Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/13318
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHardy, Kenneth Johnen
dc.contributor.authorMiller, Hen
dc.contributor.authorFletcher, D Ren
dc.contributor.authorJones, Robert Men
dc.contributor.authorShulkes, Arthuren
dc.contributor.authorMcNeil, John Jen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-16T03:08:51Z
dc.date.available2015-05-16T03:08:51Z
dc.date.issued1994-01-17en
dc.identifier.citationMedical Journal of Australia; 160(2): 58-62en
dc.identifier.govdoc8309369en
dc.identifier.otherPUBMEDen
dc.identifier.urihttp://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/13318en
dc.description.abstractTo compare open cholecystectomy (OC) with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in terms of clinical aspects and a limited review of costs.The Austin Hospital, Melbourne, a university teaching hospital.Prospective LC patients were compared with a retrospective group of OC patients whose surgery had been performed by the same surgeons.Consecutive patients undergoing LC were interviewed, their medical records were analysed and the cost of their hospitalisation was assessed. Similar data, collected previously from patients undergoing OC, were used for comparison.There were 108 patients in each group, 93.5% treated electively. All had gallstones. No deaths or common bile duct injury occurred. The mean operating room time was 131 +/- 3.7 minutes for OC and 164 +/- 4.7 minutes for LC. Operative cholangiography was attempted in 80% in each group, being successful when attempted in all OCs and in 95% of LCs. The conversion rate of LCs to OCs was 4.5%. Minor complications were more frequent with OCs. The mean duration of hospital stay was 6.5 +/- 0.3 days for OCs and 2.0 +/- 0.2 days for LCs. The amount and period of analgesia were significantly less in the LC group. Patients recovered significantly faster after LC (P < 0.01) during the first eight weeks after surgery. There was no difference by 12 weeks. The overall cost for each LC was $838 less than OC for the entire hospital stay.These results support the view that LC is a safe and justified replacement for OC in the elective situation, with benefits to the patient, hospital and general community. The hospital cost for LC was less than for OC.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subject.otherAdolescenten
dc.subject.otherAdulten
dc.subject.otherAgeden
dc.subject.otherAged, 80 and overen
dc.subject.otherAnalgesia.utilizationen
dc.subject.otherCholangiographyen
dc.subject.otherCholecystectomy.adverse effects.economicsen
dc.subject.otherCholecystectomy, Laparoscopic.adverse effects.economicsen
dc.subject.otherFemaleen
dc.subject.otherHealth Care Costsen
dc.subject.otherHumansen
dc.subject.otherLength of Stay.economicsen
dc.subject.otherMaleen
dc.subject.otherMedical Auditen
dc.subject.otherMiddle Ageden
dc.subject.otherMonitoring, Intraoperativeen
dc.subject.otherPostoperative Complications.epidemiologyen
dc.subject.otherProspective Studiesen
dc.subject.otherRetrospective Studiesen
dc.subject.otherTime Factorsen
dc.subject.otherTreatment Outcomeen
dc.titleAn evaluation of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy.en
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.journaltitleMedical Journal of Australiaen
dc.identifier.affiliationDepartment of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Austin Hospital, Vic.en
dc.description.pages58-62en
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8309369en
Appears in Collections:Journal articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.