Minimally invasive surgery has significantly transformed modern operative practice, particularly with the widespread adoption of laparoscopic techniques. This study aims to comparatively analyze the impact of laparoscopic and open surgical approaches on postoperative complications and rehabilitation duration. A retrospective and prospective comparative design was employed, involving patients who underwent elective abdominal surgical procedures. Clinical parameters assessed included intraoperative blood loss, duration of surgery, postoperative pain intensity, incidence of infectious and non-infectious complications, length of hospital stay, and time to return to normal daily activities.

The findings indicate that laparoscopic surgery is associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss, lower postoperative pain scores, decreased incidence of wound infections, and shorter hospitalization periods compared to open surgery. However, operative time was moderately longer in laparoscopic procedures during the initial learning phase. Rehabilitation outcomes demonstrated significantly faster functional recovery in patients treated with minimally invasive techniques. Despite higher equipment costs and technical demands, laparoscopy showed superior short-term clinical outcomes and improved quality-of-life indicators.

The comparative analysis confirms that laparoscopic surgery offers substantial advantages in reducing postoperative morbidity and accelerating recovery, while open surgery remains indispensable in complicated and emergency cases. These findings contribute to evidence-based surgical decision-making and optimization of perioperative management strategies.

Laparoscopic surgery; Open surgery; Postoperative complications; Rehabilitation period; Minimally invasive surgery; Surgical outcomes; Hospital stay; Postoperative recovery; Clinical comparative analysis.

Mühe E. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy – late results // Langenbecks Archiv für Chirurgie. – 1991. – Vol. 376. – P. 206–209.

World Health Organization. Global Guidelines for Safe Surgery 2009: Safe Surgery Saves Lives. – Geneva: WHO Press, 2009. – 132 p.

Kehlet H., Wilmore D. W. Multimodal strategies to improve surgical outcome // American Journal of Surgery. – 2002. – Vol. 183, No. 6. – P. 630–641.

Gustafsson U. O., Scott M. J., Hubner M., et al. Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colorectal surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations // World Journal of Surgery. – 2019. – Vol. 43. – P. 659–695.

Dindo D., Demartines N., Clavien P.-A. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey // Annals of Surgery. – 2004. – Vol. 240, No. 2. – P. 205–213.

Ахроров, А. А., & Пулатова, Б., Назарова, Ш. (2021). Усовершенствование тактики хирургического лечения больных с травмой средней зоны лица. *Медицина и инновации*, 1(4), 199–204.

Ахроров, А.Ш. (2024). Одонтогенные инфекции головы и шеи. *World Scientific Research Journal*, 1 (Volume-25), 60–70.

Shavkatovich, A. A. (2023). Modern Aspects of Treatment of Odontogenic Sinusitis. *Genius Repository*, 25, 23–26.

Shavkatovich, A. A., & Davronovich, M. D. (2023). Peculiarities of the treatment algorithm for the congenital defect that crosses the palate. *Intent Research Scientific Journal*, 2, 101–107.

Ахроров, А.Ш., & Усмонов, Р.Ф. (2023). Лечения больных с травмой средней зоны лица путем виртуального моделирования. *Образование, наука и инновационные идеи в мире*, 13(6), 16–23. [6]

Brunicardi F. C., Andersen D. K., Billiar T. R., et al. Schwartz’s Principles of Surgery. – 11th ed. – New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2019. – 2080 p.

Townsend C. M., Beauchamp R. D., Evers B. M., Mattox K. L. Sabiston Textbook of Surgery: The Biological Basis of Modern Surgical Practice. – 21st ed. – Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2022. – 2300 p.

Bittner R. Laparoscopic surgery – 15 years after clinical introduction // World Journal of Surgery. – 2006. – Vol. 30. – P. 1190–1203.

Scott M. J., Baldini G., Fearon K. C., et al. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for gastrointestinal surgery, part 1: Pathophysiological considerations // Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. – 2015. – Vol. 59. – P. 1212–1231.

Weiser T. G., Regenbogen S. E., Thompson K. D., et al. An estimation of the global volume of surgery: A modelling strategy based on available data // The Lancet. – 2008. – Vol. 372. – P. 139–144.