CONVERSION TO OPEN CHOLECYSTECTOMY - A SAFE ALTERNATIVE, NOT A FAILURE!
-
Published:2024-02-15
Issue:1
Volume:12
Page:
-
ISSN:2350-0530
-
Container-title:International Journal of Research -GRANTHAALAYAH
-
language:
-
Short-container-title:Int. J. Res. Granthaalayah
Author:
Singh Gaurav,Behari Anu,Prakash Anand,Singh Rajneesh Kumar,Gupta Ashok Kumar,Kapoor Vinay K,Saxena Rajan
Abstract
Background: Understanding factors that predict conversion in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) to an open procedure is important as it allows better patient selection, preparation, operating list planning, referral, counseling and lowers the threshold for a safe conversion, thereby minimizing undue prolongation of attempts at laparoscopic completion and inadvertent complications.Methods: Records of 1010 consecutive patients who were taken up for LC, at a tertiary care teaching institute in northern India, were reviewed retrospectively. Preoperative and intraoperative characteristics of patients who underwent a successful LC were compared with those who required conversion to open surgery.Results: The conversion rate was 7.5% (76 patients). The most common reason for conversion was the inability to define the ‘Critical view of safety’ in 48, (63%) of patients. Other reasons included dense peri-cholecystic 9 (12%) and intra-abdominal 8 (11%) adhesions, suspicion of bile duct injury 4 (5%) or malignancy 3 (4%). Prior upper abdominal surgery, intraoperative finding of a contracted and thick-walled gallbladder (GB), empyema GB, Mirizzi’s syndrome, cholecysto-enteric fistula, and a prior endoscopic common bile duct stone clearance were significant predictors of conversion. Xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis was found more commonly (43% vs 5%) in the conversion group.Conclusion: Conversion to an open procedure during LC should always be treated as an integral component of sound judgement to achieve the safest outcome in a particular patient. Due consideration of pre-operative and intra-operative factors predictive of a higher chance of conversion assists pre-operative patient preparation and counseling as well as surgical planning, conduct and mentoring of residents-in-training.
Publisher
Granthaalayah Publications and Printers
Reference33 articles.
1. Al Masri, S., Shaib, Y., Edelbi, M., Tamim, H., Jamali, F., Batley, N., Faraj, W., & Hallal, A. (2018). Predicting Conversion from Laparoscopic to Open Cholecystectomy: A Single Institution Retrospective Study. World J Surg., 42(8), 2373-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-018-4513-1 2. Ambe, P.C., Jansen, S., Macher-Heidrich, S., & Zirngibl, H. (2016). Surgical Management of Empyematous Cholecystitis: A Register Study of Over 12,000 Cases from a Regional Quality Control Database in Germany. Surg Endosc, 30(12), 5319-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4882-1 3. Ballal, M., David, G., Willmott, S., Corless, D.J., Deakin, M., & Slavin, J.P. (2009). Conversion After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in England. Surg Endosc, 23(10), 2338-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0338-1 4. Banks, P.A., Bollen, T.L., Dervenis, C., Gooszen, H.G., Johnson, C.D., Sarr, M.G., Tsiotos, G. G., & Vege, S. S. (2013). Classification of Acute Pancreatitis-2012: Revision of the Atlanta Classification and Definitions by International Consensus. Gut, 62(1), 102-11. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302779 5. Barrett, M., Asbun, H.J., Chien, H.-L., Brunt, L.M., & Telem, D.A. (2018). Bile Duct Injury and Morbidity Following Cholecystectomy: A Need for Improvement. Surg Endosc, 32(4), 1683-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5847-8
|
|