This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (119)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

An Analysis of Complications

Bruce M. Wolfe, MD; Barry N. Gardiner, MD; Barbara F. Leary, PA-C, MHS; Charles F. Frey, MD

Arch Surg. 1991;126(10):1192-1198.

Abstract
• We analyzed our initial 381 endoscopic cholecystectomies with particular emphasis on postoperative complications. The rate of conversion to open cholecystectomy was 3%. A technical complication occurred in 2% and a nontechnical complication in 4%, for a total complication incidence of 6%. There were three postoperative fatalities (0.9%). Two fatal technical complications consisted of unrecognized intestinal injuries at the time of endoscopic cholecystectomy that were obvious when the abdomen was opened. One patient died of a cerebrovascular accident. Nonfatal technical complications included five bile leaks that required treatment. There were no common bile duct injuries, but excessive caution to prevent common bile duct injury may have contributed to the high incidence of bile leaks. Examination of the case numbers of the technical complications and conversion to open cholecystectomy suggests that the learning curve is real and somewhat prolonged, and that a willingness to convert to open cholecystectomy is necessary if technical complications are to be avoided.

(Arch Surg. 1991;126:1192-1198)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis, Sacramento.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication July 9, 1991.

Presented at the 62nd Annual Scientific Session of the Pacific Coast Surgical Association, Pebble Beach, Calif, February 18, 1991.

Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis, 4301 X St, Room 2310, Sacramento, CA 95817 (Dr Wolfe).

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

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

In Vivo Robotic Laparoscopy
Oleynikov et al.
SURG INNOV 2005;12:177-181.
ABSTRACT  

Acute Postoperative Pancreatitis After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Results of the Prospective Swiss Association of Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery Study
Z'graggen et al.
Arch Surg 1997;132:1026-1030.
ABSTRACT  

Techniques and Cost of Common Bile Duct Exploration
Petelin
SURG INNOV 1997;4:23-33.
ABSTRACT  

Complications of Laparoscopic Surgery: Surgical and Anesthetic Considerations
Dubelman
SURG INNOV 1994;1:219-222.
ABSTRACT  

Laparoscopic General Surgery
Soper et al.
NEJM 1994;330:409-419.
FULL TEXT  

Gasless Laparoscopy and Conventional Instruments: The Next Phase of Minimally Invasive Surgery
Smith et al.
Arch Surg 1993;128:1102-1107.
ABSTRACT  

The Early Experience With Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Oregon
Deveney
Arch Surg 1993;128:627-632.
ABSTRACT  

Diaphragm Function Is Not Impaired by Pneumoperitoneum After Laparoscopy
Benhamou et al.
Arch Surg 1993;128:430-432.
ABSTRACT  

Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy The New 'Gold Standard'?
Soper et al.
Arch Surg 1992;127:917-923.
ABSTRACT  

Intraperitoneal Carbon Dioxide Insufflation and Cardiopulmonary Functions: Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Pigs
Ho et al.
Arch Surg 1992;127:928-933.
ABSTRACT  

Surgery
Organ and Fry
JAMA 1992;268:413-414.
ABSTRACT