Literature DB >> 1533508

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A clinical and financial analysis of 280 operations.

M E Stoker1, J Vose, P O'Mara, B S Maini.   

Abstract

Two hundred eighty patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and were compared with 304 patients who underwent traditional "open" cholecystectomy (OC). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed electively in 72.5% of cases and urgently in 27.5% of cases. Conversion from LC to OC was required in 14 patients (5%), six of whom required common bile duct exploration. Common bile duct stones were managed with video-laparoscopic techniques in 11 patients, with percutaneous transhepatic laser lithotripsy in three patients, and with laparotomy in six patients. Hospital stay was significantly shorter and complications were significantly fewer for LC compared with OC. Hospital expenses for LC were significantly higher than for OC because of longer duration of operation and higher operating room expenses. Patients who underwent elective LC returned to work an average of 31 days earlier than patients who underwent OC (10 days vs 41 days). These data indicate that LC can be performed safely although at a higher cost than OC, and that patients as well as employers benefit from a short length of hospital stay.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1533508     DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.1992.01420050117015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Surg        ISSN: 0004-0010


  22 in total

Review 1.  The E.A.E.S. Consensus Development Conferences on laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, and hernia repair. Consensus statements--September 1994. The Educational Committee of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

Authors:  E Neugebauer; H Troidl; C K Kum; E Eypasch; M Miserez; A Paul
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Cost of open versus laparoscopically assisted right hemicolectomy for cancer.

Authors:  B M Philipson; E L Bokey; J W Moore; P H Chapuis; E Bagge
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a report from a single center.

Authors:  Konstantinos Vagenas; Stavros N Karamanakos; Charalambos Spyropoulos; Spyros Panagiotopoulos; Menelaos Karanikolas; Michalis Stavropoulos
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-06-28       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Value of robotically assisted surgery for mitral valve disease.

Authors:  Tomislav Mihaljevic; Marijan Koprivanac; Marta Kelava; Avi Goodman; Craig Jarrett; Sarah J Williams; A Marc Gillinov; Gurjyot Bajwa; Stephanie L Mick; Johannes Bonatti; Eugene H Blackstone
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 14.766

5.  Specialized endoscopic equipment.

Authors:  J M Sackier
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1993 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Costs of Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Analysis of potential savings.

Authors:  B M Ure; R Lefering; H Troidl
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  The cost of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy in a community hospital.

Authors:  V W Vanek; C C Bourguet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Laparoscopic versus conventional appendectomy.

Authors:  V L Vallina; J M Velasco; C S McCulloch
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: mechanism of injury, prevention, and management.

Authors:  H J Asbun; R L Rossi; J A Lowell; J L Munson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1993 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Comparative analysis of clinical outcomes for laparoscopic distal pancreatic resection and open distal pancreatic resection at a single institution.

Authors:  Song C Kim; Kwan T Park; Ji W Hwang; Hyeng C Shin; Sang S Lee; Dong W Seo; Sung K Lee; Myung H Kim; Duck J Han
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.