Abstract
Abstract
Background
The timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for emergency biliary admissions remains inconsistent with national and international guidelines. The perception that LC is difficult in acute cholecystitis and the popularity of the two-session approach to pancreatitis and suspected choledocholithiasis result in delayed management.
Methods
Analysis of prospectively maintained data in a unit adopting a policy of “intention to treat” during the index admission. The aim was to study the incidence of previous biliary admissions and compare the operative difficulty, complications and postoperative outcomes with patients who underwent index admission LC.
Results
Of the 5750 LC performed, 20.8% had previous biliary episodes resulting in one admission in 93% and two or more in 7%. Most presented with biliary colic (39.6%) and acute cholecystitis (27.6%). A previous biliary history was associated with increased operative difficulty (p < 0.001), longer operating times (86.9 vs. 68.1 min, p < 0.001), more postoperative complications (7.8% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.002) and longer hospital stay (8.1 vs. 5.5 days, p < 0.001) and presentation to resolution intervals. However, conversion and mortality rates showed no significant differences.
Conclusion
Index admission LC is superior to interval cholecystectomy and should be offered to all patients fit for general anaesthesia regardless of the presenting complaints. Subspecialisation should be encouraged as a major factor in optimising resource utilisation and postoperative outcomes of biliary emergencies.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference26 articles.
1. NICE (2014) Gallstone disease: diagnosis and management. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg188. Accessed 16 Jan 2021.
2. NICE (2016) Commisioning guide: gallstone disease. https://www.evidence.nhs.uk/document?id=2092187&returnUrl=search%3Fom%3D%5B%7B%22acc%22%3A%5B%22True%22%5D%7D%2C%7B%22srn%22%3A%5B%22Royal+College+of+Surgeons+-+RCS%22%5D%7D%2C%7B%22srn%22%3A%5B%22Royal+College+of+Anaesthetists%22%5D%7D%2C%7B%22srn%22%3A%5B%22British+HIV+Association+-+BHIVA%22%5D%7D%5D%26pa%3D2%26sp%3Don.
3. Griffiths EA, Vohra HJ, Marriott P, Katbeh T, Zino S, Nassar AHM, West Midlands Research, Collaborative (2019) Utilisation of an operative difficulty grading scale for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 33(1):110–121
4. Nassar AHM, Ashkar KA, Mohamed AY, Hafiz AA (1995) Is laparoscopic cholecystectomy possible without video technology? Minim Invasive Therapy 4(2):63–65
5. Nassar AHM, Ng HJ, Wysocki AP, Khan KS, Gil IC (2021) Achieving the critical view of safety in the difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective study of predictors of failure. Surg Endosc 35(11):6039–6047
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献