Investigators want to assess the safety and efficacy of using abdominal drainage with not using any drainage, by estimating different outcomes after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for different reasons. Patients are seen at the Accident and Emergency Department or in the surgical wards at Aleppo University Hospital (AUH) over 12 months period.

The routine use of prophylactic drainage has become common in many hospitals around the world after cholecystectomy for different reasons. In elective surgeries, the evidence does not support the use of drainage. But in emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgeries, using drainage remains controversial. Surgeons who support the use of drainage find it useful to identify the early complications of surgery and removing intra-abdominal collections, while opponents of drainage use believe that it increases the risk of wound infection. But, a systematic review and meta-analysis discussed the ineffectiveness of the routine use of the prophylactic drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis and requested more randomized clinical trial studies on the subject. However, this study and others in the medical literature contain very few high-quality randomized controlled trials, hence our randomized controlled trial compares the use and non-use of drainage in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for different reasons.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Patients are seen at the Accident and Emergency Department or in the surgical wards at Aleppo University Hospital (AUH) over 12 months period.
• Patients who undergo cholecystectomy for any reason.

Exclusion Criteria:

• Non-cooperative patients for regular follow up.
• Draining for therapeutic indications.

We will publish the data after publishing the research.