Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 5/2021

Open Access 22.05.2020 | Cholecystitis

Safety and feasibility of prolonged versus early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a single-center retrospective study

verfasst von: Xing Cheng, Ping Cheng, Peng Xu, Ping Hu, Gang Zhao, Kaixiong Tao, Guobin Wang, Xiaoming Shuai, Jinxiang Zhang

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 5/2021

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the standard treatment for acute cholecystitis (AC), and it should be performed within 72 h of symptoms onset if possible. In many undesired situations, LC was performed beyond the golden 72 h. However, the safety and feasibility of prolonged LC (i.e., performed more than 72 h after symptoms onset) are largely unknown, and therefore were investigated in this study.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled the adult patients who were diagnosed as AC and were treated with LC at the same admission between January 2015 and October 2018 in an emergency department of a tertiary academic medical center in China. The primary outcome was the rate and severity of adverse events, while the secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay and costs.

Results

Among the 104 qualified patients, 70 (67.3%) underwent prolonged LC and 34 (32.7%) underwent early LC (< 72 h of symptom onset). There were no differences between the two groups in mortality rate (none for both), conversion rates (prolonged LC 5.4%, and early LC 8.8%, P = 0.68), intraoperative and postoperative complications (prolonged LC 5.7% and early LC 2.9%, P ≥ 0.99), operation time (prolonged LC 193.5 min and early LC 198.0 min, P = 0.81), and operation costs (prolonged LC 8,700 Yuan, and early LC 8,500 Yuan, P = 0.86). However, the prolonged LC was associated with longer postoperative hospitalization (7.0 days versus 6.0 days, P = 0.03), longer total hospital stay (11.0 days versus 8.0 days, P < 0.01), and subsequently higher total costs (40,400 Yuan versus 31,100 Yuan, P < 0.01).

Conclusions

Prolonged LC is safe and feasible for patients with AC for having similar rates and severity of adverse events as early LC, but it is also associated with longer hospital stay and subsequently higher total cost.
Hinweise
Xing Cheng and Ping Cheng are co-first authors.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Acute cholecystitis (AC) is a common acute abdominal disease for emergency admission and there is about 3–10% of acute abdominal pain linked to AC [1]. Right upper abdominal pain is the most typical symptom [2]. Usually a standardized treatment of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) would be recommended for patients with AC [36]. Most researches[712] supported that LC should be done within 72 h of symptoms onset, which was nominated as early LC, due to the lower conversion rate, less intraoperative and postoperative complications, shorter hospitalization, and smaller amount of cost. According to TG18 (Tokyo Guideline 2018) [4], a delayed LC (i.e., performed at least 6 weeks after initial conservative treatment) might be proposed for patients with AC who had the onset of symptoms more than 72 h.
Actually, surgeons always encountered patients with symptoms as disgusting and recurrent abdominal pain lasting more than 72 h. These patients denied readmission for a delayed LC persistently. In addition, in clinical practice, there also may be a sudden attack forcing to an unprepared LC or even open cholecystectomy during the waiting for a delayed LC [4]. Furthermore, the conservative treatment and the following surgical hospitalization mean higher cost and more time consuming on the treatment of AC [13, 14]. Therefore, researches on the safety and feasibility of prolonged LC are needed. A previous randomized clinical trial analyzed prolonged and delayed LC and found that prolonged LC was safe and associated with less overall morbidity, shorter hospital stay, and less cost compared with delayed LC [15]. So, we would like to confirm the safety and feasibility of a prolonged LC conducted in patients with the onset of symptoms more than 72 h.

Patients and methods

This study was approved by the ethics committee of Tongji medical college, Huazhong University of Science and Technology (Study Number 2019 S937).

Patient selection

This single-center, retrospective study was performed at a department of emergency surgery in a tertiary academic medical center. During January 2015 and October 2018, patients diagnosed with AC and treated with LC at the same admission were included. The diagnosis of AC met the TG2018 [4], patients with at least one of local symptom or sign (murphy’s sign, right upper quadrant tenderness/pain/mass), one systemic sign (fever, evaluated C-reactive protein, evaluated white blood cell count (> 18,000 mm3)), and a confirmatory imaging test (color doppler ultrasound, computed tomography, and/or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography). The imaging evidences included the presence of gallstones, thickened gallbladder wall, pericholecystic fluid, and/or sonographic Murphy’s sign. All imaging examinations were carried out by trained radiologists. The cases with choledocholithiasis, pancreatitis, pregnancy, and patients under 18 years old were excluded.

Basic characteristics

Data about age, sex, history of abdominal surgery, current smoking and drink, and pathological diagnosis were collected. The intraoperative pathological findings of simple, phlegmonous, or gangrenous cholecystitis were recorded. Each patient was assessed within the 24 h of admission by Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV (APACHE IV), Modified Early Warning Score(MEWS), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System (ASA-PS), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(SOFA), quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA), Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS), Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and the Barthel index of Activities of Daily Living (ADL).

Operative outcomes

The primary outcomes were the mortality rate, admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) more than 24 h, conversion rate to open cholecystectomy (OC), intraoperative and postoperative complications including massive bleeding (> 500 ml) [16] during and/or after operation, wound infection, and biliary leakage. The secondary outcomes were the operation time, length of hospital stay, duration of postoperation hospitalization, surgical and total costs.

Surgical procedure

All operations were performed by a fixed emergency surgeon team with 2–4 years of experience on laparoscopic techniques. LC was carried out with typical four incisions operation method [17, 18], and another incision maybe rarely needed in some difficult cases. LC conversion to OC was decided by the surgeon team independently.

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed with the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS), IBM, version 22.0. Continuous variables were described by mean (± standard deviation, SD), median (interquartile ranges, IQR), they were compared with Student’s t test and Mann–Whitney U test. Categorical variables were presented as percentages, they were compared with Pearson’s chi-square test and Fisher's exact test. P < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

A total of 135 patients were admitted with the diagnosis of AC and underwent LC, 31 cases were excluded because of 21 cases with choledocholithiasis, 9 with acute pancreatitis, 1 with baby, there were 104 patients finally enrolled. Among the 104 patients 70 (67.3%) underwent prolonged LC, 34 (32.7%) underwent early LC (Fig. 1). The median time from symptoms onset to LC was 9 days with a range of 4–35 days and 3 days with a range of 1–3 days in the prolonged and early group, respectively.
Patients in prolonged and early groups had similar basic characteristics in age, gender, current drink and smoking, and history of abdominal surgery. There were no significant differences between the two groups on the assessment of APACHE IV, MEWS, CCI, ASA-PS, SOFA, qSOFA, SIRS, NPRS, and the Barthel index of ADL. In the prolonged group, patients presented with more serious classifications on TG18 (P < 0.01) though both groups had similar clinical (in surgery) and final pathological diagnosis (P = 0.95, P = 0.37) (Table 1). The overall morbidity of simple, phlegmonous, and gangrenous cholecystitis (Fig. 2) was 63.4%, 10.6%, and 36.0%. None died or admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) more than 24 h during the hospitalization. Both groups had similar conversion rate (prolonged LC 5.7%, and early LC 8.8%, P = 0.68). We found that 4 patients losing blood more than 500 ml during the operation in the prolonged group, and in the early group, 1 patient suffered from massive bleeding and wound infection. Though the prolonged group had higher intraoperative and postoperative complications than the early group (prolonged LC 5.7%, early LC 2.9%), there were no significant difference among them (P ≥ 0.99). The prolonged and early groups had similar operation time (prolonged LC 193.5 min, and early LC 198.0 min, P = 0.81) and surgery costs (prolonged LC 8700 Yuan, and early LC 8500 Yuan, P = 0.86), respectively. The total hospital stay and postoperation hospitalization were longer in the prolonged group (11.0 days versus 8.0 days, P < 0.01) and (7.0 days versus 6.0 days, P = 0.03). The prolonged group was also associated with higher total costs (40,400 Yuan versus 31,100 Yuan, P < 0.01) (Table 2).
Table 1
Baseline and clinical characteristics compared prolonged and early LC
Characteristics
Prolonged
Early
P value
(n = 70)
(n = 34)
Age (years) [mean ± SD]
54.4 (12.8)
50.0 (11.8)
0.42
Gender [n (%)]
  
0.16
 Male
35 (50.0)
22 (64.7)
 Female
35 (50.0)
12 (35.3)
Current drink [n (%)]
4 (5.7)
3 (8.8)
0.68
Current smoking [n (%)]
4 (5.7)
5 (14.7)
0.15
History of abdominal surgery [n (%)]
12 (17.1)
2 (5.9)
0.14
APACHE IV [ median (IQR)]
18.0 (14.0–24.5)
17.0 (7.8–22.0)
0.08
MEWS [ median (IQR)]
4.0 (3.0–5.0)
4.0 (4.0–5.0)
0.09
CCI [ median (IQR)]
3.0 (2.0–5.0)
2.5 (1.0–4.0)
0.13
ASA-PS [n (%)]
  
0.24
 I
19 (27.1)
13(38.2)
 II
34 (48.6)
18(52.9)
 III
16 (22.9)
3 (8.8)
 IV
1 (1.4)
0 (0.0)
SOFA score [ median (IQR)]
1.0 (0.0–2.0)
1.0 (0.0–1.0)
0.30
qSOFA scores [n (%)]
  
0.56
 0
57(81.4)
36 (76.5)
 1
13 (18.6)
8 (23.5)
SIRS criteria [n (%)]
  
0.7
 0
23 (32.9)
7 (20.6)
 1
24(34.3)
12 (35.3)
 2
15 (21.4)
10 (29.4)
 3
5 (7.1)
3 (8.8)
 4
3 (4.3)
2 (5.9)
NPRS [n (%)]
  
0.59
 0
21 (30.0)
6 (17.6)
 1
11 (15.7)
7 (20.6)
 2
28 (40.0)
16 (47.1)
 3
10 (14.3)
5 (14.7)
The Barthel index of ADL [n (%)]
  
0.15
 50–70
24 (34.3)
6 (17.6)
 75–95
12 (17.1)
5 (14.7)
 100
34 (48.6)
23 (67.6)
Severity grade of TG18 [n (%)]
  
<0.01
 I (mild)
0 (0.0)
19 (55.9)
 II (moderate)
64 (91.4)
13 (38.2)
 III (severe)
6 (8.6)
2 (5.9)
Clinical pathological diagnosis [n (%)]
  
0.95
 Simple
45 (64.3)
21 (61.8)
 Phlegmonous
7 (10.0)
4 (11.8)
 Gangrenous
18 (25.7)
9 (26.5)
 Pathological diagnosis [n (%)]
  
0.37
 Acute cholecystitis
25 (35.7)
17 (50.0)
 Acute on chronic cholecystitis
25 (35.7)
10 (29.4)
 Chronic cholecystitis
20 (28.6)
7 (20.6)
LC Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy, IQR Inter Quartile Range, APACHE IV Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV, MEWS Modified Early Warning Score, CCI Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA-PS American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification, SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, qSOFA quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, SIRS Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, NPRS Numerical Pain Rating Scale, ADL Activities of Daily Living, TG18 Tokyo Guideline 2018
Bold values are statistically significant difference with alpha of 0.05
Table 2
Surgical characteristics and surgery-related outcomes
Characteristics and Outcomes
Prolonged
Early
P value
(n = 70)
(n = 34)
Mortality [n (%)]
0
0
ICU [n (%)]
0
0
Conversion rate [n (%)]
4 (5.7)
3 (8.8)
0.68
No. patients with complications [n (%)]
4 (5.7)
1 (2.9)
1.00
 Bleeding (> 500 ml)
4
1
1.00
 Wound infection
0
1
 Biliary leakage
0
0
Operative time (min) [median (IQR)]
193.5 (150.0–247.5)
198.0 (150.0–266.3)
0.81
Duration of postoperation hospitalization (days) [median (IQR)]
7.0 (5.0–8.0)
6.0 (5.0–7.0)
0.03
Total hospital length of stay (days) [median (IQR)]
11.0 (8.0–14.0)
8.0 (6.0–9.0)
< 0.01
Cost for surgery (Yuan) [median (IQR)]
8700 (6500–12, 000)
8 500 (7100–11, 800)
0.86
Total cost of hospitalization (Yuan) [median (IQR)]
40, 400 (33, 900–51, 100)
31, 100 (24, 900–37, 000)
< 0.01
ICU intensive care unit, IQR inter quartile range
Bold values are statistically significant difference with alpha of 0.05
In Table 3, we analyzed the severe cholecystitis (grade III) which was classified on TG18. There were 6 (8.6%) severe cases in the prolonged group, 2 (2.9%) patients with renal dysfunction, 2 (2.9%) with hepatic dysfunction, and 2 (2.9%) with hematological dysfunction. And in the early group, 2 (5.9%) patients classified to the severe AC owing to hematological dysfunction.
Table 3
Evidences to patients classified to severe (grade III) cholecystitis on TG18
Evidences
Prolonged
Early
(n = 70)
(n = 34)
Renal dysfunction
2
0
Hepatic dysfunction
2
0
Hematological dysfunction
2
2
TG18 Tokyo Guideline 2018
In this study, patients classified to moderate cholecystitis in prolonged and early groups were 64 (91.4%) and 13 (38.2%), respectively. Figure 3 showed that there were 14 (20.0%) versus 10 (29.4%) patients classified to moderate (grade II) AC associated with marked local inflammation in the prolonged and early groups, and 6 (8.6%) versus 3 (8.8%) patients simultaneously suffered from elevated WBC (white blood cell count) and marked local inflammation, respectively. Then, we analyzed patients classified to moderate (grade II) AC due to the onset of symptoms being more than 72 h with the mild (grade I) ones and further verified the safety and feasibility of prolonged LC.
Table 4 showed that the moderate and mild groups had similar basic characteristics on age, gender, current drink and smoking, and history of abdominal surgery, proportional scores on APACHE IV, MEWS, CCI, ASA-PS, SOFA, qSOFA, SIRS, NPRS, and the Barthel index of ADL assessed within 24 h of admission, clinical and final pathological diagnosis. The conversion from LC to OC and intraoperative and postoperative complications were similar (1 vs 0 patient) and (1 vs 0 patient), respectively. There were no significant differences in moderate and mild groups on operation time (moderate 177.0 min, and mild 162.0 min, P = 0.66), duration of postoperation hospitalization (moderate 6.0 days, and mild 6.0 days, P = 0.26), and operation costs (prolonged 7,800 Yuan, and mild 8,100 Yuan, P = 0.72). The moderate group had longer total hospital stay (10.0 days versus 8.0 days, P < 0.01) and higher total costs (38,900 Yuan versus 30,000 Yuan, P < 0.01).
Table 4
Basic characteristics and outcomes compared moderate cholecystitis only with symptoms more than 72 h with mild cholecystitis
Characteristics
Grade II (moderate)
Grade I (mild)
P value
(n = 44)
(n = 19)
Age (years) [ mean ± SD]
53.4 (13.0)
49.3 (14.3)
0.27
Gender [n (%)]
  
0.11
 Male
18 (40.9)
12 (63.2)
 Female
26 (59.1)
7 (36.8)
Current drink [n (%)]
3 (6.8)
2 (10.5)
0.63
Current smoking [n (%)]
3 (6.8)
3 (15.8)
0.36
History of abdominal surgery [n (%)]
10 (22.7)
1 (5.3)
0.15
APACHE IV [ median (IQR)]
18.0 (14.0–22.5)
14.0 (4.0–21.5)
0.07
MEWS [ median (IQR)]
4.0 (3.0–5.0)
4.0 (4.0–4.5)
0.57
CCI [ median (IQR)]
3.0 (2.0–4.5)
2.0 (0.0–4.0)
0.21
ASA-PS [n (%)]
  
0.24
 I
14 (31.8)
8 (42.1)
 II
18 (40.9)
10 (52.6)
 III
11 (25.0)
1 (5.3)
 IV
1 (2.3)
0 (0.0)
SOFA score [ median (IQR)]
0.0 (0.0–2.0)
0.0 (0.0–1.0)
0.25
qSOFA scores [n (%)]
  
0.49
 0
37 (84.1)
14 (73.7)
 1
7 (15.9)
5 (26.3)
SIRS criteria [n (%)]
  
0.39
 0
17 (38.6)
4 (21.1)
 1
17 (38.6)
9 (47.4)
 2
8 (18.2)
4 (21.1)
 3
1 (2.3)
2 (10.5)
 4
1 (2.3)
0 (0.0)
NPRS [n (%)]
  
0.27
 0
14 (31.8)
2 (10.5)
 1
10 (22.7)
4 (21.1)
 2
14 (31.8)
10 (52.6)
 3
6 (13.6)
3 (15.8)
The Barthel index of ADL [n (%)]
  
0.57
 50–70
15 (34.1)
4 (21.1)
 75–95
5 (11.4)
3 (15.8)
 100
24 (54.5)
12 (63.2)
Severity grade of TG18 [n (%)]
  
0.46
 I (mild)
24 (54.5)
14 (73.3)
 II (moderate)
8 (18.2)
2 (10.5)
 III (severe)
12 (27.3)
3 (15.8)
Clinical pathological diagnosis [n (%)]
  
0.27
 Simple
53.4 (13.0)
49.3 (14.3)
 Phlegmonous
18 (40.9)
12 (63.2)
 Gangrenous
26 (59.1)
7 (36.8)
Pathological diagnosis [n (%)]
  
0.06
Acute cholecystitis
5 (11.4)
7 (36.8)
Acute on chronic cholecystitis
21 (47.7)
6 (31.6)
Chronic cholecystitis
18 (40.9)
6 (31.6)
Mortality [n (%)]
0
0
ICU [n (%)]
0
0
Conversion rate [n (%)]
1(2.3)
0(0.0)
No. patients with complications [n (%)]
1(2.3)
0(0.0)
Operative time (min) [median (IQR)]
177.0 (133.0–220.0)
162.0 (125.0–208.5)
0.66
Duration of postoperation hospitalization (days) [median (IQR)]
6.0 (5.0–8.0)
6.0 (4.5–6.5)
0.26
Total hospital length of stay (days) [median (IQR)]
10.0 (8.0–13.0)
8.0 (5.5–9.0)
< 0.01
Cost for surgery (Yuan) [median (IQR)]
7800 (5900–11, 000)
8100 (6700–9400)
0.72
Total cost of hospitalization (Yuan) [median (IQR)]
38, 900 (32, 500–45, 500)
30, 000 (24, 300–35, 400)
< 0.01
LC Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy, IQR Inter Quartile Range, APACHE IV Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV, MEWS Modified Early Warning Score, CCI Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA-PS American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification, SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, qSOFA quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, SIRS Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome, NPRS Numerical Pain Rating Scale, ADL Activities of Daily Living, TG18 Tokyo Guideline 2018, ICU intensive care unit
Bold values are statistically significant difference with alpha of 0.05

Discussion

This retrospective study based on real clinical problem and confirmed the safety and feasibility of prolonged LC compared to early LC. Prolonged LC had not increased the conversion rate, intraoperative and postoperative complications, operation time, and cost. However, prolonged LC was associated with longer postoperation and total hospital stay and higher total cost compared to early LC. Our study indicated that early LC was superior to prolonged LC for patients with AC. It is particularly worth mentioning here that higher rate of prolonged LC was observed in our study (67.3% VS 32.7%), although early LC was recommended in clinical practice. We reviewed the medical records and found that most of the patients missed the golden 72 h when they went to see a doctor, and a few of them waited for the final diagnosis of AC. According to our results, for these patients, prolonged LC was recommended, rather than conservative treatment and waiting for a delayed LC.
There were many studies on the optimal time of surgery for AC. Numerous of evidence indicated that early LC is the first choice and secure when the duration of symptoms was less than 72 h [4, 8, 19, 20]. And for those more than 72 h, timely LC was better than delayed LC [15]. Another large, multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial [21] compared early LC within 24 h of symptoms with delayed LC in 7–45 days of presentation, and confirmed that early LC should be performed for patients with AC. Thus, our study was complementary to these researches, for we defined the prolonged LC as patients with AC had LC beyond 72 h of symptoms onset and confirmed the safety and feasibility of prolonged LC for AC.
Several studies [21, 22] have shown that early LC is superior to the delayed LC, but another real-world clinical study [23] indicated that a delayed LC is safe, and has better outcomes in morbidity and mortality. The opposite conclusions were probably derived from discrepant severity compositions of patients. In our study, we adopted several scoring systems to assess and standardize the responses of patients induced by the acute local or systemic inflammation at their admissions. The prolonged and early groups had equal scoring levels in each scoring system and it ensured the comparable preoperative states. Furthermore, both groups had similar clinical and final pathological diagnosis ranging from simple, phlegmonous, and gangrenous cholecystitis. There were also some really difficult cases with severe gangrene or tight adhesion to surrounding tissues (Fig. 4), demonstrating that we included not just the ‘easy’ cases in our study. Therefore, the cases we enrolled in our study were good representation for the research target.
In this retrospective analysis, the overall morbidity of gangrenous cholecystitis (GC) was 27/104 (26.0%), which was relatively high when compared to the reported morbidity of 5–26% for GC [2428], indicating that the patients with AC were really serious in our emergency department, which may also contribute to the longer overall operation time than that reported previously (195.0 min vs 88 min-116 min)[15, 29].
There were 8 patients classified to severe cholecystitis, 6 patients underwent prolonged LC, and 2 underwent early LC (Table 3). All of them recovered well at discharge. On the contrary, conservative management before a delayed LC was successful in only 60.6% of cases, 14.7% of patients required emergency surgery due to gangrene and/or perforation [30]. It indicated the removal of inflamed gallbladder as soon as possible might be preferable than a conservative intervention. Therefore, in some severe cases (grade III) with renal, hepatic, or hematological dysfunction, an aggressive early LC or prolonged LC could be performed with carefully assessment before the operation rather than a delayed LC.
There were similar percent of evidences (marked local inflammation, evaluated WBC) contributing to the classified to grade II (moderate) cholecystitis in the prolonged and early groups (Fig. 2), which indicated that evaluated WBC was concomitant to the local infection. And it might imply that the systemic immunological reactions resulted from the local inflammation in this study.
A limitation of this study was that patients were retrospectively admitted from emergency surgery department in a single center, and further prospective researches in multicenter were needed to be performed.

Conclusion

Prolonged LC for patients with AC was safe and feasible, and when patients with AC missed the golden 72 h for LC, a prolonged LC could be recommended for them.

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosure

Xing Cheng, Ping Cheng, Peng Xu, Ping Hu, Gang Zhao, Kaixiong Tao, Guobin Wang, Xiaoming Shuai, and Jinxiang Zhang declare that they have no conflict of interests.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Unsere Produktempfehlungen

Die Chirurgie

Print-Titel

Das Abo mit mehr Tiefe

Mit der Zeitschrift Die Chirurgie erhalten Sie zusätzlich Online-Zugriff auf weitere 43 chirurgische Fachzeitschriften, CME-Fortbildungen, Webinare, Vorbereitungskursen zur Facharztprüfung und die digitale Enzyklopädie e.Medpedia.

Bis 30. April 2024 bestellen und im ersten Jahr nur 199 € zahlen!

e.Med Interdisziplinär

Kombi-Abonnement

Für Ihren Erfolg in Klinik und Praxis - Die beste Hilfe in Ihrem Arbeitsalltag

Mit e.Med Interdisziplinär erhalten Sie Zugang zu allen CME-Fortbildungen und Fachzeitschriften auf SpringerMedizin.de.

Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Kimura Y, Takada T, Kawarada Y, Nimura Y, Hirata K, Sekimoto M, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Wada K, Miura F, Yasuda H, Yamashita Y, Nagino M, Hirota M, Tanaka A, Tsuyuguchi T, Strasberg SM, Gadacz TR (2007) Definitions, pathophysiology, and epidemiology of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Surg 14:15–26CrossRef Kimura Y, Takada T, Kawarada Y, Nimura Y, Hirata K, Sekimoto M, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Wada K, Miura F, Yasuda H, Yamashita Y, Nagino M, Hirota M, Tanaka A, Tsuyuguchi T, Strasberg SM, Gadacz TR (2007) Definitions, pathophysiology, and epidemiology of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Surg 14:15–26CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Beckingham IJ (2001) ABC of diseases of liver, pancreas, and biliary system Gallstone Disease. BMJ 322:91–94CrossRef Beckingham IJ (2001) ABC of diseases of liver, pancreas, and biliary system Gallstone Disease. BMJ 322:91–94CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Philipp SR, Miedema BW, Thaler K (2009) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using conventional instruments: early experience in comparison with the gold standard. J Am Coll Surg 209:632–637CrossRef Philipp SR, Miedema BW, Thaler K (2009) Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy using conventional instruments: early experience in comparison with the gold standard. J Am Coll Surg 209:632–637CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Okamoto K, Suzuki K, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Asbun HJ, Endo I, Iwashita Y, Hibi T, Pitt HA, Umezawa A, Asai K, Han H, Hwang T, Mori Y, Yoon Y, Huang WS, Belli G, Dervenis C, Yokoe M, Kiriyama S, Itoi T, Jagannath P, Garden OJ, Miura F, Nakamura M, Horiguchi A, Wakabayashi G, Cherqui D, de Santibañes E, Shikata S, Noguchi Y, Ukai T, Higuchi R, Wada K, Honda G, Supe AN, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Gouma DJ, Deziel DJ, Liau K, Chen M, Shibao K, Liu K, Su C, Chan ACW, Yoon D, Choi I, Jonas E, Chen X, Fan ST, Ker C, Giménez ME, Kitano S, Inomata M, Hirata K, Inui K, Sumiyama Y, Yamamoto M (2018) Tokyo Guidelines 2018: flowchart for the management of acute cholecystitis. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 25:55–72CrossRef Okamoto K, Suzuki K, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Asbun HJ, Endo I, Iwashita Y, Hibi T, Pitt HA, Umezawa A, Asai K, Han H, Hwang T, Mori Y, Yoon Y, Huang WS, Belli G, Dervenis C, Yokoe M, Kiriyama S, Itoi T, Jagannath P, Garden OJ, Miura F, Nakamura M, Horiguchi A, Wakabayashi G, Cherqui D, de Santibañes E, Shikata S, Noguchi Y, Ukai T, Higuchi R, Wada K, Honda G, Supe AN, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Gouma DJ, Deziel DJ, Liau K, Chen M, Shibao K, Liu K, Su C, Chan ACW, Yoon D, Choi I, Jonas E, Chen X, Fan ST, Ker C, Giménez ME, Kitano S, Inomata M, Hirata K, Inui K, Sumiyama Y, Yamamoto M (2018) Tokyo Guidelines 2018: flowchart for the management of acute cholecystitis. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 25:55–72CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Loozen CS, van Santvoort HC, van Duijvendijk P, Besselink MG, Gouma DJ, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Kelder JC, Donkervoort SC, van Geloven AA, Kruyt PM, Roos D, Kortram K, Kornmann VN, Pronk A, van der Peet DL, Crolla RM, van Ramshorst B, Bollen TL, Boerma D (2018) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus percutaneous catheter drainage for acute cholecystitis in high risk patients (CHOCOLATE): multicentre randomised clinical trial. BMJ 363:k3965CrossRef Loozen CS, van Santvoort HC, van Duijvendijk P, Besselink MG, Gouma DJ, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Kelder JC, Donkervoort SC, van Geloven AA, Kruyt PM, Roos D, Kortram K, Kornmann VN, Pronk A, van der Peet DL, Crolla RM, van Ramshorst B, Bollen TL, Boerma D (2018) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus percutaneous catheter drainage for acute cholecystitis in high risk patients (CHOCOLATE): multicentre randomised clinical trial. BMJ 363:k3965CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Wiggins T, Markar SR, Mackenzie H, Jamel S, Askari A, Faiz O, Karamanakos S, Hanna GB (2018) Evolution in the management of acute cholecystitis in the elderly: population-based cohort study. Surg Endosc 32:4078–4086CrossRef Wiggins T, Markar SR, Mackenzie H, Jamel S, Askari A, Faiz O, Karamanakos S, Hanna GB (2018) Evolution in the management of acute cholecystitis in the elderly: population-based cohort study. Surg Endosc 32:4078–4086CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Gurusamy K, Samraj K, Gluud C, Wilson E, Davidson BR (2010) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 97:141–150CrossRef Gurusamy K, Samraj K, Gluud C, Wilson E, Davidson BR (2010) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 97:141–150CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Lau H, Lo CY, Patil NG, Yuen WK (2006) Early versus delayed-interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Surg Endosc 20:82–87CrossRef Lau H, Lo CY, Patil NG, Yuen WK (2006) Early versus delayed-interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Surg Endosc 20:82–87CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Loozen CS, van Ramshorst B, van Santvoort HC, Boerma D (2018) Acute cholecystitis in elderly patients: A case for early cholecystectomy. J Visc Surg 155:99–103CrossRef Loozen CS, van Ramshorst B, van Santvoort HC, Boerma D (2018) Acute cholecystitis in elderly patients: A case for early cholecystectomy. J Visc Surg 155:99–103CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Miura F, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Solomkin JS, Pitt HA, Gouma DJ, Garden OJ, Büchler MW, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Okamoto K, Gomi H, Kusachi S, Kiriyama S, Yokoe M, Kimura Y, Higuchi R, Yamashita Y, Windsor JA, Tsuyuguchi T, Gabata T, Itoi T, Hata J, Liau K (2013) TG13 flowchart for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 20:47–54CrossRef Miura F, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Solomkin JS, Pitt HA, Gouma DJ, Garden OJ, Büchler MW, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Okamoto K, Gomi H, Kusachi S, Kiriyama S, Yokoe M, Kimura Y, Higuchi R, Yamashita Y, Windsor JA, Tsuyuguchi T, Gabata T, Itoi T, Hata J, Liau K (2013) TG13 flowchart for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 20:47–54CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Barcelo M, Cruz-Santamaria DM, Alba-Lopez C, Devesa-Medina MJ, Diaz-Rubio M, Rey E (2013) Advantages of early cholecystectomy in clinical practice of a terciary care center. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 12:87–93CrossRef Barcelo M, Cruz-Santamaria DM, Alba-Lopez C, Devesa-Medina MJ, Diaz-Rubio M, Rey E (2013) Advantages of early cholecystectomy in clinical practice of a terciary care center. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 12:87–93CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Wu XD, Tian X, Liu MM, Wu L, Zhao S, Zhao L (2015) Meta-analysis comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 102:1302–1313CrossRef Wu XD, Tian X, Liu MM, Wu L, Zhao S, Zhao L (2015) Meta-analysis comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 102:1302–1313CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Degrate L, Ciravegna AL, Luperto M, Guaglio M, Garancini M, Maternini M, Giordano L, Romano F, Gianotti L, Uggeri F (2013) Acute cholecystitis: the golden 72-h period is not a strict limit to perform early cholecystectomy. Results from 316 consecutive patients. Langenbeck's Archiv Surg 398:1129–1136CrossRef Degrate L, Ciravegna AL, Luperto M, Guaglio M, Garancini M, Maternini M, Giordano L, Romano F, Gianotti L, Uggeri F (2013) Acute cholecystitis: the golden 72-h period is not a strict limit to perform early cholecystectomy. Results from 316 consecutive patients. Langenbeck's Archiv Surg 398:1129–1136CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Gomes RM, Mehta NT, Varik V, Doctor NH (2013) No 72-hour pathological boundary for safe early laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis: a clinicopathological study. Ann Gastroenterol 26:340–345PubMedPubMedCentral Gomes RM, Mehta NT, Varik V, Doctor NH (2013) No 72-hour pathological boundary for safe early laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis: a clinicopathological study. Ann Gastroenterol 26:340–345PubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Roulin D, Saadi A, Di Mare L, Demartines N, Halkic N (2016) Early versus delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis, are the 72 hours still the rule? Ann Surg 264:717–722CrossRef Roulin D, Saadi A, Di Mare L, Demartines N, Halkic N (2016) Early versus delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis, are the 72 hours still the rule? Ann Surg 264:717–722CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Kawamoto Y, Fujikawa T, Sakamoto Y, Emoto N, Takahashi R, Kawamura Y, Tanaka A (2018) Effect of antithrombic therapy on bleeding complications in patients receiving emergency cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 25:518–526CrossRef Kawamoto Y, Fujikawa T, Sakamoto Y, Emoto N, Takahashi R, Kawamura Y, Tanaka A (2018) Effect of antithrombic therapy on bleeding complications in patients receiving emergency cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 25:518–526CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Saad S, Strassel V, Sauerland S (2013) Randomized clinical trial of single-port, minilaparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 100:339–349CrossRef Saad S, Strassel V, Sauerland S (2013) Randomized clinical trial of single-port, minilaparoscopic and conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 100:339–349CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Bisgaard T, Klarskov B, Trap R, Kehlet H, Rosenberg J (2002) Microlaparoscopic vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 16:458–464CrossRef Bisgaard T, Klarskov B, Trap R, Kehlet H, Rosenberg J (2002) Microlaparoscopic vs conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 16:458–464CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Cameron IC, Chadwick C, Phillips J, Johnson AG (2002) Acute cholecystitis–room for improvement? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84:10–13PubMedPubMedCentral Cameron IC, Chadwick C, Phillips J, Johnson AG (2002) Acute cholecystitis–room for improvement? Ann R Coll Surg Engl 84:10–13PubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Ambe PC, Kaptanis S, Papadakis M, Weber SA, Zirngibl H (2015) Cholecystectomy vs. percutaneous cholecystostomy for the management of critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis: a protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev 4:77CrossRef Ambe PC, Kaptanis S, Papadakis M, Weber SA, Zirngibl H (2015) Cholecystectomy vs. percutaneous cholecystostomy for the management of critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis: a protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev 4:77CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Gutt CN, Encke J, Köninger J, Harnoss J, Weigand K, Kipfmüller K, Schunter O, Götze T, Golling MT, Menges M, Klar E, Feilhauer K, Zoller WG, Ridwelski K, Ackmann S, Baron A, Schön MR, Seitz HK, Daniel D, Stremmel W, Büchler MW (2013) Acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 258:385–393CrossRef Gutt CN, Encke J, Köninger J, Harnoss J, Weigand K, Kipfmüller K, Schunter O, Götze T, Golling MT, Menges M, Klar E, Feilhauer K, Zoller WG, Ridwelski K, Ackmann S, Baron A, Schön MR, Seitz HK, Daniel D, Stremmel W, Büchler MW (2013) Acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 258:385–393CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat de Mestral C, Rotstein OD, Laupacis A, Hoch JS, Zagorski B, Alali AS, Nathens AB (2014) Comparative operative outcomes of early and delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 259:10–15CrossRef de Mestral C, Rotstein OD, Laupacis A, Hoch JS, Zagorski B, Alali AS, Nathens AB (2014) Comparative operative outcomes of early and delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 259:10–15CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Blythe J, Herrmann E, Faust D, Falk S, Edwards-Lehr T, Stockhausen F, Hanisch E, Buia A (2018) Acute cholecystitis &ndash; a cohort study in a real-world clinical setting (REWO study, NCT02796443). Pragmat Obs Res 9:69–75CrossRef Blythe J, Herrmann E, Faust D, Falk S, Edwards-Lehr T, Stockhausen F, Hanisch E, Buia A (2018) Acute cholecystitis &ndash; a cohort study in a real-world clinical setting (REWO study, NCT02796443). Pragmat Obs Res 9:69–75CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Meng FY, Tsao MZ, Huang ML, Huang HW (2012) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy techniques with special care treatment in acute cholecystitis patients regardless of operation timing. Hepatogastroenterology 59:1006–1009PubMed Meng FY, Tsao MZ, Huang ML, Huang HW (2012) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy techniques with special care treatment in acute cholecystitis patients regardless of operation timing. Hepatogastroenterology 59:1006–1009PubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Merriam LT, Kanaan SA, Dawes LG, Angelos P, Prystowsky JB, Rege RV, Joehl RJ (1999) Gangrenous cholecystitis: analysis of risk factors and experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 126:680–685 discussion 685-6CrossRef Merriam LT, Kanaan SA, Dawes LG, Angelos P, Prystowsky JB, Rege RV, Joehl RJ (1999) Gangrenous cholecystitis: analysis of risk factors and experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 126:680–685 discussion 685-6CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilson AK, Kozol RA, Salwen WA, Manov LJ, Tennenberg SD (1994) Gangrenous cholecystitis in an urban VA hospital. J Surg Res 56:402–404CrossRef Wilson AK, Kozol RA, Salwen WA, Manov LJ, Tennenberg SD (1994) Gangrenous cholecystitis in an urban VA hospital. J Surg Res 56:402–404CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Bourikian S, Anand RJ, Aboutanos M, Wolfe LG, Ferrada P (2015) Risk factors for acute gangrenous cholecystitis in emergency general surgery patients. Am J Surg 210:730–733CrossRef Bourikian S, Anand RJ, Aboutanos M, Wolfe LG, Ferrada P (2015) Risk factors for acute gangrenous cholecystitis in emergency general surgery patients. Am J Surg 210:730–733CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Habib FA, Kolachalam RB, Khilnani R, Preventza O, Mittal VK (2001) Role of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of gangrenous cholecystitis. Am J Surg 181:71–75CrossRef Habib FA, Kolachalam RB, Khilnani R, Preventza O, Mittal VK (2001) Role of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of gangrenous cholecystitis. Am J Surg 181:71–75CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Oymaci E, Ucar AD, Yakan S, Carti EB, Coskun A, Erkan N, Yildirim M (2014) Determination of optimal operation time for the management of acute cholecystitis: a clinical trial. Gastroenterol Rev 3:147–152CrossRef Oymaci E, Ucar AD, Yakan S, Carti EB, Coskun A, Erkan N, Yildirim M (2014) Determination of optimal operation time for the management of acute cholecystitis: a clinical trial. Gastroenterol Rev 3:147–152CrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Hadad SM, Vaidya JS, Baker L, Koh HC, Heron TP, Hussain K, Thompson AM (2007) Delay from symptom onset increases the conversion rate in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. World J Surg 31:1298–1301 discussion 1302-3CrossRef Hadad SM, Vaidya JS, Baker L, Koh HC, Heron TP, Hussain K, Thompson AM (2007) Delay from symptom onset increases the conversion rate in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. World J Surg 31:1298–1301 discussion 1302-3CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Safety and feasibility of prolonged versus early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a single-center retrospective study
verfasst von
Xing Cheng
Ping Cheng
Peng Xu
Ping Hu
Gang Zhao
Kaixiong Tao
Guobin Wang
Xiaoming Shuai
Jinxiang Zhang
Publikationsdatum
22.05.2020
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 5/2021
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07643-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2021

Surgical Endoscopy 5/2021 Zur Ausgabe

Echinokokkose medikamentös behandeln oder operieren?

06.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Therapie von Echinokokkosen sollte immer in spezialisierten Zentren erfolgen. Eine symptomlose Echinokokkose kann – egal ob von Hunde- oder Fuchsbandwurm ausgelöst – konservativ erfolgen. Wenn eine Op. nötig ist, kann es sinnvoll sein, vorher Zysten zu leeren und zu desinfizieren. 

Wie sieht der OP der Zukunft aus?

04.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Der OP in der Zukunft wird mit weniger Personal auskommen – nicht, weil die Technik das medizinische Fachpersonal verdrängt, sondern weil der Personalmangel es nötig macht.

Umsetzung der POMGAT-Leitlinie läuft

03.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Seit November 2023 gibt es evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen zum perioperativen Management bei gastrointestinalen Tumoren (POMGAT) auf S3-Niveau. Vieles wird schon entsprechend der Empfehlungen durchgeführt. Wo es im Alltag noch hapert, zeigt eine Umfrage in einem Klinikverbund.

Recycling im OP – möglich, aber teuer

02.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Auch wenn sich Krankenhäuser nachhaltig und grün geben – sie tragen aktuell erheblich zu den CO2-Emissionen bei und produzieren jede Menge Müll. Ein Pilotprojekt aus Bonn zeigt, dass viele Op.-Abfälle wiederverwertet werden können.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.