-
Digestive Surgery 2016Preoperative risk factors for the conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery have been identified, but never been explored systematically. Our objective... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Preoperative risk factors for the conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery have been identified, but never been explored systematically. Our objective was to systematically present the evidence of preoperative risk factors for conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery.
METHODS
PubMed and Embase were searched systematically in March 2014. Observational studies evaluating preoperative risk factors for conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery in patients with gallstone disease were included. The outcome variables extracted were patient demographics, medical history, severity of gallstone disease, and preoperative laboratory values.
RESULTS
A total of 1,393 studies were screened for eligibility. We found 32 studies, including 460,995 patients operated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy, eligible for the systematic review. Of these, 10 studies were suitable for 7 meta-analyses on age, gender, body mass index, previous abdominal surgery, severity of disease, white blood cell count, and gallbladder wall thickness.
CONCLUSIONS
A gallbladder wall thicker than 4-5 mm, a contracted gallbladder, age above 60 or 65, male gender, and acute cholecystitis were risk factors for the conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery. Furthermore, there was no association between diabetes mellitus or white blood cell count and conversion to open surgery.
Topics: Age Factors; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholecystitis, Acute; Conversion to Open Surgery; Gallbladder; Humans; Preoperative Period; Risk Factors; Sex Factors
PubMed: 27160289
DOI: 10.1159/000445505 -
World Journal of Gastrointestinal... Aug 2015To investigate the role of laparoscopy in diagnosis and treatment of intra abdominal infections.
AIM
To investigate the role of laparoscopy in diagnosis and treatment of intra abdominal infections.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed including studies where intra abdominal infections were treated laparoscopically.
RESULTS
Early laparoscopic approaches have become the standard surgical technique for treating acute cholecystitis. The laparoscopic appendectomy has been demonstrated to be superior to open surgery in acute appendicitis. In the event of diverticulitis, laparoscopic resections have proven to be safe and effective procedures for experienced laparoscopic surgeons and may be performed without adversely affecting morbidity and mortality rates. However laparoscopic resection has not been accepted by the medical community as the primary treatment of choice. In high-risk patients, laparoscopic approach may be used for exploration or peritoneal lavage and drainage. The successful laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers for experienced surgeons, is demonstrated to be safe and effective. Regarding small bowel perforations, comparative studies contrasting open and laparoscopic surgeries have not yet been conducted. Successful laparoscopic resections addressing iatrogenic colonic perforation have been reported despite a lack of literature-based evidence supporting such procedures. In post-operative infections, laparoscopic approaches may be useful in preventing diagnostic delay and controlling the source.
CONCLUSION
Laparoscopy has a good diagnostic accuracy and enables to better identify the causative pathology; laparoscopy may be recommended for the treatment of many intra-abdominal infections.
PubMed: 26328036
DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v7.i8.160 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jun 2015Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become a popular alternative to open cholecystectomy (OC) in the treatment of acute cholecystitis (AC). Laparoscopic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become a popular alternative to open cholecystectomy (OC) in the treatment of acute cholecystitis (AC). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is now considered the gold standard of therapy for symptomatic cholelithiasis and chronic cholecystitis. However no definitive data on its use in AC has been published. CIAO and CIAOW studies demonstrated 48.7% of AC were still operated with the open technique. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to compare OC and LC in AC.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic-review with meta-analysis and meta-regression of trials comparing open vs. laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with AC was performed. Electronic searches were performed using Medline, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCTR), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and CINAHL.
RESULTS
Ten trials have been included with a total of 1248 patients: 677 in the LC and 697 into the OC groups. The post-operative morbidity rate was half with LC (OR = 0.46). The post-operative wound infection and pneumonia rates were reduced by LC (OR 0.54 and 0.51 respectively). The post-operative mortality rate was reduced by LC (OR = 0.2). The mean postoperative hospital stay was significantly shortened in the LC group (MD = -4.74 days). There were no significant differences in the bile leakage rate, intraoperative blood loss and operative times.
CONCLUSIONS
In acute cholecystitis, post-operative morbidity, mortality and hospital stay were reduced by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Moreover pneumonia and wound infection rate were reduced by LC. Severe hemorrhage and bile leakage rates were not influenced by the technique. Cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis should be attempted laparoscopically first.
Topics: Blood Loss, Surgical; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis, Acute; Humans; Laparoscopy; Length of Stay; Operative Time; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 25958296
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2015.04.083 -
Health Technology Assessment... Aug 2014Approximately 10-15% of the adult population suffer from gallstone disease, cholelithiasis, with more women than men being affected. Cholecystectomy is the treatment of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cholecystectomy compared with observation/conservative management for preventing recurrent symptoms and complications in adults presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones or cholecystitis: a systematic review and economic evaluation.
BACKGROUND
Approximately 10-15% of the adult population suffer from gallstone disease, cholelithiasis, with more women than men being affected. Cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for people who present with biliary pain or acute cholecystitis and evidence of gallstones. However, some people do not experience a recurrence after an initial episode of biliary pain or cholecystitis. As most of the current research focuses on the surgical management of the disease, less attention has been dedicated to the consequences of conservative management.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cholecystectomy compared with observation/conservative management in people presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones (biliary pain) or cholecystitis.
DATA SOURCES
We searched all major electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Bioscience Information Service, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 1980 to September 2012 and we contacted experts in the field.
REVIEW METHODS
Evidence was considered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies that enrolled people with symptomatic gallstone disease (pain attacks only and/or acute cholecystitis). Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Standard meta-analysis techniques were used to combine results from included studies. A de novo Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.
RESULTS
Two Norwegian RCTs involving 201 participants were included. Eighty-eight per cent of people randomised to surgery and 45% of people randomised to observation underwent cholecystectomy during the 14-year follow-up period. Participants randomised to observation were significantly more likely to experience gallstone-related complications [risk ratio = 6.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 28.51; p = 0.01], in particular acute cholecystitis (risk ratio = 9.55; 95% CI 1.25 to 73.27; p = 0.03), and less likely to undergo surgery (risk ratio = 0.50; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.73; p = 0.0004), experience surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.81; p = 0.01) or, more specifically, minor surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.11; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.56; p = 0.008) than those randomised to surgery. Fifty-five per cent of people randomised to observation did not require an operation during the 14-year follow-up period and 12% of people randomised to cholecystectomy did not undergo the scheduled operation. The results of the economic evaluation suggest that, on average, the surgery strategy costs £1236 more per patient than the conservative management strategy but was, on average, more effective. An increase in the number of people requiring surgery while treated conservatively corresponded to a reduction in the cost-effectiveness of the conservative strategy. There was uncertainty around some of the parameters used in the economic model.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this assessment indicate that cholecystectomy is still the treatment of choice for many symptomatic people. However, approximately half of the people in the observation group did not require surgery or suffer complications in the long term indicating that a conservative therapeutic approach may represent a valid alternative to surgery in this group of people. Owing to the dearth of current evidence in the UK setting a large, well-designed, multicentre trial is needed.
STUDY REGISTRATION
The study was registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002817.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Adult; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Gallstones; Humans; Male; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 25164349
DOI: 10.3310/hta18550 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Aug 2014Of people admitted to hospital for biliary tract disease, 20% have acute cholecystitis. Up to the age of 50 years, acute calculous cholecystitis is three times more... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Of people admitted to hospital for biliary tract disease, 20% have acute cholecystitis. Up to the age of 50 years, acute calculous cholecystitis is three times more common in women than in men, and about one and a half times more common in women than in men thereafter. About 95% of people with acute cholecystitis have gallstones. Optimal therapy for acute cholecystitis, based on timing and severity of presentation, remains controversial.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for acute cholecystitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to October 2013 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 18 studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: early cholecystectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, observation alone, open cholecystectomy, and percutaneous cholecystostomy.
Topics: Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis, Acute; Gallstones; Humans
PubMed: 25144428
DOI: No ID Found -
World Journal of Gastroenterology Jan 2014To assess the rate of bile duct injuries (BDI) and overall biliary complications during single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) compared to conventional... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To assess the rate of bile duct injuries (BDI) and overall biliary complications during single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) compared to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC).
METHODS
SPLC has recently been proposed as an innovative surgical approach for gallbladder surgery. So far, its safety with respect to bile duct injuries has not been specifically evaluated. A systematic review of the literature published between January 1990 and November 2012 was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing SPLC versus CLC reporting BDI rate and overall biliary complications were included. The quality of RCT was assessed using the Jadad score. Analysis was made by performing a meta-analysis, using Review Manager 5.2. This study was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A retrospective study including all retrospective reports on SPLC was also performed alongside.
RESULTS
From 496 publications, 11 RCT including 898 patients were selected for meta-analysis. No studies were rated as high quality (Jadad score ≥ 4). Operative indications included benign gallbladder disease operated in an elective setting in all studies, excluding all emergency cases and acute cholecystitis. The median follow-up was 1 mo (range 0.03-18 mo). The incidence of BDI was 0.4% for SPLC and 0% for CLC; the difference was not statistically different (P = 0.36). The incidence of overall biliary complication was 1.6% for SPLC and 0.5% for CLC, the difference did not reached statistically significance (P = 0.21, 95%CI: 0.66-15). Sixty non-randomized trials including 3599 patients were also analysed. The incidence of BDI reported then was 0.7%.
CONCLUSION
The safety of SPLC cannot be assumed, based on the current evidence. Hence, this new technology cannot be recommended as standard technique for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Topics: Bile Ducts; Biliary Tract Diseases; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Humans; Patient Safety; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24574757
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i3.843 -
Journal of Visceral Surgery Feb 2014Ambulatory management is a modality of care defined in France by a hospitalization of less than 12h without an overnight stay. Currently, few data are available on its... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Ambulatory management is a modality of care defined in France by a hospitalization of less than 12h without an overnight stay. Currently, few data are available on its role in the management of gastrointestinal emergencies, such as appendectomy for acute appendicitis, cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis or emergency proctologic surgery. The aim of this systematic review was to study the published data regarding the feasibility of ambulatory management of emergency visceral surgery and to enquire about the possibilities of further development of this form of management.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A literature search was conducted from the PubMed(®) databank taking into account all published data up to July 2013.
RESULTS
For acute appendicitis, the success rate of short-stay hospitalization was 72% with unplanned read-mission rates ranging from 0 to 53%, a rate of unscheduled consultations ranging from 0 to 11%, and unplanned inpatient hospitalization rates ranging from 0% to 5%. For acute cholecystitis and proctology, there are few published data.
CONCLUSION
Ambulatory management has been sparingly studied in the setting of gastrointestinal surgical emergencies. However, there is probably a place for development of this form of management.
Topics: Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; Appendectomy; Appendicitis; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis, Acute; Emergencies; Humans; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24360353
DOI: 10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2013.10.007 -
International Journal of Surgery... 2012Gallbladder perforation is a serious complication of acute cholecystitis. Its management has evolved considerably since its classification by Niemeier in 1934. This... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Gallbladder perforation is a serious complication of acute cholecystitis. Its management has evolved considerably since its classification by Niemeier in 1934. This review summarises the evidence surrounding the natural progression of this condition and potential problems with Niemeier's classification, and proposes a management algorithm for the more complex type II perforation.
METHODS
Data from a retrospective case series and a systematic review were combined. The case series included all patients with gallbladder perforations from 2004 to 2008 at a British teaching hospital. The systematic review searched for gallbladder perforation using the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library (2011 Issue 4) databases, as well as recent conference abstracts. The outcome data were analysed using SPSS version 15. No adjustments were made for multiple testing.
RESULTS
198 patients (including 19 patients from the present series) with a mean age of 62.1+/-9.7 years and male gender proportion of 55.4% (range 33.3-76.7%) were included. The most common gallbladder perforations were type II (median 46.2%, range 7.4-83.3%), followed by type I (median 40.6%, range 16.7-70.0%) and type III (median 10.1%, range 0-48.1%). Perforation was associated with cholelithiasis in 86.6% (range 78.9-90.6%) of patients, and the overall median mortality rate was 10.8% (range 0-12.5%). Male gender was weakly associated with mortality (p = 0.089) but age (p = 0.877) and cholelithiasis (p = 0.425) were not. Mortality did not vary significantly with perforation type.
CONCLUSIONS
Gallbladder perforation should be reported according to the original Neimeier's classification to avoid heterogeneity in data (e.g. varying rates of perforation types). The algorithm proposed in this study aims to guide the management of complex type II gallbladder perforations to minimise subsequent morbidity and mortality.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Algorithms; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis, Acute; Decision Support Techniques; Female; Gallbladder Diseases; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Rupture, Spontaneous
PubMed: 22210542
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.12.004 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2011Of people admitted to hospital for biliary tract disease, 20% have acute cholecystitis. Up to the age of 50 years, acute calculous cholecystitis is three times more... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Of people admitted to hospital for biliary tract disease, 20% have acute cholecystitis. Up to the age of 50 years, acute calculous cholecystitis is three times more common in women than in men, and about 1.5 times more common in women than in men thereafter. About 95% of people with acute cholecystitis have gallstones. Optimal therapy for acute cholecystitis, based on timing and severity of presentation, remains controversial.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for acute cholecystitis? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to April 2011 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
RESULTS
We found 17 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: early cholecystectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, minilaparoscopic cholecystectomy, observation alone, open cholecystectomy, and percutaneous cholecystostomy.
Topics: Acute Disease; Biliary Tract; Biliary Tract Diseases; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholecystitis, Acute; Gallstones; Humans; Severity of Illness Index; Time Factors
PubMed: 22186260
DOI: No ID Found -
Asian Journal of Surgery Jan 2011Perforation of the duodenum, which is usually retroperitoneal, is a known complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Association of the... (Review)
Review
Perforation of the duodenum, which is usually retroperitoneal, is a known complication of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Association of the duodenal perforation with pneumothorax is rare and the development of tension pneumothorax is even rarer. We report a case of tension pneumothorax following an ERCP, which we successfully treated with chest tube insertion and laparotomy, and systematically review the other 10 cases reported in the literature. Four of these 10 cases had tension pneumothorax. All were to the right side of the chest. Patients were mainly female (7/10). The median (range) age was 70.5 (55-89) years. Four patients required surgery (40%) and one patient, who was not operated on, died (10%). Clinicians should be aware of this serious complication. Unexplained chest pain, dyspnoea, and oxygen desaturation with abdominal distension during ERCP must raise this possibility. Early clinical recognition and prompt management is essential to improve the outcome.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Chest Tubes; Cholangiography; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis; Cholestasis, Extrahepatic; Drainage; Duodenal Diseases; Early Diagnosis; Female; Gallstones; Humans; Iatrogenic Disease; Intestinal Perforation; Intraoperative Complications; Male; Middle Aged; Pneumothorax; Reoperation; Retropneumoperitoneum; Tomography, X-Ray Computed
PubMed: 21515213
DOI: 10.1016/S1015-9584(11)60018-3