-
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 -
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 -
HPB : the Official Journal of the... Oct 2022Compare outcomes of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) and percutaneous trans-hepatic drainage of gallbladder (PTGBD) as an initial intervention for AC and to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Outcome of early cholecystectomy compared to percutaneous drainage of gallbladder and delayed cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis: systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Compare outcomes of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) and percutaneous trans-hepatic drainage of gallbladder (PTGBD) as an initial intervention for AC and to compare operative outcomes of ELC and delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC).
METHODS
English-language studies published until December 2020 were searched. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies compared EC and PTGBD with delayed cholecystectomy for patients presented with acute cholecystitis were considered. Main outcomes were mortality, conversion to open, complications and length of hospital stay.
RESULTS
Out of 1347 records, 14 studies were included. 205,361 (94.7%) patients had EC and 11,565 (5.3%) patients had PTGBD as an initial intervention for AC. Mortality was higher in PTGBD; HR, 95% CI: [3.68 (2.13, 6.38)]. In contrast, complication rate was significantly higher in EC group (47%) vs PTGBD group (8.7%) in patients admitted to ICU; P-value = 0.011. Patients who had ELC were at higher risk of post-operative complications compared to DLC; RR [95% CI]: 2.88 [1.78, 4.65]. Risk of bile duct injury was six folds more in ELC; RR [95% CI]: 6.07 [1.67, 21.99].
CONCLUSION
ELC may be a preferred treatment option over PTGBD in AC. However, patient and disease specific factors should be considered to avoid unfavourable outcomes with ELC.
Topics: Humans; Gallbladder; Time Factors; Cholecystitis, Acute; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Drainage; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 35597717
DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2022.04.010 -
The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care... Nov 2022Timely management is critical for treating symptomatic common bile duct (CBD) stones; however, a single optimal management strategy has yet to be defined in the acute... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Timely management is critical for treating symptomatic common bile duct (CBD) stones; however, a single optimal management strategy has yet to be defined in the acute care setting. Consequently, this systematic review and network meta-analysis, comparing one-stage (CBD exploration or intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP] with simultaneous cholecystectomy) and two-stage (precholecystectomy or postcholecystectomy ERCP) procedures, was undertaken with the main outcomes of interest being postprocedural complications and hospital length of stay (LOS).
METHODS
PubMed, SCOPUS, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were methodically queried for articles from 2010 to 2021. The search terms were a combination of medical subject headings terms and the subsequent terms: gallstone; common bile duct (stone); choledocholithiasis; cholecystitis; endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/ERCP; common bile duct exploration; intraoperative, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography; stone extraction; and one-stage and two-stage procedure. Studies that compared two procedures or more were included, whereas studies not recording complications (bile leak, hemorrhage, pancreatitis, perforation, intra-abdominal infections, and other infections) or LOS were excluded. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the four different approaches for managing CBD stones.
RESULTS
A total of 16 studies (8,644 participants) addressing the LOS and 41 studies (19,756 participants) addressing postprocedural complications were included in the analysis. The one-stage approaches were associated with a decrease in LOS compared with the two-stage approaches. Common bile duct exploration demonstrated a lower overall risk of complications compared with preoperative ERCP, but there were no differences in the overall risk of complications in the remaining comparisons. However, differences in specific postprocedural complications were detected between the four different approaches managing CBD stones.
CONCLUSION
This network meta-analysis suggests that both laparoscopic CBD exploration and intraoperative ERCP have equally good outcomes and provide a preferable single-anesthesia patient pathway with a shorter overall length of hospital stay compared with the two-stage approaches.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Systematic Review/Meta Analysis; Level III.
Topics: Humans; Gallstones; Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Network Meta-Analysis; Choledocholithiasis; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde; Common Bile Duct
PubMed: 35939370
DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000003755 -
World Journal of Emergency Surgery :... Nov 2023An updated overview of ultrasound (US) for diagnosis of acute cholecystitis (AC) remains lacking. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
An updated overview of ultrasound (US) for diagnosis of acute cholecystitis (AC) remains lacking. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of US for AC.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We meticulously screened articles from MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, spanning from inception to August 2023. We employed the search strategy combining the keywords "bedside US", "emergency US" or "point-of-care US" with "AC". Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts of the retrieved articles to identify suitable studies. The inclusion criteria encompassed articles investigating the diagnostic performance of US for AC. Data regarding diagnostic performance, sonographers, and sonographic findings including the presence of gallstone, gallbladder (GB) wall thickness, peri-GB fluid, or sonographic Murphy sign were extracted, and a meta-analysis was executed. Case reports, editorials, and review articles were excluded, as well as studies focused on acalculous cholecystitis. The study quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool.
RESULTS
Forty studies with 8,652 patients were included. The majority of studies had a low risk of bias and applicability concerns. US had a pooled sensitivity of 71% (95% CI, 69-72%), a specificity of 85% (95% CI, 84-86%), and an accuracy of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.82-0.83) for the diagnosis of AC. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 71% (95% CI, 67-74%) and 92% (95% CI, 90-93%) performed by emergency physicians (EPs), 79% (95% CI, 71-85%) and 76% (95% CI, 69-81%) performed by surgeons, and 68% (95% CI 66-71%) and 87% (95% CI, 86-88%) performed by radiologists, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences among the three groups.
CONCLUSION
US is a good imaging modality for the diagnosis of AC. EP-performed US has a similar diagnostic performance to radiologist-performed US. Further investigations would be needed to investigate the impact of US on expediting the management process and improving patient-centered outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Cholecystitis, Acute; Ultrasonography; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 38037062
DOI: 10.1186/s13017-023-00524-5 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2022Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients with clinically acute presentations have been approached differently. The fear of viral transmission along...
INTRODUCTION
Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients with clinically acute presentations have been approached differently. The fear of viral transmission along with the short period of study made patients delay their hospital visits and doctors reassess the approach of certain acute situations. This study aimed to assess the changes in the management of patients with acute cholecystitis before and during COVID-19.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature using PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and ScienceDirect databases was performed until 01 September 2021. Totally, two kinds of studies were included, those assessing the management of acute cholecystitis during COVID-19 and those comparing the periods before and during the pandemic. The outcomes recorded include management approaches, complications, and mean length of stay.
RESULTS
A number of 15 eligible articles were included in the study. During the pandemic, six studies revealed a shift toward conservative management of acute cholecystitis and five of them reported that conservative management was opted in 73% of the patients. On the contrary, data from all studies revealed that the surgical approach was preferred in only 29.2% of patients. Furthermore, when comparing the periods before vs. during COVID-19, the conservative approach was reported in 36.3 and 43.2% before vs. during COVID-19, respectively, whereas surgical intervention was performed in 62.5% of patients before COVID-19 and 55.3% during the pandemic. The length of stay was delayed when a non-surgical approach was selected in most studies. Complications, mainly classified by the Clavien-Dindo scale, were higher in the pandemic period.
CONCLUSION
A tendency toward more conservative approaches was observed in most studies, reversing the previously used surgical approach in most cases of acute cholecystitis. In most of the examined cases during the COVID-19 pandemic, antibiotic treatment and percutaneous cholecystostomy were much more considered and even preferred.
PubMed: 35495756
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.871685 -
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 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jul 2023This systematic review aims to investigate whether percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder biliary drainage (PTGBD) is superior to emergency cholecystectomy (EC) as a... (Review)
Review
Management of Acute Cholecystitis in High-Risk Patients: Percutaneous Gallbladder Drainage as a Definitive Treatment vs. Emergency Cholecystectomy-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
BACKGROUND
This systematic review aims to investigate whether percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder biliary drainage (PTGBD) is superior to emergency cholecystectomy (EC) as a definitive treatment in high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis (AC).
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed until December 2022 using the Scopus, Medline/PubMed and Web of Science databases.
RESULTS
Seventeen studies have been included with a total of 783,672 patients (32,634 treated with PTGBD vs. 4663 who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 343 who had open cholecystectomy and 746,032 who had some form of cholecystectomy, but without laparoscopic or open approach being specified). An analysis of the results shows that PTGBD, despite being less invasive, is not associated with lower morbidity with respect to EC (RR 0.77 95% CI [0.44 to 1.34]; I = 99%; = 0.36). A lower postoperative mortality was reported in patients who underwent EC (2.37%) with respect to the PTGBD group (13.78%) (RR 4.21; 95% CI [2.69 to 6.58]; < 0.00001); furthermore, the risk of hospital readmission for biliary complications (RR 2.19 95% CI [1.72 to 2.79]; I = 48%; < 0.00001) and hospital stay (MD 4.29 95% CI [2.40 to 6.19]; < 0.00001) were lower in the EC group.
CONCLUSIONS
In our systematic review, the majority of studies have very low-quality evidence and more RCTs are needed; furthermore, PTGBD is inferior in the treatment of AC in high-risk patients. The definition of high-risk patients is important in interpreting the results, but the methods of assessment and definitions differ between studies. The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis failed to demonstrate any advantage of using PTGBD over ER as a definitive treatment of AC in critically ill patients, which suggests that EC should be considered as the treatment of choice even in very high-risk patients. Most likely, the inferiority of PTGBD versus early LC for high-risk patients is related to an association of various patient-side factor conditions and the severity of acute cholecystitis.
PubMed: 37568306
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12154903 -
Acute Cholecystitis Management During the COVID-19 Pandemic - A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Polski Przeglad Chirurgiczny Jan 2022<br><b>Aim:</b> The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of acute cholecystitis (AC) and review its possible management options during the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
<br><b>Aim:</b> The aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of acute cholecystitis (AC) and review its possible management options during the COVID-19 pandemic.</br> <br><b>Methods:</b> The present systematic review and meta-analysis was done in accordance with the PRISMA guideline. In August 2021, two independent reviewers reviewed a number of articles with the aim of finding studies on the management of acute cholecystitis during the COVID-19 pandemic. Articles were searched in the Cochrane, Embassies, and Medline libraries. Using the Stata statistical software 14, the estimated pooled rates were calculated. Funnel plot and I2 indices were applied for evaluating the heterogeneity between the studies.</br> <br><b>Results:</b> An overall of 8 studies consisting of 654 patients suspected for AC were included. The prevalence of COVID-19 among our included patients was 82% (95% CI: 79-84%, I2: 99.2%). Regarding the type of management, 35% (95% CI: 26-45%, I2: 46.9%) of patients undergone cholecystectomy, 47% (95% CI: 43-51%, I2: 54.4%) were managed by non-surgical methods, and 19% (95% CI: 14-23%, I2: 68.1%) of patients were treated by percutaneous cholecystostomy. The prevalence of grade 2 and 3 among our patients was 44 and 15%, respectively.</br> <br><b>Conclusions:</b> Considering the fact that due to the current pandemic, the number of patients referring with higher grades is assumed to be increased, early cholecystectomy remains the best management option for AC patients. However, LC seems not to be the most favorable option since it is associated with a relatively higher risk of contamination with COVID-19. PC can also be considered as a temporary and safe method in high-risk patients which might enable us to protect both patients and healthcare providers.</br>.
Topics: COVID-19; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystitis, Acute; Cholecystostomy; Humans; Pandemics
PubMed: 36047359
DOI: 10.5604/01.3001.0015.7099 -
BMJ Clinical Evidence Dec 2008Of 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 December 2006 (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 12 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, and open cholecystectomy.
Topics: Acute Disease; Cholecystectomy; Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic; Cholecystitis; Cholecystitis, Acute; Gallstones; Hospitalization; Humans; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 19445789
DOI: No ID Found