Costs and benefits of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Abdominal wall lifting vs. pneumoperitoneum procedure

Hepato-Gastroenterology

Volumn 53, Issue 70, 2006, Pages 497-500

  Ishikawa, M ^a,b   Nakagawa, T ^a   Nishioka, M ^a   Ogata, S ^a   Miyauchi, T ^a   Kashiwagi, Y ^a   Uemura, N ^a   Inoue, S ^a  

^a National Kochi Hospital   (Japan)

^b TOKUSHIMA RED CROSS HOSPITAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

Abdominal wall lifting method; Cost effectiveness; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL ABSCESS; ABDOMINAL BLEEDING; ABDOMINAL SURGERY; ABDOMINAL WALL; ABDOMINAL WALL LIFTING; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BILE DUCT INJURY; BILE LEAKAGE; CHOLECYSTECTOMY; CHOLELITHIASIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PNEUMOPERITONEUM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

ABDOMINAL WALL; ADULT; AGED; CHOLECYSTECTOMY, LAPAROSCOPIC; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISPOSABLE EQUIPMENT; EQUIPMENT REUSE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PNEUMOPERITONEUM, ARTIFICIAL; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT;

EID: 33748650560     PISSN: 01726390     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Hashimoto D, Nayeem SA, Kajiwara S, et al: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an approach without pneumoperitoneum. Surg Endosc 1993; 7:54-56.
2. Hashimoto D, Nayeem SA, Kajiwara S, et al: Abdominal wall lifting with subcutaneous ring: An experience of 50 cases of laparoscopic cholecystectomy without pneumoperitoneum. Surg Today 1993; 23:786-790.
3. Smith RS, Fry WR, Tsoi EKM, et al: Gasless laparoscopy and conventional instruments. The new phase of minimally invasive surgery. Arch Surg 1993; 128:1102-1107.
4. Ishikawa M, Tagami Y, Toyota T, et al: Can three-dimensional helical CT cholangiography before laparoscopic cholecystectomy be a substitute study for endoscopic retrograde cholangiography? Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2000; 10:351-356.
5. Apelgren KN, Blank ML, Slomski CA, et al: Reusable instruments are more cost-effective than disposable instruments for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Sur Endosc 1994; 8:32-34.
6. Demoulin L, Kesteloot K, Penninckx F, et al: A cost comparison of disposable vs reusable instruments in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Sur Endosc 1996; 10:520-525.
7. Corson SL, Batzer FR, Gocial G, et al: Measurement of the force necessary for laparoscopic trocar entry. J Reprod Med 1989; 34:282-284.
8. Nezhat FR, Silfen SL, Evans D, et al: Comparison of direct insertion of disposable and standard reusable laparoscopic trocars and previous pneumoperitoneum with Veress needle. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 78:148-150.
9. Voyles CR, Petro AB, Meena AL, et al: A practical approach to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 1991; 161:365-370.
10. Calvert NW, Troy GP, Johnson AG: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A good buy? A cost comparison with small-incision (mini) cholecystectomy. Eur J Surg 2000; 166:782-786.
11. MaMahon AJ, Russell IT, Baxter JN et al: Laparoscopic versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy: A randomized trial. Lancet 1994; 343:135-138.
12. Jonsson B, Zethraeus N, et al: Costs and benefits of laparoscopic surgery - a review of the literature. Eur J Surg 2000; 166:48-56.
13. Eddie G, White S: A comparison of reusable versus disposable laparoscopic instrument costs. Aust NZ J Surg 1996; 66:671-675.
14. Kitano S, Tomikawa M, Moriyama M, et al: A prospective randomized trial comparing pneumoperitoneum and U-shaped retractor elevation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Sur Endosc 1993; 7:311-314.
15. Ishikawa M, Tagami Y, Toyota T, et al: An initial training of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: The abdominal wall lifting vs, pneumoperitoneum procedures. Int J Surg Invest 2001; 3:421-426.