Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:8689329rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0008320lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8689329lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0162522lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8689329lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0439858lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8689329lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0443177lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:issue4lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:dateCreated1996-8-28lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:abstractTextThe authors evaluated the results after classical (CCHE) and laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCHE) in the period from March 16 1994 to June 30 1995. In this period they operated on 408 patients, out of which 208 were operated by the laparoscopic technique. There were no differences in postoperative morbidity. The mortality after laparoscopic surgery was 0% and the classical cholecystectomy reached the morbidity of 1.4%. Complicated patients were usually operated in the classical way. The time of hospitalisation after LCHE was 5.2 days and after CCHE 8.3 days. The results of LCHE were as follows: morbidity 10.5%, conversions 2.4%, reoperations 1.4%, and no leakage of the bile duct. We saved 40% of costs using LCHE. All these facts show that LCHE is advantageous, secure and well tolerated by patients. The patients prefer comfort after the operation, good cosmetic effect and a short hospital isation. CCHE did not lose its position, especially in complicated cases. (Tab. 5, Ref. 21.)lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:languageslolld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:monthAprlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:issn0006-9248lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorpubmed-author:PellSSlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MachanLLlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MazuchJJlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorpubmed-author:ZaherMMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BruncákPPlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorpubmed-author:LOILLlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorpubmed-author:CupkaIIlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:volume97lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:pagination220-3lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:dateRevised2009-11-11lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:8689329-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:year1996lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:articleTitle[Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classical cholecystectomy].lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:affiliationChirurgické oddelenie NsP v Lucenci, Slovakia.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:8689329pubmed:publicationTypeEnglish Abstractlld:pubmed