National trends in the adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy over 7 years in the United States and impact of laparoscopic approaches stratified by age

42Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction. The aim of this study was to characterize national trends in adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and determine differences in outcome based on type of surgery and patient age. Methods. Retrospective cross-sectional study of patients undergoing cholecystectomy. Trends in open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy by age group and year were analyzed. Differences in outcomes including in-hospital mortality, complications, discharge disposition, length of stay (LOS), and cost are examined. Results. Between 1999 and 2006, 358,091 patients underwent cholecystectomy. In 1999, patients aged ≥80 years had the lowest rates of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, followed by those aged 65-79, 64-50, and 49-18 years (59.7%, 65.3%, 73.2%, and 83.5%, resp., P<0.05). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was associated with improved clinical and economic outcomes across all age groups. Over the study period, there was a gradual increase in laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed among all age groups during each year, though elderly patients continued to lag significantly behind their younger counterparts in rates of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Conclusion. This is the largest study to report trends in adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the US in patients stratified by age. Elderly patients are more likely to undergo open cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is associated with improved clinical outcomes. © 2014 Anahita Dua et al.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dua, A., Aziz, A., Desai, S. S., McMaster, J., & Kuy, S. (2014). National trends in the adoption of laparoscopic cholecystectomy over 7 years in the United States and impact of laparoscopic approaches stratified by age. Minimally Invasive Surgery, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/635461

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free