Advertisement

Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 398–401 | Cite as

Treatment of acute cholecystitis

A comparison of open vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy
  • Ž. Glavić
  • L. Begić
  • D. Šimleša
  • A. Rukavina
Original Articles

Abstract

Background

In this study, the clinical results and cost-effectiveness of open vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis were compared

Methods

Over a 5-year period (1994–98), 894 cholecystectomies were performed, 545 (60.96%) of them laparoscopically and 349 (39.04%) by the open method. The study included 209 patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute cholecystitis; 115 (55.02%) of them were operated on by the open method and 94 (44.98%) by the laparoscopic method.

Results

A comparison analysis revealed that the mean postoperative treatment period was 8.40 days after open and 4.38 days after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In the group operated on by the open method, 106 patients received an antibiotic, a mean of 5.09 ampules and 3.2 tablets or suppositories of an analgesic, and 2.91 dressings per patient; whereas in the group submitted to the laparoscopic method, the comparable figures were 43, 3.13, 2.1, and 1.47, respectively. In 31 (26.96%) employed patients operated on by the open method, the mean absenteeism from work was 42 days; whereas in 31 (32.98%) of those operated on by the laparoscopic method, it was 17 days. The mean operating times for the procedures were 89 and 115 min for the open and laparoscopic methods, respectively. Two patients submitted to open cholecystectomy died within 30 days post-operatively. Wound infection was recorded in 10 (8.7%), prolonged biliary secretion in two, and cicatricial hernia in five (4.35%) patients. In the group submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there were no deaths; nine (9.57%) conversions were required; four patients had to be reoperated on, two of them for bile lobe hemorrhage and two for massive biliary secretion from the open cystic duct; herniation at the site of supraumbilical incision developed in three patients, and infection developed at the same site in two (2.13%) patients. The hospital cost was significantly higher in laparoscopic patients ($1181 vs $873) USD), as was the total cost of treatment for acute cholecystitis ($1430 vs $1316). However, the cost for sick leave and rehabilitation was significantly lower in laparoscopically treated patients ($486 vs $1199).

Conclusions

Our comparison analysis of the results and cost-effectiveness of the surgical treatment of acute cholecystitis clearly pointed to the advantages of laparoscopic over open cholecystectomy —i.e., better clinical outcome and a more rapid resumption of daily activities. Hospital and total costs of treatment were on average higher in laparoscopic patients, except for the employed ones, where the lower sick leave cost translated into a significant reduction in total costs.

Key words

Cholecystitis Cholecystectomy Laparoscopy Outcome Cost-effectiveness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Čala Z (1996) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an original three-trocar technique. World J Surg 20: 117–118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Čala Z, Velnič, D, Cvitanovič B, Rašič Ž, Perko Z (1996) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results after 1000 procedures. Acta Med Croatica 50: 147–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cox MR, Wilson TG, Luck AJ, Jeans PL, Padbury RT, Toouli J (1993) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute inflammation of the gallbladder. Ann Surg 218: 630–634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cuschieri A (1993) Cost effectiveness of endoscopic surgery. Health Econ 2: 367–369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cuschieri A, Dubois F, Mouiel J, Mouret P, Becker H, Buess G, Trede M, Troidl H (1991) The European experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 161: 385–387PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deziel DJ, Milikan KW, Economou SG, Doolas A, Ko ST, Airan MC (1993) Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a national survery of 4,292 hospitals and an analysis of 77,604 cases. Am J Surg 165: 9–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grace PA, Quereshi A, Coleman J, Keane R, McEntee G, Broe P, Osborne H, Bouchier-Hayes D (1991) Reduced postoperative hospitalization after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 78: 160–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hawasli A, Lloyd LR (1991) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The learning curve: report of 50 patients. Am Surg 57: 542–545PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kum CK, Goh PM, Isaac JR, Tekant Y, Ngoi SS (1994) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 81: 1651–1654PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lo CM, Fan ST, Liu CL, Lai ECS, Wong J (1997) Early decision for conversion of laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Am J Surg 173: 513–517PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lo CM, Liu CL, Lai EC, Fan ST, Wong J (1996) Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 223: 37–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McSherry CK (1989) Cholecystectomy: the gold standard. Am J Surg 158: 174–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morgenstern L, Wond L, Berci G (1992) Twelve hundred open cholecystectomies before the laparoscopic era: a standard for comparison. Arch Surg 127: 400–403PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Perissat J (1993) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the European experience. Am J Surg 165: 444–449PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Peters JH, Krailadsiri W, Incarbone R, Bremner CG, Froes E, Ireland AP, Crookes P, Ortega AE, Anthone GA, Stain SA (1994) Reason for conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy in a urban teaching hospital. Am J Surg 168: 555–559PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rettner DW, Ferguson C, Warshaw AL (1993) Factors associated with successful laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 217: 233–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roslyn JJ, Binns GS, Hughes EFX, Saunders-Kirkwood K, Zinner MJ, Cates JA (1993) Open cholecystectomy: a contemporary analysis of 42,747 patients. Ann Surg 218: 129–137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shea JA, Healey MJ, Berlin JA, Clarke JR, Malet PF, Staroscik RN, Schwartz JS, Williams SV (1996) Mortality and complications associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 224: 609–620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Soper NJ, Stockmann PT, Dunegan DL, Ashley SW (1992) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the new “gold standard”. Arch Surg 127: 917–923PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Southern Surgeons Club, Moore MJ, Bennett CL (1995) The learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 170: 55–59PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Traverso LW, Hargrave K (1995) A prospective cost analysis of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 169: 503–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Unger SW, Rosenbaum G, Unger HM, Edelman DS (1993) A comparison of laparoscopic and open treatment of acute cholecystitis. Surg Endosc 7: 408–411PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wenner J, Graffner H, Lindell G (1995) A financial analysis of laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 9: 702–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zucker KA, Flowers JL, Bailey RW, Graham SM, Buell J, Imbembo AL (1993) Laparoscopic management of acute cholecystitis. Am J Surg 165: 508–514PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ž. Glavić
    • 1
  • L. Begić
    • 1
  • D. Šimleša
    • 1
  • A. Rukavina
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryCountry General HospitalPožegaCroatia

Personalised recommendations