Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 4/2006

01-04-2006

Minilaparotomy cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy

A randomized study with special reference to obesity

Authors: J. Harju, P. Juvonen, M. Eskelinen, P. Miettinen, M. Pääkkönen

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 4/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Minilaparotomy cholecystectomy (MC) has recently challenged the role of the laparoscopic approach (LC) for cholecystectomies. However, the situation is far from clear when operating times and recovery are evaluated.

Methods

Altogether 157 patients with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones were randomized into MC (n = 85) and LC (n = 72) groups. Both groups were similar in terms of age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical fitness classification, and operating surgeon.

Results

The mean operating time was 55 ± 19.5 min in the MC group and 79 ± 27.0 min in the LC group (p < 0.0001). The postoperative hospital stay and length of sick leave did not differ between the two groups. There were no significant differences in postoperative pain, analgesic consumption, or postoperative pulmonary function between the groups. The body mass index did not influence operating time or patient recovery in either group. No major complications occurred in either groups.

Conclusion

The MC procedure seems to be a faster technique than the LC approach for noncomplicated gallstone disease, with no difference in recovery times. The MC procedure also seems to be suitable for the obese patient.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Al-Tameem MM (1993) Minilaparotomy cholecystectomy. J R Coll Surg Edinb 38: 154–157PubMed Al-Tameem MM (1993) Minilaparotomy cholecystectomy. J R Coll Surg Edinb 38: 154–157PubMed
2.
go back to reference Majeed AW, Troy G, Nicholl JP, Smythe A, Reed MW, Stoddard CJ, Peacock J, Johnson AG (1996) Randomised, prospective, single-blind comparison of laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy. Lancet 347: 989–9940CrossRefPubMed Majeed AW, Troy G, Nicholl JP, Smythe A, Reed MW, Stoddard CJ, Peacock J, Johnson AG (1996) Randomised, prospective, single-blind comparison of laparoscopic versus small-incision cholecystectomy. Lancet 347: 989–9940CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Makinen AM, Nordback IH (1995) Cholecystectomy: comparison of minilaparotomy and laparoscopy. Int Surg 80: 99–101PubMed Makinen AM, Nordback IH (1995) Cholecystectomy: comparison of minilaparotomy and laparoscopy. Int Surg 80: 99–101PubMed
4.
go back to reference McGinn FP, Miles AJ, Uglow M, Ozmen M, Terzi C, Humby M (1995) Randomized trial of laparoscopic and minicholecystectomy. Br J Surg 82: 1374–1377PubMed McGinn FP, Miles AJ, Uglow M, Ozmen M, Terzi C, Humby M (1995) Randomized trial of laparoscopic and minicholecystectomy. Br J Surg 82: 1374–1377PubMed
5.
go back to reference McMahon AJ, Russell IT, Baxter JN, Ross S, Anderson JR, Morran CG, Sunderland G, Galloway D, Ramsay G, O´Dwyer PJ (1994) Laparoscopic versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy: a randomised trial. Lancet 343: 135–138CrossRefPubMed McMahon AJ, Russell IT, Baxter JN, Ross S, Anderson JR, Morran CG, Sunderland G, Galloway D, Ramsay G, O´Dwyer PJ (1994) Laparoscopic versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy: a randomised trial. Lancet 343: 135–138CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference McMahon AJ, Russell IT, Ramsay G, Sunderland G, Baxter JN, Anderson JR, Galloway D, O´Dwyer PJ (1994) Laparoscopic and minilaparotomy cholecystectomy: a randomized trial comparing postoperative pain and pulmonary function. Surgery 115: 533–539PubMed McMahon AJ, Russell IT, Ramsay G, Sunderland G, Baxter JN, Anderson JR, Galloway D, O´Dwyer PJ (1994) Laparoscopic and minilaparotomy cholecystectomy: a randomized trial comparing postoperative pain and pulmonary function. Surgery 115: 533–539PubMed
7.
go back to reference Miles RH, Carballo RE, Prinz RA (1992) Laparoscopy: the preferred method of cholecystectomy in the morbidly obese. Surgery 818–822 Miles RH, Carballo RE, Prinz RA (1992) Laparoscopy: the preferred method of cholecystectomy in the morbidly obese. Surgery 818–822
8.
go back to reference Oyogoa SO, Komenaka IK, Ilkhani R, Wise L (2003) Minilaparotomy cholecystectomy in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a community-based hospital perspective. Am Surg 69: 604–607PubMed Oyogoa SO, Komenaka IK, Ilkhani R, Wise L (2003) Minilaparotomy cholecystectomy in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a community-based hospital perspective. Am Surg 69: 604–607PubMed
9.
go back to reference Ros A, Gustafsson L, Krook H, Nordgren CE, Thorell A, Wallin G, Nilsson E (2001) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Ann Surg 234: 741–749CrossRefPubMed Ros A, Gustafsson L, Krook H, Nordgren CE, Thorell A, Wallin G, Nilsson E (2001) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy: a prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Ann Surg 234: 741–749CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Schirmer BD, Dix J, Edge SB, Hyser MJ, Hanks JB, Aguilar M (1992) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the obese patient. Ann Surg 216: 146–152PubMed Schirmer BD, Dix J, Edge SB, Hyser MJ, Hanks JB, Aguilar M (1992) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the obese patient. Ann Surg 216: 146–152PubMed
11.
go back to reference Schmitz R, Rohde V, Treckmann J, Shah S (1997) Randomized clinical trial of conventional cholecystectomy versus minicholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84: 1683–1686CrossRefPubMed Schmitz R, Rohde V, Treckmann J, Shah S (1997) Randomized clinical trial of conventional cholecystectomy versus minicholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84: 1683–1686CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Squirrell DM, Majeed AW, Troy G, Peacock JE, Nicholl JP, Johnson AG (1998) A randomized, prospective, blinded comparison of postoperative pain, metabolic response, and perceived health after laparoscopic and small incision cholecystectomy. Surgery 123: 485–495CrossRefPubMed Squirrell DM, Majeed AW, Troy G, Peacock JE, Nicholl JP, Johnson AG (1998) A randomized, prospective, blinded comparison of postoperative pain, metabolic response, and perceived health after laparoscopic and small incision cholecystectomy. Surgery 123: 485–495CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Srivastava A, Srinivas G, Misra MC, Pandav CS, Seenu V, Goyal A (2001) Cost-effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy for gallstone disease. a randomized trial. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 17: 497–502PubMed Srivastava A, Srinivas G, Misra MC, Pandav CS, Seenu V, Goyal A (2001) Cost-effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy for gallstone disease. a randomized trial. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 17: 497–502PubMed
14.
go back to reference Syrakos T, Antonitsis P, Zacharakis E, Takis A, Manousari A, Bakogiannis K, Efthimiopoulos G, Achoulias I, Trikopupi A, Kiskinis D (2004) Small-incision (minilaparotomy) versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective study in a university hospital. Langenbecks Arch Surg 389: 172–177CrossRefPubMed Syrakos T, Antonitsis P, Zacharakis E, Takis A, Manousari A, Bakogiannis K, Efthimiopoulos G, Achoulias I, Trikopupi A, Kiskinis D (2004) Small-incision (minilaparotomy) versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a retrospective study in a university hospital. Langenbecks Arch Surg 389: 172–177CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Tyagi NS, Meredith MC, Lumb JC, Caccad RG, Vanterpool CC, Rayls KR, Zerega WD, Silbergleit A (1994) A new minimal invasive technique for cholecystectomy: subxiphoid “minimal stress triangle” microceliotomy. Ann Surg 220: 617–625PubMed Tyagi NS, Meredith MC, Lumb JC, Caccad RG, Vanterpool CC, Rayls KR, Zerega WD, Silbergleit A (1994) A new minimal invasive technique for cholecystectomy: subxiphoid “minimal stress triangle” microceliotomy. Ann Surg 220: 617–625PubMed
Metadata
Title
Minilaparotomy cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy
A randomized study with special reference to obesity
Authors
J. Harju
P. Juvonen
M. Eskelinen
P. Miettinen
M. Pääkkönen
Publication date
01-04-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 4/2006
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-004-2280-6

Other articles of this Issue 4/2006

Surgical Endoscopy 4/2006 Go to the issue