Anzeige
Erschienen in:
30.10.2020 | Review Article
Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy: comparison of reconstituting and fenestrating techniques
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 3/2021
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (LSC) is a safe bailout procedure in situations when dissection of "critical view of safety" is not possible. After the proposed classification of subtotal cholecystectomy into "fenestrating" and "reconstituting" techniques in 2016, a comparative review of the outcomes of both methods is timely.
Methods
A literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science database was conducted up to January 31, 2020 for studies that reported LSC. Studies reporting LSC only in patients with Mirizzi syndrome or xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis were excluded. Our analysis includes 39 studies with 1784 cases of LSC. We report a comparison of outcomes between reconstituting and fenestrating LSC on 1505 cases [935 reconstituting (62.1%) and 570 fenestrating (37.9%)].
Results
Following LSC, the rate of open conversion is 7.7%, hemorrhage is 0.4%, bile duct injury is 0.3%, bile leak is 15.4%, retained stone is 4.6%, subhepatic or subphrenic collection is 2.9%, superficial surgical site infection is 2.0% and 30-day mortality is 0.2%. 8.8% of patients required postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), 1.1% required percutaneous intervention, and 2.2% required reoperation. Compared to reconstituting LSC, fenestrating LSC has a higher incidence of open conversion (n = 58, 10.2% vs. n = 43, 4.6%, p < 0.001), retained stones (n = 38, 6.7% vs. n = 38, 4.1%, p = 0.0253), subhepatic or subphrenic collections (n = 33, 5.8% vs. n = 13, 1.4%, p < 0.001), superficial surgical site infections (n = 18, 3.2% vs. n = 14, 1.5%, p = 0.0303), postoperative ERCP (n = 82, 14.4% vs. n = 62, 6.6%, p < 0.001), and need for reoperation (n = 20, 3.5% vs. n = 12, 1.3%, p < 0.001).
Conclusions
Although reconstituting LSC has better outcomes, both techniques are complementary. Intraoperative findings and surgical expertise impact the choice.