Aim: The well known advantages of the standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy are attributed to the small four port incisions with less surgical trauma than open surgery. Accordingly, reduction of the number of ports may be proposed to maximize the advantages of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this work was to try the feasibility of the three port laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to evaluate if there is a potential advantage over the standard 4 port technique. 
Materials and Methods: This study included 60 cases divided into 2 equal groups. Patients in the first group (GI) were subjected to standard four port cholecystectomy, while in the second group (GII) the operations were done through three ports. Operations in GII were carried out by one surgeon using 2 handed techniques and a camera man technician. 
Results: Omitting of the fourth port in GII did not affect the operative field. In GII, only 2 cases needed a fourth port and the conversion rate to open surgery was 3.3% as similar as in GI.The post operative pain was indicated by the number of intramuscular NSAI analgesic injections which was significantly higher in GI (1.3±0.7) than in GII (0.9±0.6) with p < 0.05.There was no mortality or significant morbidities in both groups. 
Conclusion: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy through three ports is a feasible and safe technique. It gives more satisfactory results to the patients, particularly those with cosmetic wise concept.