Literature DB >> 7890525

The introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy--audit of transition period with late follow-up.

P Kent1, C A Bannon, O Beausang, P R O'Connell, T P Corrigan, T F Gorey.   

Abstract

The operative treatment of 356 consecutive patients with gallstone related disease who presented in the thirty months following the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy was reviewed. A standard questionnaire, with emphasis on total hospital stay (including convalescence), late postoperative morbidity and time to return to work/full activity was sent to all patients. Two hundred and ninety-eight patients responded (83%). The median duration of follow-up was 19 months, (range 6-36 months). Patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy spent significantly less time in hospital post-operatively (median 3 days, interquartile range 2-4) than either those who required conversion to open cholecystectomy (median 7.5 days, interquartile range 5.5-10) or those who had planned open cholecystectomy (median 9.5 days, interquartile range 5-13), (p < 0.001, Kruskal-Wallis). Planned gall bladder extraction through the umbilical port site was associated with a significantly higher probability of wound infection compared with extraction through the epigastric port site (chi 2 = 4.977, P < 0.05). The median time to return to work/full activity was significantly shorter after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (median 21 days, interquartile range 14-42), than after open cholecystectomy (median 42 days, interquartile range 21-60) or following conversion to open cholecystectomy (median 56 days, interquartile range 35-60). We conclude that laparoscopic cholecystectomy requires a significantly shorter hospitalisation than open cholecystectomy and facilitates early return to work/full activity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7890525     DOI: 10.1007/bf02968104

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ir J Med Sci        ISSN: 0021-1265            Impact factor:   1.568


  9 in total

1.  Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

Authors:  M J Kerin; N N Williams; K J Cronin; J M Fitzpatrick; T F Gorey
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 1.568

2.  Role of ERCP and therapeutic biliary endoscopy in association with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  J Boulay; R Schellenberg; P G Brady
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: trans-Canada experience with 2201 cases.

Authors:  D E Litwin; M J Girotti; E C Poulin; J Mamazza; A G Nagy
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.089

4.  Interruption of professional and home activity after laparoscopic cholecystectomy among French and American patients.

Authors:  G C Vitale; D Collet; G M Larson; W G Cheadle; F B Miller; J Perissat
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  The European experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A Cuschieri; F Dubois; J Mouiel; P Mouret; H Becker; G Buess; M Trede; H Troidl
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 2.565

6.  Coelioscopic cholecystectomy. Preliminary report of 36 cases.

Authors:  F Dubois; P Icard; G Berthelot; H Levard
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 7.  U.S. experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  T R Gadacz
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 2.565

8.  Early experiences of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in five Irish hospitals. Irish Laparoscopic Group.

Authors:  A L Leahy; D B Bouchier-Hayes; J M Hyland; P V Delaney; G O'Sullivan; F B Keane
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 1.568

9.  Endoscopic management of common duct stones with laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  K J Cronin; M J Kerin; N N Williams; J Crowe; P MacMathuna; J Lennon; J M Fitzpatrick; T F Gorey
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 1.568

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.