-
The American Surgeon Mar 2024This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare clinical outcomes in patients with complicated acute cholecystitis undergoing laparoscopic total vs subtotal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare clinical outcomes in patients with complicated acute cholecystitis undergoing laparoscopic total vs subtotal cholecystectomy.
METHODS
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and queried PubMed, Embase, ProQuest, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases from inception to May 2023. The primary outcome was complication rates including common bile duct injury, wound infection, reoperation, bile leak, retained stones, and subhepatic collection, whereas secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay.
RESULTS
A total of 7 studies with 135,233 cases were included for meta-analysis. Patients who underwent laparoscopic total cholecystectomy had a significantly lower risk of postoperative bile leaks (RR: .15; 95% CI: .03, .80) and subhepatic fluid collection (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: .06, .63) and were 2.94 times less likely to die compared to those who underwent subtotal cholecystectomy (RR .34; 95% CI: .15, .77). Patients who underwent subtotal cholecystectomy had significantly longer hospital length of stay (mean difference 1.0 days; 95% CI: .5 days, 1.4 days).
CONCLUSIONS
In adult patients presenting with complicated cholecystitis, management with laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy presents a unique complication profile with increased risk of postoperative bile leak and subhepatic fluid collection, in-hospital mortality, and longer hospital length-of-stay when used as an alternative approach to laparoscopic total cholecystectomy. Further research into the most appropriate clinical scenarios and patient populations for the use of the subtotal cholecystectomy approach may prove useful in improving its associated outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cholecystectomy; Laparoscopy; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholecystitis, Acute; Cholecystitis
PubMed: 37966455
DOI: 10.1177/00031348231216482 -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Aug 2021Severity of cholecystitis can be defined by the presence of histopathological changes such as gangrene, perforation, and empyema. Severe cholecystitis correlates with... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Severity of cholecystitis can be defined by the presence of histopathological changes such as gangrene, perforation, and empyema. Severe cholecystitis correlates with higher morbidity and longer hospital stay. The present review aimed to identify the predictors of severe cholecystitis.
METHODS
Electronic databases including PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane library were searched in the period of January 1980 to March 2019. The main outcome of this review was to assess the predictability of pre-operative parameters such as Leukocytosis, fever, tachycardia, gallbladder wall edema, gallbladder distension, serum platelet count, and gallbladder mural striation. The role of patients' characteristics including age, gender, and diabetes mellitus in predicting severe cholecystitis was also assessed.
RESULTS
A total of 8823 patients were analysed. The mean age of patients was 67.14 ± 4.17. The parameters that had the highest Odds ratio in predicting severe cholecystitis were all findings on CT scanning and included attenuation of arterial phase, mural striation of the gallbladder, and decreased gallbladder wall enhancement.
CONCLUSION
We conclude that CT findings were the most significant predictors of severe cholecystitis. Patients with clinical and laboratory predictors of severe cholecystitis should be urgently evaluated with contrast CT scan to rule out any severe complications.
Topics: Cholecystitis; Gallbladder Diseases; Gangrene; Humans; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 32703731
DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2020.06.010 -
Surgical Endoscopy Dec 2016Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural stenting for gallbladder drainage is an emerging alternative for the treatment of acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural stenting for gallbladder drainage is an emerging alternative for the treatment of acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients. A variety of stents have been described, including plastic stents, self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs), and lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs). LAMSs represent the only specifically designed stent for transmural gallbladder drainage. A systematic review was performed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of EUS-guided drainage (EUS-GBD) in acute cholecystitis using different types of stents.
METHODS
A computer-assisted literature search up to September 2015 was performed using two electronic databases, MEDLINE and EMBASE. Search terms included MeSH and non-MeSH terms relating to acute cholecystitis, gallbladder drainage, endoscopic gallbladder drainage, endoscopic ultrasound gallbladder drainage, alone or in combination. Additional articles were retrieved by hand-searching from references of relevant studies. Pooled technical success, clinical success, and adverse event rates were calculated.
RESULTS
Twenty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, and the eligible cases were 166. The overall technical success rate, clinical success rate, and frequency of adverse events were 95.8, 93.4, and 12.0 %, respectively. The technical success rate was 100 % using plastic stents, 98.6 % using SEMSs, and 91.5 % using LAMSs. The clinical success rate was 100, 94.4, and 90.1 % after the deployment of plastic stents, SEMSs, and LAMSs, respectively. The frequency of adverse events was 18.2 % using plastic stents, 12.3 % using SEMSs, and 9.9 % using LAMSs.
CONCLUSIONS
Among the different drainage approaches in the non-surgical management of acute cholecystitis, EUS-guided transmural stenting for gallbladder drainage appears to be feasible, safe, and effective. LAMSs seem to have high potentials in terms of efficacy and safety, although further prospective studies are needed.
Topics: Cholecystitis, Acute; Drainage; Endosonography; Humans; Stents; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Interventional
PubMed: 27059975
DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-4894-x -
Clinical Journal of Gastroenterology Oct 2021Biliary hyperkinesia is typically diagnosed in patients with biliary-like pain and no evidence of gall stones on imaging modalities but who have had biliary scintigraphy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Biliary hyperkinesia is typically diagnosed in patients with biliary-like pain and no evidence of gall stones on imaging modalities but who have had biliary scintigraphy scan (HIDA) that shows ejection fraction ≥ 80%. This study aims to identify whether the removal of the gall bladder can alleviate the symptoms associated with biliary hyperkinesia. Systematic search following PRISMA guidelines was done from inception to January 2020 using PubMed/Medline, OVID, Embase, Cochrane database of systemic reviews, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and Cochrane library databases. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes together with 95% confidence intervals (CI) or mean differences (MD) or standardized MD (SMD) for continuous outcomes. A meta-analysis was done using random-effect model in RevMan 5.4 software. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. A total of 332 patients diagnosed with biliary hyperkinesia underwent cholecystectomy, of whom 303 (91.3%) reported symptomatic improvement RR 8.67 (95% CI 4.95, 15.16) P = 0.01. Six studies described abnormal histological features in 163/181 (90.05%) with high GB EF. RR 7.88 (95% CI 3.94, 15.75) P = 0.08. Chronic cholecystitis n = 155 (95%), cholesterolosis n = 7 (4.3%), and one showed features of acute cholecystitis. Patients with typical biliary colic symptoms without gallstones and markedly high ejection fraction might benefit from having cholecystectomy to alleviate their symptoms.
Topics: Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis, Acute; Gallbladder Diseases; Gallstones; Humans; Hyperkinesis
PubMed: 34115337
DOI: 10.1007/s12328-021-01463-x -
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery May 2022The aim of this review was to examine whether neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) can predict the presence of cholecystitis and distinguish between simple and severe... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The aim of this review was to examine whether neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) can predict the presence of cholecystitis and distinguish between simple and severe cholecystitis.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effects model was used to calculate mean difference (MD) in two situations: (a) no cholecystitis versus cholecystitis and (b) simple versus severe cholecystitis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to determine cut-off values of NLR for the above situations.
RESULTS
Ten retrospective studies comprising of 2827 patients were included. Three hundred twenty-seven had no cholecystitis, 2100 had simple cholecystitis and the remaining 400 had severe cholecystitis. NLR was significantly higher in acute cholecystitis compared to "no cholecystitis" (MD = 8.05 (95% CI 7.71-8.38), p < 0.01) and in severe cholecystitis when compared with simple cholecystitis (MD = 3.14 (95% CI 1.26-5.02), p < 0.01). For patients with cholecystitis compared to those without cholecystitis, an NLR cut-off value of 2.98 was identified (AUC = 0.90). Logistic regression analysis confirmed an NLR > 2.9 was an independent predictor of cholecystitis (OR 36.0, p = 0.006). In simple versus severe cholecystitis, an NLR cut-off value of 8.5 was identified (AUC = 0.73). Binary logistic regression analysis suggested an NLR > 8.5 was not an independent predictor of severe cholecystitis (OR 6.5 p = 0.090).
CONCLUSION
NLR is significantly higher in patients with cholecystitis of any severity compared to patients without cholecystitis. Moreover, NLR can predict acute cholecystitis. However, NLR cannot predict the severity of disease due to inadequately powered studies. Future research is required.
Topics: Cholecystitis; Cholecystitis, Acute; Humans; Lymphocytes; Neutrophils; Prognosis; ROC Curve; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 34746977
DOI: 10.1007/s00423-021-02350-2 -
Translational Gastroenterology and... 2023Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients admitted with acute cholecystitis is considered the preferred, feasible and safe mode of managing gallstone disease. The...
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients admitted with acute cholecystitis is considered the preferred, feasible and safe mode of managing gallstone disease. The objective of this study is to evaluate the role of single-dose pre-operative prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing emergency LC for mild to moderate acute cholecystitis.
METHODS
All randomized control trials (RCTs) reporting the use of single-dose pre-operative prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing acute cholecystectomy were retrieved from the search of standard medical electronic databases and analysis was conducted by using the principles of meta-analysis on the statistical software RevMan version 5.
RESULTS
Standard medical databases search produced only 3 RCTs on 781 patients undergoing acute cholecystectomy. There were 384 patients in single dose pre-operative antibiotics group whereas 397 patients were recruited in the no-antibiotics group. In the random effects model analysis, the use of single-dose preoperative prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing acute cholecystectomy for mild to moderate cholecystitis failed to demonstrate any extra advantage of reducing the risk of [risk ratio (RR) =0.69; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-1.03; Z=1.80; P=0.07] infective complications. There was no heterogeneity [Tau =0; Chi =1.74, df =2 (P=0.42; I=0%)] among included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
A preoperative single dose of prophylactic antibiotics in patients undergoing acute LC for mild to moderate acute cholecystitis does not offer extra benefits to reduce infective complications.
PubMed: 38021359
DOI: 10.21037/tgh-23-48 -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Jun 2021Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered to be the gold standard in the early management of acute cholecystitis however, recommendations for routine drain... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered to be the gold standard in the early management of acute cholecystitis however, recommendations for routine drain insertion in the acute setting are unavailable.
STUDY DESIGN
A systematic review of literature review and metanalysis was conducted. All studies comparing drain versus no drain after LC for acute cholecystitis were included.
RESULTS
Seven studies, with 1274 patients, were included. Postoperative wound infection rates (relative risk (RR) 0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.88; I2 = 0%) and postoperative abdominal collection requiring drainage (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.12; I 2 = 0%) were lower in the no-drain group, but this was only significant for wounded infections on subgroup analysis of RCTs. Length of stay hospital (mean difference (MD) -0.49, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.09; I 2 = 69%) and operative time (MD -8.13, 95% CI -13.87 to -2.38; I 2 = 92%) were significantly shorter in the no drain group however this was in the context of significant heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION
The available data suggests that acute cholecystitis is not an indication for routine drain placement after LC. However, these results must be interpreted with caution due to the limitations of the included studies. In effect, the main issue of this meta-analysis lies on the limitations of the included studies themselves, because of a considerable heterogeneity among the included works, particularly for the inclusion criteria of patients and reported severity of acute cholecystitis. Further work is required to produce evidence which will definitively alter clinical practice.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level 2a (systematic review of cohort studies). Oxford CEBM levels of evidence.
Topics: Abdomen; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholecystitis, Acute; Drainage; Humans; Length of Stay
PubMed: 32713729
DOI: 10.1016/j.surge.2020.04.011 -
Deutsches Arzteblatt International Aug 2016Besides cholecystectomy (CC), percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) has been recommended for the management of critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis. However,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Besides cholecystectomy (CC), percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) has been recommended for the management of critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis. However, solid evidence on the benefit of PC in this subgroup of patients is lacking.
METHODS
In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews, we systematically searched the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus for relevant studies published between 2000 and 2014. Two investigators independently screened the studies included.
RESULTS
Six studies with a total of 337 500 patients (PC 10 045, CC 327 455) were included for meta-analysis. Significant differences in favor of CC were recorded with regard to the rate of mortality (OR 4.28, [1.72 to 10.62], p = 0.0017), length of hospital stay (OR 1.41, [1.02 to 1.95], p = 0.04), and the rate of readmission for biliary complaints (OR 2.16, [1.72 to 2.73], p<0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference between both intervention arms with regard to complications (OR 0.74, [0.36 to 1.53], p = 0.42) and re-interventions (OR 7.69, [0.68 to 87.33], p = 0.10).
CONCLUSION
The benefit of percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) over cholecystectomy (CC) in the management of critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis could not be proven in this systematic review.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis, Acute; Cholecystostomy; Critical Illness; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Incidence; Length of Stay; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Readmission; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Survival Rate; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27598871
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2016.0545 -
Cancers May 2023Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is a rescue technique for patients with malignant biliary obstruction who fail conventional treatment with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is a rescue technique for patients with malignant biliary obstruction who fail conventional treatment with ERCP or EUS-guided biliary drainage. The technique has been successfully employed in the management of acute cholecystitis in patients not fit for surgery. However, the evidence for its use in malignant obstruction is less robust. This review article aims to evaluate the data available at present to better understand the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage.
METHODS
A detailed literature review was conducted and several databases were searched for any studies relating to EUS-GBD in malignant biliary obstruction. Pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for clinical success and adverse events.
RESULTS
Our search identified 298 studies related to EUS-GBD. The final analysis included 7 studies with 136 patients. The pooled rate of clinical success (95% CI) was 85% (78-90%, I: 0%). The pooled rate of adverse events (95% CI) was 13% (7-19%, I: 0%). Adverse events included: peritonitis, bleeding, bile leakage, stent migration, and stent occlusion. No deaths directly related to the procedure were reported; however, in some of the studies, deaths occurred due to disease progression.
CONCLUSION
This review supports the use of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage as a rescue option for patients who have failed conventional measures.
PubMed: 37296955
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15112988 -
BMC Surgery Nov 2018The timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) performed after the mild acute biliary pancreatitis (MABP) is still controversial. We conducted a review to compare... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) performed after the mild acute biliary pancreatitis (MABP) is still controversial. We conducted a review to compare same-admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SA-LC) and delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) after mild acute biliary pancreatitis (MABP).
METHODS
We systematically searched several databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) for relevant trials published from 1 January 1992 to 1 June 2018. Human prospective or retrospective studies that compared SA-LC and DLC after MABP were included. The measured outcomes were the rate of conversion to open cholecystectomy (COC), rate of postoperative complications, rate of biliary-related complications, operative time (OT), and length of stay (LOS). The meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3 software (The Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom).
RESULTS
This meta-analysis involved 1833 patients from 4 randomized controlled trials and 7 retrospective studies. No significant differences were found in the rate of COC (risk ratio [RR] = 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-1.97; p = 0.36), rate of postoperative complications (RR = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.67-1.69; p = 0.80), rate of biliary-related complications (RR = 1.28; 95% CI, 0.42-3.86; p = 0.66), or OT (RR = 1.57; 95% CI, - 1.58-4.72; p = 0.33) between the SA-LC and DLC groups. The LOS was significantly longer in the DLC group (RR = - 2.08; 95% CI, - 3.17 to - 0.99; p = 0.0002). Unexpectedly, the subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in LOS according to the Atlanta classification (RR = - 0.40; 95% CI, - 0.80-0.01; p = 0.05). The gallstone-related complications during the waiting time in the DLC group included gall colic, recurrent pancreatitis, acute cholecystitis, jaundice, and acute cholangitis (total, 25.39%).
CONCLUSION
This study confirms the safety of SA-LC, which could shorten the LOS. However, the study findings have a number of important implications for future practice.
Topics: Acute Disease; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Gallstones; Humans; Pancreatitis; Time Factors
PubMed: 30486807
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-018-0445-9