A case-control study to compare the variability of operating time in laparoscopic and open surgery

The purpose of this study was to compare the variability of operating times for some of the most common gynaecological procedures performed laparoscopically and by open surgery. The case notes of 60 women randomly selected from a cohort of 600 who had undergone laparoscopic surgery for ectopic pregnancy, ovarian cysts, leiomyoma and hysterectomy were reviewed. These patients were matched with an equal number of women who had been treated by open surgery for similar indications. Additional matching criteria included age (+/-2 years), size of the lesion in cases of ovarian cysts and fibroids (+/-3 cm), the period of amenorrhoea in ectopic pregnancies, and uterine size and pelvic pathology in women undergoing hysterectomy. Comparison of laparoscopy and laparotomy showed that the mean procedure times were similar for the two routes of surgery, with the exception of hysterectomy which took significantly longer if done laparoscopically. The duration of laparoscopic surgery for ectopic pregnancy, ovarian cystectomy and hysterectomy was significantly less predictable than at laparotomy. These data indicate that with the exception of hysterectomy, the average operating time for laparoscopic procedures is comparable to that for laparotomy. In contrast, the variability of duration of laparoscopic surgery tends to be much greater than with laparotomy for all procedures considered.