This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

David F. Ransohoff, MD; Charles K. McSherry, MD

JAMA. 1995;273(20):1621-1622.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Although the laparoscopic approach to cholecystectomy was introduced only about 5 years ago, it now accounts for some 90% of all cholecystectomies done in the United States. Following the introduction of this type of "minimally invasive surgery," the overall number of procedures has increased by about 22%, at least in the elderly in Pennsylvania described in this issue of JAMA by Escarce et al.¹ What is the explanation for this change in practice behavior, and is the change for the better?

See also p 1581.

The laparoscopic approach clearly is more convenient than the open approach to cholecystectomy because it requires shorter hospital stay and allows quicker return to work. Indeed, the rapid and widespread adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy appears to have been in large part patient driven because of the procedure's convenience. The laparoscopic approach is believed to be as safe as or perhaps safer than open cholecystectomy, . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
From the Departments of Medicine and Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Dr Ransohoff), and Department of Surgery, Cornell University Medical College, New York, NY (Dr McSherry).

Footnotes
Reprint requests to CB# 7105, 5034 Old Clinic Bldg, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7105 (Dr Ransohoff).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?