Search

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is clearly the gold standard for symptomatic cholelithiasis. Open cholecystectomy is now reserved for difficult and problematic cases. The purpose of this paper is to propose that mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy (minicholecystectomy) can be as effective as laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This paper compares the two techniques in well-matched patients. In addition mastery of this technique is practical and rewarding and should be part of the repertoire of the general surgeon. We conducted a retrospective review of the experience of a single surgeon at a community-based teaching hospital over a 2-year period for minicholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Sixty-six patients were matched for age, sex, body surface area, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score. The absolute cost was lower for the minicholecystectomy group than for the laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. The operating room times were not significantly different in the two groups (P value 0.79). The average length of stay and the average amount of intramuscular analgesia required for the two groups were also not significantly different (P values 0.69 and 0.35, respectively). Although subjective postoperative satisfaction was equal for both groups the minicholecystectomy group had no complications whereas the laparoscopic group had two (myocardial infarction and cystic duct stump leak) complications. We conclude that minicholecystectomy can be used as a viable alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy especially in patients who cannot tolerate laparoscopic procedures and in areas where cost containment is critical.