care. 1992 Mar;1(1):10–14. doi: 10.1136/qshc.1.1.10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dubois F., Icard P., Berthelot G., Levard H. Coelioscopic cholecystectomy. Preliminary report of 36 cases. Ann Surg. 1990 Jan;211(1):60–62. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199001000-00010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Flowers J. L., Bailey R. W., Scovill W. A., Zucker K. A. The Baltimore experience with laparoscopic management of acute cholecystitis. Am J Surg. 1991 Mar;161(3):388–392. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(91)90604-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Reddick E. J., Olsen D. O. Laparoscopic laser cholecystectomy. A comparison with mini-lap cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 1989;3(3):131–133. doi: 10.1007/BF00591357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sheldon T. A. Please bypass the PORT. BMJ. 1994 Jul 16;309(6948):142–143. doi: 10.1136/bmj.309.6948.142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wolfe B. M., Gardiner B., Frey C. F. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A remarkable development. JAMA. 1991 Mar 27;265(12):1573–1574. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Zucker K. A., Bailey R. W., Gadacz T. R., Imbembo A. L. Laparoscopic guided cholecystectomy. Am J Surg. 1991 Jan;161(1):36–44. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(91)90358-k. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]