Open Access
Open access
volume 18 issue SUPPLEMENT 3 pages 1-10

Comparative analysis of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted cholecystectomy: a literature review

Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2024-08-16
SJR
CiteScore
Impact factor
ISSN25441558, 25441620
Abstract

Background: A cholecystectomy is one of the most common surgical procedures, primarily used to treat patients with symptomatic gallstone disease. There are three main methods for performing this surgery: open, laparoscopic, and robotic access. Currently, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is considered the gold standard for treating symptomatic cholelithiasis. However, robotic cholecystectomy represents an advancement in minimally invasive techniques. Aim of the Study: The aim of this study is to review and compare the different approaches to cholecystectomy—open, laparoscopic, and robotic—and to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of each method. Material and Methods: A literature search was conducted using publicly available databases, PubMed and Google Scholar, with the following keywords: “open cholecystectomy,” “laparoscopic cholecystectomy,” and “robotic cholecystectomy.” The search included articles published between January 2002 and March 2024. A total of 37 articles were ultimately included in this review. Results: In the analyzed publications, the approaches to cholecystectomy were compared, including open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery. Laparoscopic and robotic cholecystectomy are generally preferred over open cholecystectomy due to their minimally invasive nature, which results in faster recovery times and fewer complications. However, the choice of surgical method should be tailored to the individual patient's needs, the surgeon's expertise, and the financial implications of each technique. Conclusion: While minimally invasive techniques offer significant advantages, there remain certain clinical scenarios where open cholecystectomy is indicated and necessary. Therefore, a comprehensive evaluation of each patient's condition is crucial to determine the most appropriate surgical approach of cholecystectomy.

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
0
Share
Cite this
GOST |
Cite this
GOST Copy
Derlatka K. et al. Comparative analysis of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted cholecystectomy: a literature review // Medical Science Pulse. 2024. Vol. 18. No. SUPPLEMENT 3. pp. 1-10.
GOST all authors (up to 50) Copy
Derlatka K., Tasior J., Kulczycka M., Skoczylas T., Wyroślak-Najs J. Comparative analysis of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted cholecystectomy: a literature review // Medical Science Pulse. 2024. Vol. 18. No. SUPPLEMENT 3. pp. 1-10.
RIS |
Cite this
RIS Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.5604/01.3001.0054.7119
UR - https://medicalsciencepulse.com/gicid/01.3001.0054.7119
TI - Comparative analysis of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted cholecystectomy: a literature review
T2 - Medical Science Pulse
AU - Derlatka, Kamila
AU - Tasior, Justyna
AU - Kulczycka, Marika
AU - Skoczylas, Tomasz
AU - Wyroślak-Najs, Justyna
PY - 2024
DA - 2024/08/16
PB - Index Copernicus
SP - 1-10
IS - SUPPLEMENT 3
VL - 18
SN - 2544-1558
SN - 2544-1620
ER -
BibTex |
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors) Copy
@article{2024_Derlatka,
author = {Kamila Derlatka and Justyna Tasior and Marika Kulczycka and Tomasz Skoczylas and Justyna Wyroślak-Najs},
title = {Comparative analysis of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted cholecystectomy: a literature review},
journal = {Medical Science Pulse},
year = {2024},
volume = {18},
publisher = {Index Copernicus},
month = {aug},
url = {https://medicalsciencepulse.com/gicid/01.3001.0054.7119},
number = {SUPPLEMENT 3},
pages = {1--10},
doi = {10.5604/01.3001.0054.7119}
}
MLA
Cite this
MLA Copy
Derlatka, Kamila, et al. “Comparative analysis of open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted cholecystectomy: a literature review.” Medical Science Pulse, vol. 18, no. SUPPLEMENT 3, Aug. 2024, pp. 1-10. https://medicalsciencepulse.com/gicid/01.3001.0054.7119.