Se establecen unos criterios de inclusión y exclusión y se obtienen dos grupos homogéneos de pacientes, a los que se estudia con el mismo protocolo, analizando las incidencias operatorias, cuidados postoperatorios, morbimortalidad, costes y seguimiento a distancia.
Resultados. Los resultados clínicos, estéticos o los costes no se decantan hacia ninguna de las técnicas estudiadas, pero la exposición es mejor con la laparoscópica.
Conclusiones. La cirugía laparoscópica debe ser la técnica de elección, reservando la minilaparotomía para los casos de conversión y en principio para aquella patología que el cirujano considera que no se debe resolver por esta vía.
Patients and methods. The present report deals with a prospective, randomized study of 150 patients, 75 of whom underwent minilaparotomy and the remaining 75, laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established, resulting in two homogeneous groups of patients that were studied according to the same protocol. The intraoperative events, postoperative care, morbidity, mortality, costs and long-term follow-up were analyzed.
Results. Neither the clinical results, cosmetic results nor costs indicated greater benefits with one technique or the other. However, laparoscopy enabled a more thorough exploration of the abdominal cavity.
Conclusion. Laparoscopic surgery should be the technique of choice, reserving minilaparotomy for cases in which conversion to open surgery is necessary and for those procedures that the surgeon feels unprepared to perform by laparoscopic surgery.