We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Invited Critique |

Randomized Clinical Trial of Small-Incision and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Patients With Symptomatic Cholecystolithiasis: Primary and Clinical Outcomes—Invited Critique

Charles D. Mabry, MD
Arch Surg. 2008;143(4):377-378. doi:"10.1001/archsurg.143.4.377.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


The authors have chosen to question and then to carefully examine whether laparoscopy is a better method to remove a diseased gallbladder than by means of a minilaparotomy (defined as < 8-cm incision). In these halcyon days of laparoscopy and natural-orifice surgery, they were bold enough to question which minimal operation is best for cholecystectomy—and the answers, while not surprising, are important for the larger debate now under way in America regarding methods of approach and incision. The authors have done so by carefully constructing a study to analyze both initial outcome measures (complications, length of procedure, etc) and secondary outcomes (cost, time to return to work, etc). Their study is both unique among publications as well as interesting, in that they have strived to reduce outside factors that inadvertently creep into studies, thus contaminating results. Keus et al specifically designed the study to reduce the 4 key domains of bias: generation of the allocation sequence, allocation concealment, blinding for type of surgery, and follow-up.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles

Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: A Manual for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, 3rd ed