Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy

Roosevelt Fajardo, José Ignacio Valenzuela, Sandra Catalina Olaya, Gustavo Quintero, Gabriel Carrasquilla, Carlos Eduardo Pinzón, Catalina López, Juan Camilo Ramírez

Research output: Contribution to journalResearch Articlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations


Introduction: Cholecystectomy has been the subject of several clinical and cost comparison studies. Objective: The results of open or laparoscopy cholecystectomy were compared in terms of cost and effectiveness from the perspective of healthcare institutions and from that of the patients. Materials and methods: The cost-effectiveness study was undertaken at two university hospitals in Bogotá, Colombia. The approach was to select the type of cholecystectomy retrospectively and then assess the result prospectively. The cost analysis used the combined approach of micro-costs and daily average cost. Patient resource consumption was gathered from the time of surgery room entry to time of discharge. A sample of 376 patients with cholelithiasis/cystitis (May 2005-June 2006) was selected-156 underwent open cholecystectomy and 220 underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The following data were tabulated: (1) frequency of complications and mortality, post-surgical hospital stay, (2) reincorporation to daily activities, (3) surgery duration, (4) direct medical costs, (5) costs to the patient, and (6) mean and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results: Frequency of complications was 13.5% for open cholecystectomy and 6.4% for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (p=0.02); hospital stay was longer in open cholecystectomy than in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (p=0.003) as well as the reincorporation to daily activities reported by the patients (p
Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)514-524
Number of pages11
StatePublished - Dec 1 2011


Dive into the research topics of 'Cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this