Abstract

Ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is increasingly recognized for its advantages over the inpatient approach, which advantages include cost-effectiveness and faster recovery. However, its acceptance is limited by patient concerns regarding safety, and the potential for postoperative complications. The study aims to compare the operative and postoperative outcomes of ambulatory LC versus inpatient LC, specifically addressing patient hesitations related to early discharge. In a retrospective analysis, patients who underwent LC were divided into ambulatory or inpatient groups based on American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, age, and the availability of postoperative care. Propensity score matching was utilized to ensure comparability between the groups. Data collection focused on demographic information, perioperative data, and postoperative follow-up results to identify the safety of both approaches. The study included a cohort of 220 patients undergoing LC, of which 48 in each group matched post-propensity score matching. The matched analysis indicated that ambulatory LC patients seem to experience shorter operative times and reduced blood loss, but these differences were not statistically significant (35 minutes vs. 46 minutes, p-value = 0.18; and 8.5 mL vs. 23 mL, p-value = 0.14, respectively). There were no significant differences in complication rates or readmission frequencies, compared to the inpatient cohort. Ambulatory LC does not compromise safety or efficacy, compared to traditional inpatient procedures. The findings suggest that ambulatory LC could be more widely adopted, with appropriate patient education and selection criteria, to alleviate concerns and increase patient acceptance.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.