Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ British Journal of S...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
British Journal of Surgery
Article . 1993 . Peer-reviewed
License: OUP Standard Publication Reuse
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the Netherlands

Authors: Go, P. M.; Schol, F.; Gouma, D. J.;

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the Netherlands

Abstract

Abstract Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was introduced into the Netherlands in the Spring of 1990. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of the procedure in Dutch hospitals over the first 2 years to obtain some insight into its safety and efficacy in general surgical practice. A written questionnaire was sent to all 138 Dutch surgical institutions enquiring about conversion rate, complications (with emphasis on mortality rate and common bile duct injuries), operating time and hospital stay. The surgeons' opinions were also sought on possible contraindications such as previous operation, bile duct stones and cholecystitis, as were their estimations of the percentage of patients in their practice eligible for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Data were obtained for 6076 laparoscopic cholecystectomies; the response rate was 100 per cent. Conversion to open cholecystectomy was necessary in 413 patients (6·8 per cent), mostly because of adhesions, cholecystitis, haemorrhage and unclear anatomy. Postoperative complications were reported in 260 patients (4·3 per cent). There were seven deaths (0·12 per cent) and 52 (0·86 per cent) bile duct injuries, of which 20 were recognized during laparoscopy. The mean operating time for the ten most recent patients in each institute was 70 (range 30–180) min and the mean hospital stay 4·5 (range 2–8) days. Previous lower abdominal operations were not considered to be a contraindication by 96 per cent of surgeons, whereas, previous upper abdominal procedures were regarded as a contraindication by 66 per cent. After successful clearance of the bile duct at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, only 12 per cent would perform an open procedure. Moderate cholecystitis was not considered a contraindication to laparoscopic cholecystectomy by 71 per cent of surgeons, but severe cholecystitis was a reason for open cholecystectomy for 83 per cent. In most surgical practices 70–80 per cent of patients were considered to be eligible for the laparoscopic procedure. In conclusion, laparoscopic cholecystectomy has gained rapid acceptance in the Netherlands. Although the number of bile duct injuries is high, the findings of this general survey are similar to those from highly specialized centres and match the overall results of conventional cholecystectomy.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Time Factors, Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic, Cholecystitis, Humans, Bile Ducts, Netherlands

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    79
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
79
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 10%
hybrid