Skip to main content
Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England logoLink to Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England
. 1992 Nov;74(6):397–400.

A prospective comparison of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy.

S E Attwood 1, A D Hill 1, K Mealy 1, R B Stephens 1
PMCID: PMC2497695  PMID: 1471836

Abstract

In one surgical unit, 115 patients undergoing cholecystectomy were studied to compare patient recovery, subjective and objective pain experienced and complications after laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy. The data were collected prospectively where allocation to open or laparoscopic cholecystectomy was by consecutive attendance. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was feasible in 90% of patients presenting with symptomatic gallstones. Compared with the open operation, laparoscopic cholecystectomy was safe with less peroperative and postoperative morbidity, was more cost-effective and was associated with faster patient recovery as documented by less postoperative pain, earlier return to diet, earlier full mobilisation and discharge home. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is superior to open cholecystectomy and should be available to all patients requiring elective cholecystectomy.

Full text

PDF
400

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Ali J., Khan T. A. The comparative effects of muscle transection and median upper abdominal incisions on postoperative pulmonary function. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1979 Jun;148(6):863–866. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Attwood S. E., Hill A. D., Murphy P. G., Thornton J., Stephens R. B. A prospective randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy. Surgery. 1992 Sep;112(3):497–501. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cuschieri A. Minimal access surgery: the birth of a new era. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 1990 Dec;35(6):345–347. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Goco I. R., Chambers L. G. "Mini-cholecystectomy" and operative cholangiography. A means of cost containment. Am Surg. 1983 Mar;49(3):143–145. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Grace P. A., Quereshi A., Coleman J., Keane R., McEntee G., Broe P., Osborne H., Bouchier-Hayes D. Reduced postoperative hospitalization after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 1991 Feb;78(2):160–162. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800780209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Nathanson L. K., Shimi S., Cuschieri A. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the Dundee technique. Br J Surg. 1991 Feb;78(2):155–159. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800780208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Neugebauer E., Troidl H., Spangenberger W., Dietrich A., Lefering R. Conventional versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy and the randomized controlled trial. Cholecystectomy Study Group. Br J Surg. 1991 Feb;78(2):150–154. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800780207. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Olsen D. O. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg. 1991 Mar;161(3):339–344. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(91)90592-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Reddick E. J., Olsen D., Spaw A., Baird D., Asbun H., O'Reilly M., Fisher K., Saye W. Safe performance of difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Am J Surg. 1991 Mar;161(3):377–381. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(91)90601-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Russell R. C., Shankar S. The stabilized ring retractor: a technique for cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 1987 Sep;74(9):826–826. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800740925. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England are provided here courtesy of The Royal College of Surgeons of England

RESOURCES