Open Cholecystectomy versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Management of Acute Cholecystitis: A Comparative Study | ||||
| International Journal of Medical Arts | ||||
| Articles in Press, Accepted Manuscript, Available Online from 25 May 2025 | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/ijma.2025.173513.1550 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Ammar Ibrahim Alsayed Hegazi  1; Nagah Atwa Salem1; Mohamed Ibrahim Albastawisy Narouz2
| ||||
| 1Department of Surgery, Damietta Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Damietta, Egypt | ||||
| 2Department of General Surgery, Damietta Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Background: Acute cholecystitis is a common surgical emergency, and the choice between open cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains a topic of debate. While laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the standard of care in elective cases, its role in managing acute cholecystitis is still under investigation. Aim of the work: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of open cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of acute cholecystitis. Patients and methods: This study was conducted on 40 cases scheduled for acute cholecystitis. The patients were split evenly into two groups: group A underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and group B had the open surgery approach. The two groups were then assessed based on surgical duration, surgical and post-surgical complications, post-operative pain levels, infection rates during recovery, time required for healing, length of hospital stay, and resumption of regular activities. Results: Operative time and duration of study were significantly longer in the group A than group B [54.12 ± 11.70, 5.56 ± 2.98 vs 46.1 ± 14.40, and 3.02 ± 1.75, respectively]. However, the mean time to start oral feeding was significantly shorter in laparoscopic than open approaches [1.40 ± 0.754 vs .05 ± 0.887 days]. Patients with laparoscopic interventions regains daily normal activities faster than the open approach and need lower postoperative analgesia. Conclusion: The open and laparoscopic approaches were effective and safe. However, laparoscopic technique was associated with shorter hospital stay, lower incidence of post-operative complications and lesser analgesic requirements. Thus, it can be recommended over open cholecystectomy. Despite extensive global literature on this topic, our study contributes localized data reflecting practical challenges and institutional outcomes. This can aid internal audits and continuous quality improvement efforts in surgical care. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Cholecystectomy; Laparoscopic; Acute Cholecystitis | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 73 |
||||
