Conversion after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in England

Ideal Local Anesthetic for Intraperitoneal Gallbladder Bed Infiltration Following Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the gold standard operation for symptomatic cholelithiasis; however, pain remains a major factor in increasing morbidity and length of hospital stay. Infiltration of the gallbladder bed with a local anesthetic has been shown to improve postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, although it is unclear which local anesthetic provides superior pain relief. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of various local anesthetics on postoperative pain when instilled intraperitoneally in the gallbladder bed following laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods Patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomies were randomized into three groups of 30 patients each, depending on the local anesthetic instilled in the gallbladder bed: lignocaine (Group A), bupivacaine (Group B), or a combination of lignocaine and bupivacaine (Group C). Pain was measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at two, six, 12, and 24 hours following surgery. Secondary outcomes included vitals, rescue analgesic use, return of bowel function, time to ambulation, and presence of nausea. Results Group C showed the lowest pain scores at all time points compared to the other groups (p < 0.05). Mean arterial pressures and heart rates were lower in Group C than in Group A at two and 24 hours. Return of bowel function and time to ambulation was earlier in Group C than in Group B. No significant complications were noted in any of the groups. Conclusion We conclude that a combination of lignocaine and bupivacaine instillation in the gallbladder bed provides the most effective pain relief following laparoscopic cholecystectomy, without significant complications at the doses used.

Can gallbladder wall thickness and systemic inflammatory index values predict the possibility of conversion from laparoscopy to open surgery?

Background/Objective

This study aims to develop an objective marker that predicts the risk of conversion from laparoscopy to open surgery using gallbladder wall thickness and inflammatory index values.

Materials and Methods

A total of 2,920 cholecystectomy patients were screened, including those whose operations were converted to open and those who underwent laparoscopy. A total of 700 cholecystectomy patients who met the study criteria were included in the study. The same team of surgeons performed all operations. The conversion probability from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy was calculated using the ratio obtained by evaluating inflammatory markers and gallbladder wall thickness (K). The preoperative complete blood count and abdominal ultrasound data of the patients were obtained from our university patient registry system.

Results

Age, neutrophil count, gallbladder wall thickness, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), KxNLR, and KxPLR values were all significantly higher in the conversion from laparoscopy to open surgery group compared with the laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. According to the ROC analysis performed on the gallbladder wall thickness values according to the probability of conversion to open surgery, the cutoff value was determined as >3 mm. Gallbladder wall thickness >KxPLR >KxNLR was defined as the diagnostic value order according to the area under the curve.

Conclusions

The results of this study showed that gallbladder wall thickness effectively determines the probability of conversion from laparoscopy to open cholecystectomy and multiplying the gallbladder wall thickness (mm) by NLR increased the sensitivity.

A Prospective Cohort Analysis of the Prevalence and Predictive Factors of Delayed Discharge After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Italy: The DeDiLaCo Study

BACKGROUND

The concept of early discharge ≤24 hours after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (LC) is still doubted in Italy. This prospective multicentre study aims to analyze the prevalence of patients undergoing elective LC who experienced a delayed discharge >24 hours in an extensive Italian national database and identify potential limiting factors of early discharge after LC.

METHODS

This is a prospective observational multicentre study performed from January 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021 by 90 Italian surgical units.

RESULTS

A total of 4664 patients were included in the study. Clinical reasons were found only for 850 patients (37.7%) discharged >24 hours after LC. After excluding patients with nonclinical reasons for delayed discharge >24 hours, 2 groups based on the length of hospitalization were created: the Early group (≤24 h; 2414 patients, 73.9%) and the Delayed group (>24 h; 850 patients, 26.1%). At the multivariate analysis, ASA III class ( P <0.0001), Charlson's Comorbidity Index (P=0.001), history of choledocholithiasis (P=0.03), presence of peritoneal adhesions (P<0.0001), operative time >60 min (P<0.0001), drain placement (P<0.0001), pain ( P =0.001), postoperative vomiting (P=0.001) and complications (P<0.0001) were independent predictors of delayed discharge >24 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of delayed discharges >24 hours after LC in our study were unrelated to the surgery itself. ASA class >II, advanced comorbidity, the presence of peritoneal adhesions, prolonged operative time, and placement of abdominal drainage were intraoperative variables independently associated with failure of early discharge.

Gallbladder-associated hospital admission and cholecystectomy rates across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand (2004-2019): Are we over-intervening?

Backgrounds/Aims

To investigate if the increase in the number of cholecystectomies is proportional to symptomatic gallbladder-associated hospital admissions in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ).

Methods

National healthcare registries were used to obtain data on all episodes of cholecystectomies and hospital admissions for patients ≥ 15 years from public and private hospitals.

Results

Between 2004 and 2019, in Australia, there have been 1,074,747 hospital admissions and 779,917 cholecystectomies, 715,462 (91.7%) of which were laparoscopic, and 163,084 admissions and 98,294 cholecystectomies in NZ. The 15-54 years age group saw an increase in operative rates, +4.0% in Australia and +6.6% in NZ, and admissions, +3.7% and +5.8%, respectively. Hospital admissions decreased by -9.8% in Australia but the proportion of patients undergoing intervention increased by 10.8% (from 67.1% to 75.0% of hospital admissions). Procedural rates increased by +7.3% in NZ with no change in the intervention rate.

Conclusions

In Australia, there has been a decline in symptomatic gallbladder-associated hospital admissions and a rise in intervention rate. Admissions and interventions have increased proportionally in NZ. There are higher rates of cholecystectomy and admission amongst younger demographics, compared to historical cohorts. Future research should focus on identifying risk factors for increased disease and operative rates amongst younger populations.

Surgical outcome of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis: Ten years' experience at a tertiary care centre

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) plays an important role in the treatment of elderly patients and/or patients in poor health with acute cholecystitis (AC). The primary aim of this study is to determine how these factors influence the clinical outcome of PTGBD. Moreover, we assessed the timing and results of subsequent cholecystectomies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively examined the results of 162 patients undergoing PTGBD between 2010 and 2020 (male-female ratio: 51.23% vs. 48.77%; mean age: 71.43 ± 13.22 years). Patient's performance status and intervention outcomes were assessed with clinical success rates (CSR) and in-hospital mortality. The conversion rate (CR) of possible urgent or delayed, elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LC) after PTGBD were analysed.

RESULTS

PTGBD was the definitive treatment in 42.18% of patients, while it was a bridging therapy prior to cholecystectomy (CCY) for the other patients. CSR was 87.97%, it was only 64.29% in grade III AC. In 9.87% of the cases, urgent LC was necessary after PTGBD, and its conversion rate was approximately equal to that of elective LC (18.18 vs. 17.46%, respectively, p = 0.2217). Overall, the post-PTGBD in-hospital mortality was 11.72%, while the same figure was 0% for grade I AC, 7.41% for grade II and 40.91% for grade III. Based on logistic regression analyses, in-hospital mortality (OR 6.07; CI 1.79-20.56), clinical progression (OR 7.62; CI 2.64-22.05) and the need for emergency CCY (OR 14.75; CI 3.07-70.81) were mostly determined by AC severity grade.

CONCLUSION

PTGBD is an easy-to-perform intervention with promising clinical success rates in the treatment of acute cholecystitis. After PTGBD, the level of gallbladder inflammation played a decisive role in the course of AC. In a severe, grade III inflammation, we have to consider low CSR and high mortality.

Effect of routine abdominal drainage on postoperative pain after uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholelithiasis: A randomised controlled trial

This is a prospective randomized controlled trial to investigate the effect of routine abdominal drainage on postoperative pain after uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholelithiasis. This study was a single-center randomized controlled trial performed at the general surgery ward of Taleghani hospital, in Tehran, Iran, from July 2018 to October 2018. Patients were randomly divided into two parallel groups, one receiving routine abdominal drainage and the other receiving no treatment. Postoperative pain was measured by the Universal Pain Assessment Tool (UPAT) 0, 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively. A total of 60 patients (30 patients in the study and control groups) were included. GLM repeated measure analysis showed a significant time*treatment effect for routine abdominal drainage in decreasing UPAT scores from baseline to 24 h after surgery (F = 4.59, df = 3.98, P-value = 0.001). Our findings demonstrated that abdominal drainage significantly reduces postoperative pain 0, 2, 4, 6, and 12 h after surgery (P-value<0.05). We also showed that abdominal drainage increases the time to first morphine sulfate administration and decreases the total dose of morphine sulfate administration (P-value<0.001). Moreover, we demonstrated that abdominal drainage decreases the average postoperative pain (P-value<0.001) and does not lead to any considerable side effects. However, 24 h after surgery, no significant pain-relieving effect was evident for abdominal drainage. In conclusion, insertion of abdominal drainage leads to decreased postoperative pain. Future studies need to investigate the optimal time for removal of the abdominal drain. This trial was prospectively registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials with a registration ID of IRCT20130706013875N2.

Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation versus no intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Pain is one of the important reasons for delayed discharge after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Use of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic for laparoscopic cholecystectomy may be a way of reducing pain. A previous version of this Cochrane Review found very low-certainty evidence on the benefits and harms of the intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of intraperitoneal instillation of local anaesthetic agents in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, and three other databases to 19 January 2021 together with reference checking of studies retrieved. We also searched five online clinical trials registries to identify unpublished or ongoing trials to 10 September 2021. We contacted study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We only considered randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, publication status, or relevance of outcome measure) comparing local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation versus placebo, no intervention, or inactive control during laparoscopic cholecystectomy, for the review. We excluded non-randomised studies, and studies where the method of allocating participants to a treatment was not strictly random (e.g. date of birth, hospital record number, or alternation).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected the data independently. Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, pain, return to activity and work, and non-serious adverse events. The analysis included both fixed-effect and random-effects models using RevManWeb. We performed subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed risk of bias using predefined domains, graded the certainty of the evidence using GRADE, and presented outcome results in a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-five completed trials were included, of which 76 trials contributed data to one or more of the outcomes. This included a total of 4957 participants randomised to intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation (2803 participants) and control (2154 participants). Most trials only included participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy and those who were at low anaesthetic risk (ASA I and II). The most commonly used local anaesthetic agent was bupivacaine. Methods of instilling the local anaesthetic varied considerably between trials; this included location and timing of application. The control groups received 0.9% normal saline (69 trials), no intervention (six trials), or sterile water (two trials). One trial did not specify the control agent used. None of the trials provided information on follow-up beyond point of discharge from hospital. Only two trials were at low risk of bias. Seven trials received external funding, of these three were assessed to be at risk of conflicts of interest, a further 17 trials declared no funding. We are very uncertain about the effect intraperitoneal local anaesthetic versus control on mortality; zero mortalities in either group (8 trials; 446 participants; very low-certainty evidence); serious adverse events (RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.49 to 2.34); 13 trials; 988 participants; discharge on same day of surgery (RR 1.43; 95% CI 0.64 to 3.20; 3 trials; 242 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found that intraperitoneal local anaesthetic probably results in a small reduction in length of hospital stay (MD -0.10 days; 95% CI -0.18 to -0.01; 12 trials; 936 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on health-related quality of life, return to normal activity or return to work. Pain scores, as measured by visual analogue scale (VAS), were lower in the intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation group compared to the control group at both four to eight hours (MD -0.99 cm VAS; 95% CI -1.19 to -0.79; 57 trials; 4046 participants; low-certainty of evidence) and nine to 24 hours (MD -0.68 cm VAS; 95% CI -0.88 to -0.49; 52 trials; 3588 participants; low-certainty of evidence). In addition, we found two trials that were still ongoing, and one trial that was completed but with no published results. All three trials are registered on the WHO trial register.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are very uncertain about the effect estimate of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic for laparoscopic cholecystectomy on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and proportion of patients discharged on the same day of surgery because the certainty of evidence was very low. Due to inadequate reporting, we cannot exclude an increase in adverse events. We found that intraperitoneal local anaesthetic probably results in a small reduction in length of stay in hospital after surgery. We found that intraperitoneal local anaesthetic may reduce pain at up to 24 hours for low-risk patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Future randomised clinical trials should be at low risk of systematic and random errors, should fully report mortality and side effects, and should focus on clinical outcomes such as quality of life.

Simple Blood Tests May Be Used to Predict the Increased Risk of Conversion in Elective Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Surgery

Background: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the possibility if simple blood tests that can be made in majority of hospitals may be used predict to risk of conversion to laparoscopic surgery to an open approach. Patients and Methods: The hospital records of 636 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (L-C) were retrospectively reviewed, and 583 patients included in the study protocol. Preoperative laboratory tests of all patients and data of patients who underwent conversion from laparoscopic surgery to open surgery were examined. Results: Of the 583 patients who were included in the study, 404 (69.29%) were female and the mean age was 50.02 ± 12.84 (19-89) years. The cholecystectomy was completed laparoscopically in 559 (89.5%) patients. The most common symptoms seen in the patients were epigastric discomfort and right upper quadrant pain. The high level of white blood cell (WBC) count and c-reactive protein (CRP) were found to be statistically significant before surgery in patients who had a conversion to open cholecystectomy (P < .001). Conclusion: Elevation of WBC count and CRP value before elective L-C may be useful in the prediction of a high risk of conversion from laparoscopic to open approach. This finding will help the surgeon to plan the treatment and inform the patient of the possibility before surgery.

Evaluation of the conversion rate as it relates to preoperative risk factors and surgeon experience: a retrospective study of 4013 patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Our aim is to determine the relationships among patient demographics, patient history, surgical experience, and conversion rate (CR) during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCs).

METHODS

We analyzed data from patients who underwent LC surgery between 2005 and 2014 based on patient charts and electronic documentation. CR (%) was evaluated in 4013 patients who underwent elective LC surgery. The relationships between certain predictive factors (patient demographics, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), acute cholecystitis (AC), abdominal surgery in the patient history, as well as surgical experience) and CR were examined by univariate analysis and logistic regression.

RESULTS

In our sample (N = 4013), the CR was 4.2%. The CR was twice as frequent among males than among females (6.8 vs. 3.2%, p < 0.001), and the chance of conversion increased from 3.4 to 5.9% in patients older than 65 years. The detected CR was 8.8% in a group of patients who underwent previous ERCP (8.8 vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001). From the ERCP indications, most often, conversion was performed because of severe biliary tract obstruction (CR: 9.3%). LC had to be converted to open surgery after upper and lower abdominal surgeries in 18.8 and 4.8% cases, respectively. Both AC and ERCP in the patient history raised the CR (12.3%, p < 0.001 and 8.8%, p < 0.001). More surgical experience and high surgery volume were not associated with a lower CR prevalence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient demographics (male gender and age > 65 years), previous ERCP, and upper abdominal surgery or history of AC affected the likelihood of conversion. More surgical experience and high surgery volume were not associated with a lower CR prevalence.

Complicated Acute Cholecystitis: The Role of C-Reactive Protein and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio as Predictive Markers of Severity

Objectives The clinical diagnosis of complicated acute cholecystitis (CAC) remains difficult with several pathological or ultrasonography criteria used to differentiate it from uncomplicated acute cholecystitis (UAC). This study aims to evaluate the use of combined inflammatory markers C-reactive protein (CRP) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as surrogate markers to differentiate between UAC and CAC. Methods We identified 600 consecutive patients admitted with biliary symptoms during an acute surgical take from our electronic prospectively maintained database over a period of 55 months. Only patients undergoing emergency cholecystectomy performed during the index admission were included. The primary outcome was the finding of CAC versus UAC. Results A total of 176 patients underwent emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) during the index admission, including 118 (67%) females with a median age of 51 years (range: 21-97 years). The proportion of UAC (130 [74%]) and CAC (46 [26%]) was determined along with demographic data. Multivariate regression analysis showed that patient's age (OR=1.047; p=0.003), higher CRP (OR=1.005; p=0.012) and NLR (OR=1.094; p=0.047) were significant independent factors associated with severity of cholecystitis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for CRP showed an AUC (area under the curve) of 0.773 (95% CI: 0.698- 0.849). Using a cut-off value of 55 mg/L for CRP, the sensitivity of CAC was 73.9% and specificity was 73.1% in predicting CAC. The median post-operative length of stay was four days. The conversion rate from laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery was 2% (4/176), and 5% (9/176) patients suffered post-operative complications with no mortality at 30 days. Conclusion CRP, NLR and age were independent factors associated with the severity of acute cholecystitis. NLR and CRP can be used as surrogate markers to predict patients at risk of CAC during emergency admission, which can inform future guidelines. Moreover, ELC for CAC can be safely performed under the supervision of dedicated upper GI surgeons.

Experience of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies in a Tertiary Care Hospital: a Retrospective Study

Introduction: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the most commonly performed surgical procedure of digestive tract. It has replaced open cholecystectomy as gold standard treatment for cholelithiasis and inflammation of gallbladder.  It is estimated that approximately 90% of cholecystectomies in the  United States are performed using a laparoscopic approach.  The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in context to its complications, morbidity and mortality in a tertiary care hospital.  Methods: This retrospective study was conducted on 1200 patients, who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomies, during the period from January 2019 to December 2019, at Government Medical College Jammu J & K, India and necessary data was collected and reviewed. Results: In our study, a total of 1200 patients were studied including 216 males (18%) and 984 females (82%). The mean age of the patients was 43.35±8.61. The mean operative time in our study was 55.5±10.60 minutes with range of 45 – 90 minutes. Conversion rate was 2.6%. 2 patients were re-explored. Bile duct injury was found in 6 patients (0.5%).  Conclusions: Gallstone disease is a global health problem. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has now replaced open cholecystectomy as the first choice of treatment for gallstones. Gall stone diseases is most frequently encountered in female population. The risk factors for conversion to open cholecystectomy include male gender, previous abdominal surgery, acute cholecystitis, dense adhesions and fibrosis in Calot’ s triangle, anatomical variations, advanced age, comorbidity, obesity, suspicion of common bile duct stones, jaundice, and decreased surgeon experience. The incidence of surgical site infection has significantly decreased in laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to open cholecystectomy. In our study we could not find any case of surgical site infection.

Early identification of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy using indocyanine green fluorescence cholangiography: A randomised controlled study

BACKGROUND

Achieving critical view of safety (CVS) is vital during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). There is no known study determining use of indocyanine green fluorescence cholangiography (ICGFC) in early identification of CVS during LC. This study aims to compare use of ICGFC in LC against conventional LC in early identification of CVS.

METHODOLOGY

Patients undergoing LC in a single centre were randomized into ICGFC-LC and conventional LC. Surgery was performed by a single surgeon and the time taken to achieve CVS from the time of gallbladder fundus retraction was measured. Difficulty level for each surgery was rated and analysed using a modified scoring system (Level 1- Easy to Level 4-Very difficult).

RESULTS

63 patients were recruited where mean time (min) to achieve CVS was 22.3 ± 12.9 in ICGFC-LC (n = 30) and 22.8 ± 14.3 in conventional LC (p = 0.867). The time taken to achieve CVS was shorter in ICGFC-LC group across all difficulty levels, although not significant (p > 0.05). No major complication was observed in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

This study had shown ICGFC-LC reduces time to CVS across all difficulty levels but not statistically significant. ICGFC-LC maybe useful in difficult LC and in surgical training.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials NCT04228835.

STUDY GRANT

UMMI Surgical - Karl Storz Distributor (Malaysia).

The Analysis of Risk Factors in the Conversion from Laparoscopic to Open Cholecystectomy

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a standard treatment for cholelithiasis. In situations where laparoscopic cholecystectomy is dangerous, a surgeon may be forced to change from laparoscopy to an open procedure. Data from the literature shows that 2 to 15% of laparoscopic cholecystectomies are converted to open surgery during surgery for various reasons. The aim of this study was to identify the risk factors for the conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery. A retrospective analysis of medical records and operation protocols was performed. The study group consisted of 263 patients who were converted into open surgery during laparoscopic surgery, and 264 randomly selected patients in the control group. Conversion risk factors were assessed using logistic regression analysis that modeled the probability of a certain event as a function of independent factors. Statistically significant factors in the regression model with all explanatory variables were age, emergency treatment, acute cholecystitis, peritoneal adhesions, chronic cholecystitis, and inflammatory infiltration. The use of predictive risk assessments or nomograms can be the most helpful tool for risk stratification in a clinical scenario. With such predictive tools, clinicians can optimize care based on the known risk factors for the conversion, and patients can be better informed about the risks of their surgery.

Fluorescent cholangiography significantly improves patient outcomes for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the most common elective abdominal surgery in the USA, with over 750,000 performed annually. Fluorescent cholangiography (FC) using indocyanine green dye (ICG) permits identification of extrahepatic biliary structures to facilitate dissection without requiring cystic duct cannulation. Achieving the "critical view of safety" with assistance of ICG cholangiogram may support identification of anatomy, safely reduce conversion to open procedures, and decrease operative time. We assess the utility of FC with respect to anatomic visualization during LC and its effects on patient outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database identified patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy at a single academic center from 2013 to 2019. Exclusion criteria were primary open and single incision cholecystectomy. Patient factors included age, sex, BMI, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Outcomes included operative time, conversion to open procedure, length of stay (LOS), mortality rate, and 30-day complications. A multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine independent predictors for open conversion.

RESULTS

A total of 1389 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. 69.8% were female; mean age 48.6 years (range 15-94), average BMI 29.4 kg/m² (13.3-55.6). 989 patients (71.2%) underwent LC without fluorescence and 400 (28.8%) underwent FC with ICG. 30-day mortality detected 2 cases in the non-ICG group and zero with ICG. ICG reduced operative time by 26.47 min per case (p < 0.0001). For patients with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m², operative duration for ICG vs non-ICG groups was 75.57 vs 104.9 min respectively (p < 0.0001). ICG required conversion to open at a rate of 1.5%, while non-ICG converted at a rate of 8.5% (p < 0.0001). Conversion rate remained significant with multivariable analysis (OR 0.212, p = 0.001). A total of 19 cases were aborted (1.35%), 8 in the ICG group (1.96%) and 11 in the non-ICG group (1.10%), these cases were not included in LC totals. Average LOS was 0.69 vs 1.54 days in the ICG compared to non-ICG LCs (p < 0.0001), respectively. Injuries were more common in the non-ICG group, with 9 patients sustaining Strasberg class A injuries in the non-ICG group and 2 in the ICG group. 1 CBDI occurred in the non-ICG group. There was no significant difference in 30-day complication rates between groups.

CONCLUSION

ICG cholangiography is a non-invasive adjunct to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, leading to improved patient outcomes with respect to operative times, decreased conversion to open procedures, and shorter length of hospitalization. Fluorescence cholangiography improves visualization of biliary anatomy, thereby decreasing rate of CBDI, Strasberg A injuries, and mortality. These findings support ICG as standard of care during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: which predicting factors of conversion? Two Italian center's studies

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy represents the gold standard technique for the treatment of lithiasic gallbladder disease. Although it has many advantages, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not risk-free and in special situations there is a need for conversion into an open procedure, in order to minimize postoperative complications and to complete the procedure safely. The aim of this study was to identify factors that can predict the conversion to open cholecystectomy.

METHODS

We analyzed 1323 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy over the last five years at St. Orsola University Hospital-Bologna and Umberto I University Hospital-Rome. Among these, 116 patients (8.7%) were converted into laparotomic cholecystectomy. Clinical, demographic, surgical and pathological data from these patients were included in a prospective database. A univariate analysis was performed followed by a multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

On univariate analysis, the factors significantly correlated with conversion to open were the ASA score higher than 3 and the comorbidity, specifically cardiovascular disease, diabetes and chronic renal failure (P<0.001). Patients with a higher mean age had a higher risk of conversion to open (61.9±17.1 vs. 54.1±15.2, P<0.001). Previous abdominal surgery and previous episodes of cholecystitis and/or pancreatitis were not statistically significant factors for conversion. There were four deaths in the group of converted patients and two in the laparoscopic group (P<0.001). Operative morbility was higher in the conversion group (22% versus 8%, P<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the factors significantly correlated to conversion were: age <65 years old (P=0.031 OR: 1.6), ASA score 3-4 (P=0.013, OR:1.8), history of ERCP (P=0.16 OR:1.7), emergency procedure (P=0.011, OR:1.7); CRP higher than 0,5 (P<0.001, OR:3.3), acute cholecystitis (P<0.001, OR:1.4). Further multivariate analysis of morbidity, postoperative mortality and home discharge showed that conversion had a significant influence on overall post-operative complications (P=0.011, OR:2.01), while mortality (P=0.143) and discharge at home were less statistically influenced.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that most of the independent risk factors for conversion cannot be modified by delaying surgery. Many factors reported in the literature did not significantly impact conversion rates in our results.

Recommendation for cholecystectomy protocol based on intraoperative ultrasound - a single-centre retrospective case-control study

Introduction

There is a strong need to make laparoscopic cholecystectomy as safe as possible, but sometimes complications in the form of bile duct and/or vascular injury occur. The safe plane of dissection can be precisely identified with intraoperative ultrasound, ensuring reduction of the complication rate to a minimum.

Aim

To evaluate the advantages of the cholecystectomy protocol based on the use of intraoperative ultrasound during laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy.

Material and methods

The study group consisted of 700 patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis, which was divided into two subgroups: with the critical view of safety only (312 patients) and with the critical view of safety + laparoscopic/open cholecystectomy ultrasound (388 patients). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and conversion in patients from the second subgroup were performed under the control of intraoperative ultrasound.

Results

We did not observe any biliary complications, and the visualization of the common bile duct, the proper hepatic artery and the portal vein was obtained in every patient from the critical view of safety + laparoscopic/open cholecystectomy ultrasound group. The mean time of the operation was significantly shorter and the conversion, biliary injury and intraoperative bleeding rates were significantly lower in this group of patients.

Conclusions

Intraoperative ultrasound is a very efficient and safe method of guidance, and its use should be standard along with the critical view of safety during cholecystectomy.

The Cholecystectomy As A Day Case (CAAD) Score: A Validated Score of Preoperative Predictors of Successful Day-Case Cholecystectomy Using the CholeS Data Set

BACKGROUND

Day-case surgery is associated with significant patient and cost benefits. However, only 43% of cholecystectomy patients are discharged home the same day. One hypothesis is day-case cholecystectomy rates, defined as patients discharged the same day as their operation, may be improved by better assessment of patients using standard preoperative variables.

METHODS

Data were extracted from a prospectively collected data set of cholecystectomy patients from 166 UK and Irish hospitals (CholeS). Cholecystectomies performed as elective procedures were divided into main (75%) and validation (25%) data sets. Preoperative predictors were identified, and a risk score of failed day case was devised using multivariate logistic regression. Receiver operating curve analysis was used to validate the score in the validation data set.

RESULTS

Of the 7426 elective cholecystectomies performed, 49% of these were discharged home the same day. Same-day discharge following cholecystectomy was less likely with older patients (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.15-0.23), higher ASA scores (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15-0.23), complicated cholelithiasis (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.48), male gender (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.74), previous acute gallstone-related admissions (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.48-0.60) and preoperative endoscopic intervention (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.34-0.47). The CAAD score was developed using these variables. When applied to the validation subgroup, a CAAD score of ≤5 was associated with 80.8% successful day-case cholecystectomy compared with 19.2% associated with a CAAD score >5 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The CAAD score which utilises data readily available from clinic letters and electronic sources can predict same-day discharges following cholecystectomy.

Index Admission Emergency Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Common Bile Duct Exploration: Results From a Specialist Center in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND

The incidence of common bile duct (CBD) stones is between 10% to 18% in people undergoing cholecystectomy for gallstones. Laparoscopic exploration of the CBD is now becoming routine practice in the elective setting, however its safety and efficacy in emergencies is poorly understood.

METHODS

We analyzed our results for index emergency admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy within a specialist center in the United Kingdom. Data from all emergency cholecystectomies in our unit, between 2011 to 2016 were collected and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

In total, 494 patients underwent emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy; 53 (10.7%) patients underwent common bile duct exploration (CBDE), with 1 conversion and 1 bile leak. Indications for CBDE were based on preoperative imaging (41 cases, 81%) or intra-operative cholangiogram (44 cases, 83%) findings.

CONCLUSIONS

Index admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy and concomitant CBDE is safe and should be the gold standard treatment for patients presenting with acute biliary complications, reducing readmissions and the need for a 2-stage procedure.

Predicting Conversion from Laparoscopic to Open Cholecystectomy: A Single Institution Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the standard surgical treatment for benign gallbladder disease. Nevertheless, conversion to open cholecystectomy (OC) is needed in some cases. The aim of this study is to calculate our institutional conversion rate and to identify the variables that are implicated in increasing the risk of conversion (LC-OC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a retrospective study of all cases of LC performed at the American University of Beirut Medical Center between 2000 and 2015. Each (LC-OC) case was randomly matched to a laparoscopically completed case by the same consultant within the same year of practice, as the LC-OC case, in a 1:5 ratio. Forty-eight parameters were compared between the two study groups.

RESULTS

Forty-eight out of 4668 LC were converted to OC over the 15-year study period; the conversion rate in our study was 1.03%. The variables that were found to be most predictive of conversion were male gender, advanced age, prior history of laparotomy, especially in the setting of prior gunshot wound, a history of restrictive or constrictive lung disease and anemia (Hb < 9 g/dl). The most common intraoperative reasons for conversion were perceived difficult anatomy or obscured view secondary to severe adhesions or significant inflammation. Patients who were in the LC-OC arm had a longer length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Advance age, male gender, significant comorbidities and history of prior laparotomies have a high risk of conversion. Patients with these risk factors should be counseled for the possibility of conversion to open surgery preoperatively. Further research is needed to determine whether these high risks patients should be operated on by surgeons with more extensive experience in minimal invasive surgery.

OUTCOME OF LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH GALLSTONE DISEASE AT A SECONDARY LEVEL CARE HOSPITAL

Background:

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the most commonly performed operation of the digestive tract. ⁾It is considered as the gold standard treatment for cholelithiasis.

Aim:

To evaluate the outcome of it regarding length of hospital stay, complications, morbidity and mortality at a secondary hospital.

Methods:

Data of 492 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy were retrospectively reviewed. Patients’ demographics, co-morbid diseases, previous abdominal surgery, conversion to open cholecystectomy, operative time, intra and postoperative complications, and hospital stay were collected and analyzed from patients’ files.

Results:

Out of 492 patients, 386 (78.5%) were females and 106 (21.5%) males. The mean age of the patients was 49.35±8.68 years. Mean operative time was 65.94±11.52 min. Twenty-four cases (4.9%) were converted to open surgery, four due to obscure anatomy (0.8%), 11 due to difficult dissection in Calot’s triangle (2.2%) and nine by bleeding (1.8%). Twelve (2.4%) cases had biliary leakage, seven (1.4%) due to partial tear in common bile duct, the other five due to slipped cystic duct stables. Mean hospital stay was 2.6±1.5 days. Twenty-one (4.3%) developed wound infection. Port site hernia was detected in nine (1.8%) patients. There was no cases of bowel injury or spilled gallstones. There was no mortality recorded in this series.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe and effective line for management of gallstone disease that can be performed with acceptable morbidity at a secondary hospital.

Risk factors for the late development of common bile duct stones after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

The development of common bile duct (CBD) stones after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) could be a stressful event for surgeons and patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the risk factors for and the time of occurrence of CBD stones, which are detected at a certain period after LC in patients who have no history of having CBD stone before operation.

METHODS

A total of 1938 patients who underwent LC for benign gallbladder lesion were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were categorized into two groups according to the development of CBD stones at least 6 months after LC (case group, control group). The risk factors for and the time of development of CBD stones after LC were evaluated.

RESULTS

In a univariate analysis, the significant factors for the development of CBD stones were old age, acute cholecystitis, the presence of periampullary diverticulum, and the presence of gall bladder stones sized <0.55 cm. By multivariate analysis, acute cholecystitis (OR: 3.082, 95% CI: 1.306-7.272, p = 0.010), the presence of periampullary diverticulum (OR: 7.950, 95% CI: 3.425-18.457, p < 0.001), and the presence of gall bladder stones sized < 0.55 cm (OR: 5.647, 95% CI: 1.310-24.346, p = 0.020) were independent factors that could predict the development of CBD stones at least 6 months after LC. The time intervals of the development of CBD stones had evenly distributed during 50 months after LC.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that the surgeon should inform the possibility of the development of CBD stones who have the identified risk factors.

Difficult Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Trainees: Predictors and Results in an Academic Teaching Hospital

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is one of the first laparoscopic procedures performed by surgical trainees. This study aims to determine preoperative and/or intraoperative predictors of difficult LC and to compare complications of LC performed by trainees with that performed by trained surgeons. A cohort of 180 consecutive patients with cholelithiasis who underwent LC was analyzed. We used univariate and binary logistic regression analyses to predict factors associated with difficult LC. We compared the rate of complications of LCs performed by trainees and that performed by trained surgeons using Pearson's chi-square test. Patients with impacted stone in the neck of the gallbladder (GB) (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.59-15.77), with adhesions in the Triangle of Calot (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.27-6.83), or with GB rupture (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.02-11.41) were more likely to experience difficult LC. There was no difference between trainees and trained surgeons in the rate of cystic artery injury (p = .144) or GB rupture (p = .097). However, operative time of LCs performed by trained surgeons was significantly shorter (median, 45 min; IQR, 30-70 min) compared with the surgical trainees' operative time (60 min; IQR, 50-90 min). Surgical trainees can perform difficult LC safely under supervision with no increase in complications albeit with mild increase in operative time.

Retroinfundibular laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy in difficult cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy becomes the gold standard surgical procedure for treating gallstones. Standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) requires proper dissection of Calot's triangle to achieve the critical view of safety. This may be difficult in certain conditions, resulting in higher incidence of bile duct injury and conversion to open. We aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy by retroinfundibular (RI) approach to that of SLC, in difficult cases.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study is prospective cohort study, in which 60 patients were operated by SLC and 65 patients by laparoscopic cholecystectomy by RI approach.

RESULTS

From the total 125 cases, 95 (76%) patients were male and 30 (24%) were female. The mean age was 59.5 ± 5.5 years. The mean operative time in SLC group was 128 ± 17 min VS. 114 ± 10 min in RI group. Conversion to open occurred in 10% in SLC group VS. 1.5% in RI group. Biliary injury occurred in 3.3% in SLC group VS. 0% in RI group. The mean hospital stay in SLC was 3.7 ± 5.3 days VS. 2.1 ± 0.3 days in RI group.

CONCLUSION

In difficult cholecystectomy, RI approach is feasible and safe alternative to SLC.

Protocol for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Is it rocket science?

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) does not require advanced techniques, and its performance has therefore rapidly spread worldwide. However, the rate of biliary injuries has not decreased. The concept of the critical view of safety (CVS) was first documented two decades ago. Unexpected injuries are principally due to misidentification of human factors. The surgeon's assumption is a major cause of misidentification, and a high level of experience alone is not sufficient for successful LC. We herein describe tips and pitfalls of LC in detail and discuss various technical considerations. Finally, based on a review of important papers and our own experience, we summarize the following mandatory protocol for safe LC: (1) consideration that a high level of experience alone is not enough; (2) recognition of the plateau involving the common hepatic duct and hepatic hilum; (3) blunt dissection until CVS exposure; (4) Calot's triangle clearance in the overhead view; (5) Calot's triangle clearance in the view from underneath; (6) dissection of the posterior right side of Calot's triangle; (7) removal of the gallbladder body; and (8) positive CVS exposure. We believe that adherence to this protocol will ensure successful and beneficial LC worldwide, even in patients with inflammatory changes and rare anatomies.

The Problem with Big Data: Operating on Smaller Datasets to Bridge the Implementation Gap

Big datasets have the potential to revolutionize public health. However, there is a mismatch between the political and scientific optimism surrounding big data and the public's perception of its benefit. We suggest a systematic and concerted emphasis on developing models derived from smaller datasets to illustrate to the public how big data can produce tangible benefits in the long term. In order to highlight the immediate value of a small data approach, we produced a proof-of-concept model predicting hospital length of stay. The results demonstrate that existing small datasets can be used to create models that generate a reasonable prediction, facilitating health-care delivery. We propose that greater attention (and funding) needs to be directed toward the utilization of existing information resources in parallel with current efforts to create and exploit "big data."

Abdominal drainage versus no abdominal drainage for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

The aim is to assess the benefits and harms of routine abdominal drainage in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until August 2016. We included all randomised clinical trials comparing drainage versus no drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy irrespective of language and publication status. We used standard methodological procedures in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A total of 2398 participants were randomised to drain (1197 participants) versus 'no drain' (1201 participants) in 16 trials included in this article. Pain 24 h after surgery was less severe in the no drain group (MD1.31; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.65; p < 0.00001). Abdominal drainage prolonged operative time (MD 5.77 min; 95% CI 4.98 min-6.57 min; p < 0.00001) but not the length of hospital stay (MD 0.21 days; 95% CI -0.00 days to 0.42 days; p = 0.05). No significant difference was present with respect to the intra-abdominal fluid, wound infection, nausea or vomit, mortality after operation. There is no significant advantage of drain placement after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Further well designed randomized clinical trials should be carefully re-considered.

Preoperative risk factors for conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy: a validated risk score derived from a prospective U.K. database of 8820 patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is commonly performed, and several factors increase the risk of open conversion, prolonging operating time and hospital stay. Preoperative stratification would improve consent, scheduling and identify appropriate training cases. The aim of this study was to develop a validated risk score for conversion for use in clinical practice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Preoperative patient and disease-related variables were identified from a prospective cholecystectomy database (CholeS) of 8820 patients, divided into main and validation sets. Preoperative predictors of conversion were identified by multivariable binary logistic regression. A risk score was developed and validated using a forward stepwise approach.

RESULTS

Some 297 procedures (3.4%) were converted. The risk score was derived from six significant predictors: age (p = 0.005), sex (p < 0.001), indication for surgery (p < 0.001), ASA (p < 0.001), thick-walled gallbladder (p = 0.040) and CBD diameter (p = 0.004). Testing the score on the validation set yielded an AUROC = 0.766 (p < 0.001), and a score >6 identified patients at high risk of conversion (7.1% vs. 1.2%).

CONCLUSION

This validated risk score allows preoperative identification of patients at six-fold increased risk of conversion to open cholecystectomy.

Conversions in laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery offers patients with rectal cancer short-term benefits and similar survival rates as open surgery. However, selecting patients who are suitable candidates for laparoscopic surgery is essential to prevent intra-operative conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery. Clinical and pathological variables were studied among patients who had converted laparoscopic surgeries within the COLOR II trial to improve patient selection for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Between January 20, 2004, and May 4, 2010, 1044 patients with rectal cancer enrolled in the COLOR II trial and were randomized to either laparoscopic or open surgery. Of 693 patients who had laparoscopic surgery, 114 (16 %) were converted to open surgery. Predictive factors were studied using multivariate analyses, and morbidity and mortality rates were determined.

RESULTS

Factors correlating with conversion were as follows: age above 65 years (OR 1.9; 95 % CI 1.2-3.0: p = 0.003), BMI greater than 25 (OR 2.7; 95 % CI 1.7-4.3: p < 0.001), and tumor location more than 5 cm from the anal verge (OR 0.5; CI 0.3-0.9). Gender was not significantly related to conversion (p = 0.14). In the converted group, blood loss was greater (p < 0.001) and operating time was longer (p = 0.028) compared with the non-converted laparoscopies. Hospital stay did not differ (p = 0.06). Converted procedures were followed by more postoperative complications compared with laparoscopic or open surgery (p = 0.041 and p = 0.042, respectively). Mortality was similar in the laparoscopic and converted groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Age above 65 years, BMI greater than 25, and tumor location between 5 and 15 cm from the anal verge were risk factors for conversion of laparoscopic to open surgery in patients with rectal cancer.

What are the appropriate indicators of surgical difficulty during laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Results from a Japan-Korea-Taiwan multinational survey

BACKGROUND

Serious complications continue to occur in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The commonly used indicators of surgical difficulty such as the duration of surgery are insufficient because they are surgeon and institution dependent. We aimed to identify appropriate indicators of surgical difficulty during LC.

METHODS

A total of 26 Japanese expert LC surgeons discussed using the nominal group technique (NGT) to generate a list of intraoperative findings that contribute to surgical difficulty. Thereafter, a survey was circulated to 61 experts in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. The questionnaire addressed LC experience, surgical strategy, and perceptions of 30 intraoperative findings listed by the NGT.

RESULTS

The response rate of the survey was 100%. There was a statistically significant difference among nations regarding the duration of surgery and adoption rate of safety measures and recognition of landmarks. The criteria for conversion to an open or subtotal cholecystectomy were at the discretion of each surgeon. In contrast, perceptions of the impact of 30 intraoperative findings on surgical difficulty (categorized by factors related to inflammation and additional findings of the gallbladder and other intra-abdominal factors) were consistent among surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative findings are objective and considered to be appropriate indicators of surgical difficulty during LC.

Who experiences endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstone disease?

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has become a standard treatment of symptomatic gallstone disease. But, some patients suffer from retained common bile duct stones after LC. The aim of this study is to analyze the predicting factors associated with subsequent postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) after LC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a database of every LC performed between July 2006 and September 2012. We classify 28 patients who underwent ERCP within 6 months after LC for symptomatic gallstone disease as the ERCP group and 56 patients who underwent LC for symptomatic gallstone disease during same period paired by sex, age, underlying disease, operation history, and body mass index as the control group. To identify risk factor performing postoperative ERCP after LC, we compared admission route, preoperative biochemical liver function test, number of gall stones, gallstone size, adhesion around GB, wall thickening of GB, and existence of acute cholecystitis between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Admission route, preoperative AST, ALT, and ALP, stone size, longer operation time, and acute cholecystitis were identified as risk factors of postoperative ERCP in univariate analyses. But, longer operation time (P = 0.004) and acute cholecystitis (P = 0.048) were identified as independent risk factors of postoperative ERCP in multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSION

The patient who underwent ERCP after LC for symptomatic gallstone disease are more likely experienced longer operation time and acute cholecystitis than the patient who did not undergo ERCP after LC.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: early or delayed?: Evidence from a systematic review of discordant meta-analyses

The laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is an important approach of treating acute cholecystitis and the timing of performing this given treatment is associated with clinical outcomes. Although several meta-analyses have been done to investigate the optimal timing of implementing this treatment, the conflicting findings from these meta-analyses still confuse decision-making. And thus, we performed this systematic review to assess discordant meta-analyses and generate conclusive findings to facilitate informed decision-making in clinical context eventually. We electronically searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE to include meta-analysis comparing early (within 7 days of the onset of symptoms) with delayed LC (at least 1 week after initial conservative treatment) for acute cholecystitis through August 2015. Two independent investigators completed all tasks including scanning and appraising eligibility, abstracting essential information using prespecified extraction form, assessing methodological quality using Oxford Levels of Evidence and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool, and assessing the reporting quality using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), as well as implementing Jadad algorithm in each step for the whole process. A heterogeneity degree of ≤50% is accepted. Seven eligible meta-analyses were included eventually. Only one was Level I of evidence and remaining studies were Level II of evidence. The AMSTAR scores varied from 8 to 11 with a median of 9. The PRISMA scores varied from 19 to 26. The most heterogeneity level fell into the desired criteria. After implementing Jadad algorithm, 2 meta-analyses with more eligible RCTs were selected based on search strategies and implication of selection. The best available evidence indicated a nonsignificant difference in mortality, bile duct injury, bile leakage, overall complications, and conversion to open surgery, but a significant reduction in wound infection, hospitalization, and operation duration and improvement of the quality of life when compared early LC with delayed LC. However, number of work days lost, hospital costs, and patient satisfaction are warranted to be assessed further. With the best available evidence, we recommend early LC to be as the standard treatment option in treating acute cholecystitis.

Anticipation of complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: prediction of individual outcome

BACKGROUND

Complication rates after a laparoscopic cholecystectomy are still up to 10 %. Knowledge of individual patient risk profiles could help to reduce morbidity.

AIM

The aim of this study is to create risk profiles for specific complications to anticipate on individual outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Individual patient outcome for a specific post-operative complication was assessed from a retrospective database of two major teaching hospitals, using uni- and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 4359 patients were included of which 346 developed one or more complications (8 %). Five risk profiles were found to predict specific complications: older patients (>65 year) are at risk for pneumonia (OR 7.0, 95 % CI 3.3-15.0, p < 0.001) and bleeding (OR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.2-3.9, p = 0.014), patients with acute cholecystitis are at risk for intra-abdominal abscess (OR 5.9, 95 % CI 3.4-10.1, p < 0.001), bile leakage (OR 3.6, 95 % CI 2.0-6.6, p < 0.001) and pneumonia (OR 3.5, 95 % CI 1.6-7.6, p < 0.002), previous history of cholecystitis is predictive for wound infection (OR 5.1, 95 % CI, (2.7-9.7), p < 0.001), intra-abdominal abscess (OR 6.1, 95 % CI 2.8-13.8, p < 0.001), post-operative bleeding (OR 4.8, 95 % CI 2.1-11.1, p < 0.001), bile leakage (OR 7.2, 95 % CI 3.4-15.4, p < 0.001) and pneumonia (OR 3.9, 95 % CI 1.3-11.9, p = 0.018), pre-operative ERCP is predictive for intra-abdominal abscess (OR 3.3, 95 % CI 2.0-5.7, p < 0.001), post-operative bleeding (OR 2.1, 95 % CI 1.2-3.9, p = 0.058) and pneumonia (OR 3.8, 95 % CI 1.9-7.8, p = 0.001), and converted patients are at risk for wound infection (OR 4.0, 95 % CI 2.1-7.7, p < 0.001) and intra-abdominal abscess (OR 3.5, 95 % CI 1.6-7.7, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Individual risk prediction of outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is feasible. This facilitates individual pre-operative doctor-patient communication and may tailor surgical strategies.

[Not Available]

OBJECTIVES

Database review to analyse age and sex differences in complication and conversion rates and influence on return to normal daily activities and work after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

658 patients had a laparoscopic cholecystectomy for proven gallstones between 9/4/2001 and 15/2/2006 under the care of one surgeon (F. H.) at Benenden hospital, Kent, UK.

RESULTS

We had a 65.5% response rate with 431 replies at a mean follow up of 22.4 months (2.3-52.8). There was a male to female ratio of 5:23 with a mean age of 54.2 years (22-83). Using linear regression we found no significant correlation with operative time and variables of age and sex (df = 2, 251, R (2) = 0.03, F = 0.574, p < 0.564). No significant correlation with number of complications and age or sex (df = 2, 334, R (2) = 0.004, F = 1.615, p < 0.200). Age (Exp(B) = 1.040, p < 0.51) and sex (Exp(B) = 0.863, p < 0.855) had no effect on conversion. No difference was found in relation to age and sex with return to normal daily activities (df = 2, 307, F = 0.904, p < 0.406). Age was a non-significant predictor of return to work (Beta = 0.040, p < 0.572) however men return to work significantly sooner (Beta = 0.191, p < 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Operative time, number of complications, conversion to open and return to normal daily activities may not be affected by age or sex of patients. Hospital stay may be longer in older patients. Men appear to return to work sooner. Further analysis with validated questionnaires are required.

Bile duct reconstruction following laparoscopic cholecystectomy in England

Objectives

To determine the incidence of bile duct reconstruction (BDR) following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and to identify associated risk factors.

Background

Major bile duct injury (BDI) requiring reconstruction is a serious complication of cholecystectomy.

Methods

All LC and attempted LC operations in England between April 2001 and March 2013 were identified. Patients with malignancy, a stone in bile duct or those who underwent bile duct exploration were excluded. This cohort of patients was followed for 1 year to identify those who underwent BDR as a surrogate marker for major BDI. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with the need for reconstruction.

Results

In total, 572,223 LC and attempted LC were performed in England between April 2001 and March 2013. Five hundred (0.09 %) of these patients underwent BDR. The risk of BDR is lower in patient that do not have acute cholecystitis [odds ratio (OR) 0.48 (95 % CI 0.30–0.76)]. The regular use of on-table cholangiography (OTC) [OR 0.69 (0.54–0.88)] and high consultant caseload >80 LC/year [OR 0.56 (0.39–0.54)] reduced the risk of BDR. Patients who underwent BDR were 10 times more likely to die within a year than those who did not require further surgery (6 vs. 0.6 %).

Conclusions

The rate of BDR following laparoscopic cholecystectomy in England is low (0.09 %). The study suggests that OTC should be used more widely and provides further evidence in support of the provision of LC services by specialised teams with an adequate caseload (>80).

Can Payers Use Prices to Improve Quality? Evidence from English Hospitals

In most activity-based financing systems, payers set prices reactively based on historical averages of hospital reported costs. If hospitals respond to prices, payers might set prices proactively to affect the volume of particular treatments or clinical practice. We evaluate the effects of a unique initiative in England in which the price offered to hospitals for discharging patients on the same day as a particular procedure was increased by 24%, while the price for inpatient treatment remained unchanged. Using national hospital records for 205,784 patients admitted for the incentivised procedure and 838,369 patients admitted for a range of non-incentivised procedures between 1 December 2007 and 31 March 2011, we consider whether this price change had the intended effect and/or produced unintended effects. We find that the price change led to an almost six percentage point increase in the daycase rate and an 11 percentage point increase in the planned daycase rate. Patients benefited from a lower proportion of procedures reverted to open surgery during a planned laparoscopic procedure and from a reduction in long stays. There was no evidence that readmission and death rates were affected. The results suggest that payers can set prices proactively to incentivise hospitals to improve quality.

Bleeding complications in cholecystectomy: a register study of over 22,000 cholecystectomies in Finland

Background

Major bleeding is rare but among the most serious complications of laparoscopic surgery. Still very little is known on bleeding complications and related blood component use in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of this study is to compare bleeding complications, transfusion rates and related costs between LC and open cholecystectomy (OC).

Methods

Data concerning LCs and OCs and related blood component use between 2002 and 2007 were collected from existing computerized medical records (Finnish Red Cross Register) of ten Finnish hospital districts.

Results

Register data included 17175 LCs and 4942 OCs. In the LC group, 1.3 % of the patients received red blood cell (RBC) transfusion compared to 13 % of the patients in the OC group (p < 0.001). Similarly, the proportions of patients with platelet (0.1 % vs. 1.2 %, p < 0.001) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) products (0.5 % vs. 5.8 %) transfusions were respectively higher in the OC group than in the LC group. The mean transfused dose of RBCs, PTLs and FFP product Octaplas® or the mean cost of the transfused blood components did not differ significantly between the LC and OC groups.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was associated with lower transfusion rates of blood components compared to open surgery. The severity of bleeding complications may not differ substantially between LC and OC.

Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cholecystectomy compared with observation/conservative management for preventing recurrent symptoms and complications in adults presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones or cholecystitis: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Approximately 10-15% of the adult population suffer from gallstone disease, cholelithiasis, with more women than men being affected. Cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for people who present with biliary pain or acute cholecystitis and evidence of gallstones. However, some people do not experience a recurrence after an initial episode of biliary pain or cholecystitis. As most of the current research focuses on the surgical management of the disease, less attention has been dedicated to the consequences of conservative management.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cholecystectomy compared with observation/conservative management in people presenting with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstones (biliary pain) or cholecystitis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched all major electronic databases (e.g. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Bioscience Information Service, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) from 1980 to September 2012 and we contacted experts in the field.

REVIEW METHODS

Evidence was considered from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies that enrolled people with symptomatic gallstone disease (pain attacks only and/or acute cholecystitis). Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Standard meta-analysis techniques were used to combine results from included studies. A de novo Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.

RESULTS

Two Norwegian RCTs involving 201 participants were included. Eighty-eight per cent of people randomised to surgery and 45% of people randomised to observation underwent cholecystectomy during the 14-year follow-up period. Participants randomised to observation were significantly more likely to experience gallstone-related complications [risk ratio = 6.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 to 28.51; p = 0.01], in particular acute cholecystitis (risk ratio = 9.55; 95% CI 1.25 to 73.27; p = 0.03), and less likely to undergo surgery (risk ratio = 0.50; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.73; p = 0.0004), experience surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.81; p = 0.01) or, more specifically, minor surgery-related complications (risk ratio = 0.11; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.56; p = 0.008) than those randomised to surgery. Fifty-five per cent of people randomised to observation did not require an operation during the 14-year follow-up period and 12% of people randomised to cholecystectomy did not undergo the scheduled operation. The results of the economic evaluation suggest that, on average, the surgery strategy costs £1236 more per patient than the conservative management strategy but was, on average, more effective. An increase in the number of people requiring surgery while treated conservatively corresponded to a reduction in the cost-effectiveness of the conservative strategy. There was uncertainty around some of the parameters used in the economic model.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this assessment indicate that cholecystectomy is still the treatment of choice for many symptomatic people. However, approximately half of the people in the observation group did not require surgery or suffer complications in the long term indicating that a conservative therapeutic approach may represent a valid alternative to surgery in this group of people. Owing to the dearth of current evidence in the UK setting a large, well-designed, multicentre trial is needed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

The study was registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002817.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Identifying complications of interventional procedures from UK routine healthcare databases: a systematic search for methods using clinical codes

BACKGROUND

Several authors have developed and applied methods to routine data sets to identify the nature and rate of complications following interventional procedures. But, to date, there has been no systematic search for such methods. The objective of this article was to find, classify and appraise published methods, based on analysis of clinical codes, which used routine healthcare databases in a United Kingdom setting to identify complications resulting from interventional procedures.

METHODS

A literature search strategy was developed to identify published studies that referred, in the title or abstract, to the name or acronym of a known routine healthcare database and to complications from procedures or devices. The following data sources were searched in February and March 2013: Cochrane Methods Register, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, Econlit, EMBASE, Health Management Information Consortium, Health Technology Assessment database, MathSciNet, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in-process, OAIster, OpenGrey, Science Citation Index Expanded and ScienceDirect. Of the eligible papers, those which reported methods using clinical coding were classified and summarised in tabular form using the following headings: routine healthcare database; medical speciality; method for identifying complications; length of follow-up; method of recording comorbidity. The benefits and limitations of each approach were assessed.

RESULTS

From 3688 papers identified from the literature search, 44 reported the use of clinical codes to identify complications, from which four distinct methods were identified: 1) searching the index admission for specified clinical codes, 2) searching a sequence of admissions for specified clinical codes, 3) searching for specified clinical codes for complications from procedures and devices within the International Classification of Diseases 10th revision (ICD-10) coding scheme which is the methodology recommended by NHS Classification Service, and 4) conducting manual clinical review of diagnostic and procedure codes.

CONCLUSIONS

The four distinct methods identifying complication from codified data offer great potential in generating new evidence on the quality and safety of new procedures using routine data. However the most robust method, using the methodology recommended by the NHS Classification Service, was the least frequently used, highlighting that much valuable observational data is being ignored.

The HAC trial (harmonic for acute cholecystitis): a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing the use of harmonic scalpel to monopolar diathermy for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in cases of acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

The HARMONIC SCALPEL (H) is an advanced ultrasonic cutting and coagulating surgical device with important clinical advantages, such as: reduced ligature demand; greater precision due to minimal lateral thermal tissue damage; minimal smoke production; absence of electric corrents running through the patient. However, there are no prospective RCTs demonstrating the advantages of H compared to the conventional monopolar diathermy (MD) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in cases of acute cholecystitis (AC).

METHODS

This study was a prospective, single-center, randomized trial (Trial Registration Number: NCT00746850) designed to investigate whether the use of H can reduce the incidence of intra-operative conversion during LC in cases of AC, compared to the use of MD. Patients were divided into two groups: both groups underwent early LC, within 72 hours of diagnosis, using H and MD respectively (H = experimental/study group, MD = control group). The study was designed and conducted in accordance with the regulations of Good Clinical Practice.

RESULTS

42 patients were randomly assigned the use of H (21 patients) or MD (21 patients) during LC. The two groups were comparable in terms of basic patient characteristics. Mean operating time in the H group was 101.3 minutes compared to 106.4 minutes in the control group (p=ns); overall blood loss was significantly lower in the H group. Conversion rate was 4.7% for the H group, which was significantly lower than the 33% conversion rate for the control group (p<0.05). Post-operative morbidity rates differed slightly: 19% and 23% in the H and control groups, respectively (p=ns). Average post-operative hospitalization lasted 5.2 days in the H group compared to 5.4 days in the control group (p=ns).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of H appears to correlate with reduced rates of laparoscopic-open conversion. Given this evidence, H may be more suitable than MD for technically demanding cases of AC.

Pharmacological interventions for prevention or treatment of postoperative pain in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

While laparoscopic cholecystectomy is generally considered less painful than open surgery, pain is one of the important reasons for delayed discharge after day-surgery and overnight stay following laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety and effectiveness of different pharmacological interventions such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and anticonvulsant analgesics in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of different analgesics in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform portal (WHO ICTRP) to March 2013 to identify randomised clinical trials of relevance to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing different pharmacological interventions with no intervention or inactive controls for outcomes related to benefit in this review. We considered comparative non-randomised studies with regards to treatment-related harms. We also considered trials that compared one class of drug with another class of drug for this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected the data independently. We analysed the data with both fixed-effect and random-effects models using Review Manager 5 analysis. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 trials with 2505 participants randomised to the different pharmacological agents and inactive controls. All the trials were at unclear risk of bias. Most trials included only low anaesthetic risk people undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Participants were allowed to take additional analgesics as required in 24 of the trials. The pharmacological interventions in all the included trials were aimed at preventing pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There were considerable differences in the pharmacological agents used and the methods of administration. The estimated effects of the intervention on the proportion of participants who were discharged as day-surgery, the length of hospital stay, or the time taken to return to work were imprecise in all the comparisons in which these outcomes were reported (very low quality evidence). There was no mortality in any of the groups in the two trials that reported mortality (183 participants, very low quality evidence). Differences in serious morbidity outcomes between the groups were imprecise across all the comparisons (very low quality evidence). None of the trials reported patient quality of life or time taken to return to normal activity. The pain at 4 to 8 hours was generally reduced by about 1 to 2 cm on the visual analogue scale of 1 to 10 cm in the comparisons involving the different pharmacological agents and inactive controls (low or very low quality evidence). The pain at 9 to 24 hours was generally reduced by about 0.5 cm (a modest reduction) on the visual analogue scale of 1 to 10 cm in the comparisons involving the different pharmacological agents and inactive controls (low or very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of very low quality that different pharmacological agents including non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioid analgesics, and anticonvulsant analgesics reduce pain scores in people at low anaesthetic risk undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, the decision to use these drugs has to weigh the clinically small reduction in pain against uncertain evidence of serious adverse events associated with many of these agents. Further randomised clinical trials of low risk of systematic and random errors are necessary. Such trials should include important clinical outcomes such as quality of life and time to return to work in their assessment.

Methods of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation may decrease pain in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, the optimal method to administer the local anaesthetic is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the optimal local anaesthetic agent, the optimal timing, and the optimal delivery method of the local anaesthetic agent used for intraperitoneal instillation in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform portal (WHO ICTRP) to March 2013 to identify randomised clinical trials for assessment of benefit and comparative non-randomised studies for the assessment of treatment-related harms.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing different methods of local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected the data independently. We analysed the data with both fixed-effect and random-effects models using Review Manager 5 analysis. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 trials with 798 participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy randomised to different methods of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation. All the trials were at high risk of bias. Most trials included only people with low anaesthetic risk. The comparisons included in the trials that met the eligibility criteria were the following; comparison of one local anaesthetic agent with another local anaesthetic agent (three trials); comparison of timing of delivery (six trials); comparison of different methods of delivery of the anaesthetic agent (two trials); comparison of location of the instillation of the anaesthetic agent (one trial); three trials reported mortality and morbidity.There were no mortalities or serious adverse events in either group in the following comparisons: bupivacaine (0/100 (0%)) versus lignocaine (0/106 (0%)) (one trial; 206 participants); just after creation of pneumoperitoneum (0/55 (0%)) versus end of surgery (0/55 (0%)) (two trials; 110 participants); just after creation of pneumoperitoneum (0/15 (0%)) versus after the end of surgery (0/15 (0%)) (one trial; 30 participants); end of surgery (0/15 (0%)) versus after the end of surgery (0/15 (0%)) (one trial; 30 participants).None of the trials reported quality of life, the time taken to return to normal activity, or the time taken to return to work. The differences in the proportion of people who were discharged as day-surgery and the length of hospital stay were imprecise in all the comparisons included that reported these outcomes (very low quality evidence). There were some differences in the pain scores on the visual analogue scale (1 to 10 cm) but these were neither consistent nor robust to fixed-effect versus random-effects meta-analysis or sensitivity analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The currently available evidence is inadequate to determine the effects of one method of local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation compared with any other method of local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation in low anaesthetic risk individuals undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Further randomised clinical trials of low risk of systematic and random errors are necessary. Such trials should include important clinical outcomes such as quality of life and time to return to work in their assessment.

Low pressure versus standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

A pneumoperitoneum of 12 to 16 mm Hg is used for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Lower pressures are claimed to be safe and effective in decreasing cardiopulmonary complications and pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of low pressure pneumoperitoneum compared with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2013 to identify randomised trials,using search strategies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised clinical trials, irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status for inclusion in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified trials and independently extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models with RevMan 5 based on available case analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1092 participants randomly assigned to the low pressure group (509 participants) and the standard pressure group (583 participants) in 21 trials provided information for this review on one or more outcomes. Three additional trials comparing low pressure pneumoperitoneum with standard pressure pneumoperitoneum (including 179 participants) provided no information for this review. Most of the trials included low anaesthetic risk participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. One trial including 140 participants was at low risk of bias. The remaining 20 trials were at high risk of bias. The overall quality of evidence was low or very low. No mortality was reported in either the low pressure group (0/199; 0%) or the standard pressure group (0/235; 0%) in eight trials that reported mortality. One participant experienced the outcome of serious adverse events (low pressure group 1/179, 0.6%; standard pressure group 0/215, 0%; seven trials; 394 participants; RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.14 to 65.90; very low quality evidence). Quality of life, return to normal activity, and return to work were not reported in any of the trials. The difference between groups in the conversion to open cholecystectomy was imprecise (low pressure group 2/269, adjusted proportion 0.8%; standard pressure group 2/287, 0.7%; 10 trials; 556 participants; RR 1.18; 95% CI 0.29 to 4.72; very low quality evidence) and was compatible with an increase, a decrease, or no difference in the proportion of conversion to open cholecystectomy due to low pressure pneumoperitoneum. No difference in the length of hospital stay was reported between the groups (five trials; 415 participants; MD -0.30 days; 95% CI -0.63 to 0.02; low quality evidence). Operating time was about two minutes longer in the low pressure group than in the standard pressure group (19 trials; 990 participants; MD 1.51 minutes; 95% CI 0.07 to 2.94; very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be completed successfully using low pressure in approximately 90% of people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, no evidence is currently available to support the use of low pressure pneumoperitoneum in low anaesthetic risk patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety of low pressure pneumoperitoneum has to be established. Further well-designed trials are necessary, particularly in people with cardiopulmonary disorders who undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation versus no intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

While laparoscopic cholecystectomy is generally considered less painful than open surgery, pain is one of the important reasons for delayed discharge after day surgery and overnight stay laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety and effectiveness of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of intraperitoneal instillation of local anaesthetic agents in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to March 2013 to identify randomised clinical trials of relevance to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation versus placebo, no intervention, or inactive control during laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the review with regards to benefits while we considered quasi-randomised studies and non-randomised studies for treatment-related harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected the data independently. We analysed the data with both fixed-effect and random-effects models using Review Manager 5 analysis. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 58 trials, of which 48 trials with 2849 participants randomised to intraperitoneal local anaesthetic instillation (1558 participants) versus control (1291 participants) contributed data to one or more of the outcomes. All the trials except one trial with 30 participants were at high risk of bias. Most trials included only low anaesthetic risk people undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Various intraperitoneal local anaesthetic agents were used but bupivacaine in the liquid form was the most common local anaesthetic used. There were considerable differences in the methods of local anaesthetic instillation including the location (subdiaphragmatic, gallbladder bed, or both locations) and timing (before or after the removal of gallbladder) between the trials. There was no mortality in either group in the eight trials that reported mortality (0/236 (0%) in local anaesthetic instillation versus 0/210 (0%) in control group; very low quality evidence). One participant experienced the outcome of serious morbidity (eight trials; 446 participants; 1/236 (0.4%) in local anaesthetic instillation group versus 0/210 (0%) in the control group; RR 3.00; 95% CI 0.13 to 67.06; very low quality evidence). Although the remaining trials did not report the overall morbidity, three trials (190 participants) reported that there were no intra-operative complications. Twenty trials reported that there were no serious adverse events in any of the 715 participants who received local anaesthetic instillation. None of the trials reported participant quality of life, return to normal activity, or return to work.The effect of local anaesthetic instillation on the proportion of participants discharged as day surgery between the two groups was imprecise and compatible with benefit and no difference of intervention (three trials; 242 participants; 89/160 (adjusted proportion 61.0%) in local anaesthetic instillation group versus 40/82 (48.8%) in control group; RR 1.25; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.58; very low quality evidence). The MD in length of hospital stay was 0.04 days (95% CI -0.23 to 0.32; five trials; 335 participants; low quality evidence). The pain scores as measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS) were significantly lower in the local anaesthetic instillation group than the control group at four to eight hours (32 trials; 2020 participants; MD -0.99 cm; 95% CI -1.10 to -0.88 on a VAS scale of 0 to 10 cm; very low quality evidence) and at nine to 24 hours (29 trials; 1787 participants; MD -0.53 cm; 95% CI -0.62 to -0.44; very low quality evidence). Various subgroup analyses and meta-regressions to investigate the influence of the different local anaesthetic agents, different methods of local anaesthetic instillation, and different controls on the effectiveness of local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation were inconsistent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Serious adverse events were rare in studies evaluating local anaesthetic intraperitoneal instillation (very low quality evidence). There is very low quality evidence that it reduces pain in low anaesthetic risk people undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, the clinical importance of this reduction in pain is unknown and likely to be small. Further randomised clinical trials of low risk of systematic and random errors are necessary. Such trials should include important clinical outcomes such as quality of life and time to return to work in their assessment.

Wound infiltration with local anaesthetic agents for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

While laparoscopic cholecystectomy is generally considered to be less painful than open surgery, pain is one of the important reasons for delayed discharge after day surgery resulting in overnight stay following laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The safety and effectiveness of local anaesthetic wound infiltration in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not known.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of local anaesthetic wound infiltration in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to identify the best method of local anaesthetic wound infiltration with regards to the type of local anaesthetic, dosage, and time of administration of the local anaesthetic.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2013 to identify studies of relevance to this review. We included randomised clinical trials for benefit and quasi-randomised and comparative non-randomised studies for treatment-related harms.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) comparing local anaesthetic wound infiltration versus placebo, no intervention, or inactive control during laparoscopic cholecystectomy, trials comparing different local anaesthetic agents for local anaesthetic wound infiltration, and trials comparing the different times of local anaesthetic wound infiltration were considered for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors collected the data independently. We analysed the data with both fixed-effect and random-effects meta-analysis models using RevMan. For each outcome, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the review. All the 26 trials except one trial of 30 participants were at high risk of bias. Nineteen of the trials with 1263 randomised participants provided data for this review. Ten of the 19 trials compared local anaesthetic wound infiltration versus inactive control. One of the 19 trials compared local anaesthetic wound infiltration with two inactive controls, normal saline and no intervention. Two of the 19 trials had four arms comparing local anaesthetic wound infiltration with inactive controls in the presence and absence of co-interventions to decrease pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Four of the 19 trials had three or more arms that could be included for the comparison of local anaesthetic wound infiltration versus inactive control and different methods of local anaesthetic wound infiltration. The remaining two trials compared different methods of local anaesthetic wound infiltration.Most trials included only low anaesthetic risk people undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Seventeen trials randomised a total of 1095 participants to local anaesthetic wound infiltration (587 participants) versus no local anaesthetic wound infiltration (508 participants). Various anaesthetic agents were used but bupivacaine was the commonest local anaesthetic used. There was no mortality in either group in the seven trials that reported mortality (0/280 (0%) in local anaesthetic infiltration group versus 0/259 (0%) in control group). The effect of local anaesthetic on the proportion of people who developed serious adverse events was imprecise and compatible with increase or no difference in serious adverse events (seven trials; 539 participants; 2/280 (0.8%) in local anaesthetic group versus 1/259 (0.4%) in control; RR 2.00; 95% CI 0.19 to 21.59; very low quality evidence). None of the serious adverse events were related to local anaesthetic wound infiltration. None of the trials reported patient quality of life. The proportion of participants who were discharged as day surgery patients was higher in the local anaesthetic infiltration group than in the no local anaesthetic infiltration group (one trial; 97 participants; 33/50 (66.0%) in the local anaesthetic group versus 20/47 (42.6%) in the control group; RR 1.55; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.28; very low quality evidence). The effect of local anaesthetic on the length of hospital stay was compatible with a decrease, increase, or no difference in the length of hospital stay between the two groups (four trials; 327 participants; MD -0.26 days; 95% CI -0.67 to 0.16; very low quality evidence). The pain scores as measured by the visual analogue scale (0 to 10 cm) were lower in the local anaesthetic infiltration group than the control group at 4 to 8 hours (13 trials; 806 participants; MD -1.33 cm on the VAS; 95% CI -1.54 to -1.12; very low quality evidence) and 9 to 24 hours (12 trials; 756 participants; MD -0.36 cm on the VAS; 95% CI -0.53 to -0.20; very low quality evidence). The effect of local anaesthetic on the time taken to return to normal activity between the two groups was imprecise and compatible with a decrease, increase, or no difference in the time taken to return to normal activity (two trials; 195 participants; MD 0.14 days; 95% CI -0.59 to 0.87; very low quality evidence). None of the trials reported on return to work.Four trials randomised a total of 149 participants to local anaesthetic wound infiltration prior to skin incision (74 participants) versus local anaesthetic wound infiltration at the end of surgery (75 participants). Two trials randomised a total of 176 participants to four different local anaesthetics (bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, ropivacaine, neosaxitoxin). Although there were differences between the groups in some outcomes the changes were not consistent. There was no evidence to support the preference of one local anaesthetic over another or to prefer administration of local anaesthetic at a specific time compared with another.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Serious adverse events were rare in studies evaluating local anaesthetic wound infiltration (very low quality evidence). There is very low quality evidence that infiltration reduces pain in low anaesthetic risk people undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, the clinical importance of this reduction in pain is likely to be small. Further randomised clinical trials at low risk of systematic and random errors are necessary. Such trials should include important clinical outcomes such as quality of life and time to return to work in their assessment.

Formal education of patients about to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Generally, before being operated on, patients will be given informal information by the healthcare providers involved in the care of the patients (doctors, nurses, ward clerks, or healthcare assistants). This information can also be provided formally in different formats including written information, formal lectures, or audio-visual recorded information.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of formal preoperative patient education for patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to March 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials irrespective of language and publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data. We planned to calculate the risk ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes based on intention-to-treat analyses when data were available.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 431 participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomised to formal patient education (215 participants) versus standard care (216 participants) in four trials. The patient education included verbal education, multimedia DVD programme, computer-based multimedia programme, and Power Point presentation in the four trials. All the trials were of high risk of bias. One trial including 212 patients reported mortality. There was no mortality in either group in this trial. None of the trials reported surgery-related morbidity, quality of life, proportion of patients discharged as day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the length of hospital stay, return to work, or the number of unplanned visits to the doctor. There were insufficient details to calculate the mean difference and 95% CI for the difference in pain scores at 9 to 24 hours (1 trial; 93 patients); and we did not identify clear evidence of an effect on patient knowledge (3 trials; 338 participants; SMD 0.19; 95% CI -0.02 to 0.41; very low quality evidence), patient satisfaction (2 trials; 305 patients; SMD 0.48; 95% CI -0.42 to 1.37; very low quality evidence), or patient anxiety (1 trial; 76 participants; SMD -0.37; 95% CI -0.82 to 0.09; very low quality evidence) between the two groups.A total of 173 participants undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomised to electronic consent with repeat-back (patients repeating back the information provided) (92 participants) versus electronic consent without repeat-back (81 participants) in one trial of high risk of bias. The only outcome reported in this trial was patient knowledge. The effect on patient knowledge between the patient education with repeat-back versus patient education without repeat-back groups was imprecise and based on 1 trial of 173 participants; SMD 0.07; 95% CI -0.22 to 0.37; very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to the very low quality of the current evidence, the effects of formal patient education provided in addition to the standard information provided by doctors to patients compared with standard care remain uncertain. Further well-designed randomised clinical trials of low risk of bias are necessary.

Anaesthetic regimens for day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Day surgery involves admission of selected patients to hospital for a planned surgical procedure with the patients returning home on the same day. An anaesthetic regimen usually involves a combination of an anxiolytic, an induction agent, a maintenance agent, a method of maintaining the airway (laryngeal mask versus endotracheal intubation), and a muscle relaxant. The effect of anaesthesia may continue after the completion of surgery and can delay discharge. Various regimens of anaesthesia have been suggested for day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different anaesthetic regimens (risks of mortality and morbidity, measures of recovery after surgery) in patients undergoing day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 10, 2013), MEDLINE (PubMed) (1987 to November 2013), EMBASE (OvidSP) (1987 to November 2013), Science Citation Index Expanded (ISI Web of Knowledge) (1987 to November 2013), LILACS (Virtual Health Library) (1987 to November 2013), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (http://www.controlled-trials.com/mrct/) (November 2013), World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) portal (November 2013), and ClinicalTrials.gov (November 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized clinical trials comparing different anaesthetic regimens during elective day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy (irrespective of language or publication status).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and independently extracted the data. We calculated the risk ratio, rate ratio or mean difference with 95% confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat or available data analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 trials involving 1069 participants at low anaesthetic risk. The sample size varied from 40 to 300 participants. We included 23 comparisons. All trials were at a high risk of bias. We were unable to perform a meta-analysis because there were no two trials involving the same comparison. Primary outcomes included perioperative mortality, serious morbidity and proportion of patients who were discharged on the same day. There were no perioperative deaths or serious adverse events in either group in the only trial that reported this information (0/60). There was no clear evidence of a difference in the proportion of patients who were discharged on the same day between any of the comparisons. Overall, 472/554 patients (85%) included in this review were discharged as day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients. Secondary outcomes included hospital readmissions, health-related quality of life, pain, return to activity and return to work. There was no clear evidence of a difference in hospital readmissions within 30 days in the only comparison in which this outcome was reported. One readmission was reported in the 60 patients (2%) in whom this outcome was assessed. Quality of life was not reported in any of the trials. There was no clear evidence of a difference in the pain intensity, measured by a visual analogue scale, between comparators in the only trial which reported the pain intensity at between four and eight hours after surgery. Times to return to activity and return to work were not reported in any of the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently insufficient evidence to conclude that one anaesthetic regimen for day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy is to be preferred over another. However, the data are sparse (that is, there were few trials under each comparison and the trials had few participants) and further well designed randomized trials at low risk of bias and which are powered to measure differences in clinically important outcomes are necessary to determine the optimal anaesthetic regimen for day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy, one of the commonest procedures performed in the western world.

Routine abdominal drainage versus no abdominal drainage for uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the main method of treatment of symptomatic gallstones. Drains are used after laparoscopic cholecystectomy to prevent abdominal collections. However, drain use may increase infective complications and delay discharge.

OBJECTIVES

The aim is to assess the benefits and harms of routine abdominal drainage in uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials comparing drainage versus no drainage after uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy irrespective of language and publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures defined by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1831 participants were randomised to drain (915 participants) versus 'no drain' (916 participants) in 12 trials included in this review. Only two trials including 199 participants were of low risk of bias. Nine trials included patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy exclusively. One trial included patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis exclusively. One trial included patients undergoing elective and emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and one trial did not provide this information. The average age of participants in the trials ranged between 48 years and 63 years in the 10 trials that provided this information. The proportion of females ranged between 55.0% and 79.0% in the 11 trials that provided this information. There was no significant difference between the drain group (1/840) (adjusted proportion: 0.1%) and the 'no drain' group (2/841) (0.2%) (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.04 to 4.37) in short-term mortality in the ten trials with 1681 participants reporting on this outcome. There was no significant difference between the drain group (7/567) (adjusted proportion: 1.1%) and the 'no drain' group (3/576) (0.5%) in the proportion of patients who developed serious adverse events in the seven trials with 1143 participants reporting on this outcome (RR 2.12; 95% CI 0.67 to 7.40) or in the number of serious adverse events in each group reported by eight trials with 1286 participants; drain group (12/646) (adjusted rate: 1.5 events per 100 participants) versus 'no drain' group (6/640) (0.9 events per 100 participants); rate ratio 1.60; 95% CI 0.66 to 3.87). There was no significant difference in the quality of life between the two groups (one trial; 93 participants; SMD 0.22; 95% CI -0.19 to 0.63). The proportion of patients who were discharged as day-procedure laparoscopic cholecystectomy seemed significantly lower in the drain group than the 'no drain' group (one trial; 68 participants; drain group (0/33) (adjusted proportion: 0.2%) versus 'no drain' group (11/35) (31.4%); RR 0.05; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.75). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay between the two groups (five trials; 449 participants; MD 0.22 days; 95% CI -0.06 days to 0.51 days). The operating time was significantly longer in the drain group than the 'no drain' group (seven trials; 775 participants; MD 5.00 minutes; 95% CI 2.69 minutes to 7.30 minutes). There was no significant difference in the return to normal activity and return to work between the groups in one trial involving 100 participants. This trial did not provide any information from which the standard deviation could be imputed and so the confidence intervals could not be calculated for these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no evidence to support the routine use of drain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Further well designed randomised clinical trials are necessary.

Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallstone pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Gallstones and alcohol account for more than 80% of acute pancreatitis. Cholecystectomy is the definitive treatment for gallstones. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred route for performing cholecystectomy. The timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy after an attack of acute biliary pancreatitis is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in people with acute biliary pancreatitis. For mild acute pancreatitis, we considered 'early' laparoscopic cholecystectomy to be laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed within three days of onset of symptoms. We considered all laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed beyond three days of onset of symptoms as 'delayed'. For severe acute pancreatitis, we considered 'early' laparoscopic cholecystectomy as laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed within the index admission. We considered all laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed in a later admission as 'delayed'.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, issue 12), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and trial registers until January 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials, irrespective of language or publication status, comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for people with acute biliary pancreatitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We planned to analyse data with both the fixed-effect and the random-effects models using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 2011). We calculated the risk ratio (RR), or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on an intention-to-treat analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one trial comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for people with mild acute pancreatitis. Fifty participants with mild acute gallstone pancreatitis were randomised either to early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (within 48 hours of admission irrespective of whether the abdominal symptoms were resolved or the laboratory values had returned to normal) (n = 25), or to delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (surgery after resolution of abdominal pain and after the laboratory values had returned to normal) (n = 25). This trial is at high risk of bias. There was no short-term mortality in either group. There was no significant difference between the groups in the proportion of participants who developed serious adverse events (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.01 to 7.81). Health-related quality of life was not reported in this trial. There were no conversions to open cholecystectomy in either group. The total hospital stay was significantly shorter in the early laparoscopic cholecystectomy group than in the delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy group (MD -2.30 days; 95% CI -4.40 to -0.20). This trial reported neither the number of work-days lost nor the costs. We did not identify any trials comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy after severe acute pancreatitis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence of increased risk of complications after early laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy may shorten the total hospital stay in people with mild acute pancreatitis. If appropriate facilities and expertise are available, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy appears preferable to delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in those with mild acute pancreatitis. There is currently no evidence to support or refute early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for people with severe acute pancreatitis. Further randomised controlled trials at low risk of bias are necessary in people with mild acute pancreatitis and severe acute pancreatitis.