Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

Purpose: We evaluated reports of minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy as compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Materials and methods: We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases for randomized controlled trials reported between January 1996 to December 2005. The outcome measures used were operative time, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, postoperative analgesic requirement, and cosmetic results. Meta-analysis methods were used to measure the pooled estimate of the effect size.

Results: Data from 712 patients (352 minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy and 360 conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy) in 12 randomized controlled trials were analyzed. The statistically significant advantages of minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy were less postoperative pain and better cosmesis. Conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy showed a trend to shorter operative time that did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusion: Minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy could be a feasible alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in select patients, resulting in less pain and better cosmetic results. Additional well-designed randomized controlled and, if possible, blinded trials, with large sample sizes, are required to confirm this conclusion.