title: Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  We evaluated reports of minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy as compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
  
  
  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.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  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.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, Yamamoto First Hospital, Osaka, Japan. oceanus0222@yahoo.co.jp
authors.forename: Shunsuke
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Hosono
authors.forename: Hirohisa
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Osaka
mesh_terms: D017081:Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic