Endoscopic cystic duct stent as primary treatment for intrahepatic gallbladder perforation with abscess formation

Formation and rupture of liver hematomas caused by intrahepatic gallbladder perforation: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder perforation is a serious complication of acute cholecystitis. Such perforation is a rare but life-threatening situation that can lead to the formation and rupture of liver hematomas. Here, we report a case of a ruptured intrahepatic hematoma caused by intrahepatic gallbladder perforation, and we present a literature review.

CASE SUMMARY

A 70-year-old male was admitted to the hospital with a complaint of right upper quadrant abdominal pain, flustering and dizziness. The preoperative diagnosis was a ruptured malignant liver tumor, and the patient's medical images and increased level of carbohydrate antigen-199 suggested that the gallbladder had been invaded. However, the tumor was proven to be a liver hematoma secondary to gallbladder perforation after surgery. The patient was discharged uneventfully on the fifteenth postoperative day.

CONCLUSION

Intrahepatic gallbladder perforation is difficult to diagnose preoperatively. Radiological examinations play a crucial role in the diagnosis but only for partial cases. Early diagnosis and appropriate surgery are key to managing this rare condition.

Localized gallbladder perforation: a systematic review of treatment and prognosis

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of localized gallbladder perforation (Neimeier type II) has yet to be defined. The aim of this systematic review was to identify factors associated with improved patient outcomes.

METHODS

Systematic review of studies that described the management of Neimeier type II perforation, reported complications of the first intervention, necessity of added interventions, resolution of the pathology, and days of hospital stay were included. The search strategy was conducted in EMBASE, Mayo Journals, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science (December 2020) RESULTS: A total of 122 patients (53% male) from case reports, series, and cohorts were included for analysis. In total 56 (46%) and 44 (36%)patients were treated with open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy respectively. Overall risk of bias was moderate. The need for another intervention was higher in the laparoscopic group (5 vs 17, p=<0.001) as well as prevalence of complications (4 vs 16, p=<0.001), but lower for days of hospital stay (median days 5. vs 15, p = 0.008) against open cholecystectomy. Preoperative percutaneous catheter drainage did not influence outcome.

CONCLUSION

Open cholecystectomy has a lower need for further surgical procedures and postoperative complications, but a longer hospital stay. These outcomes did not vary with preoperative percutaneous drainage. The effect of timing of cholecystectomy did not influence the outcomes.

Safety of Percutaneous Cholecystostomy Early Removal: A Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

There are no strong recommendations regarding the management of percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC). The aim of this study was to assess the safety of early PC removal in terms of complications and recurrent disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective observational study of consecutive patients who underwent PC for acute cholecystitis from January 2012 to December 2017. We first evaluated PC-related complications and recurrent disease in patients whose drainage was removed as inpatients (IPR) or as outpatients (OPR). Patients were then divided into 2 groups according to the timing of PC removal: G1 with the PC removed within the first 7 days after its collocation and G2 with the PC removed after 7 days.

RESULTS

We included 151 patients. Patients in the OPR group had their catheters removed after 52 days (26 to 67 d) while the IPR group after 8 days (6 to 11 d); P<0.001. No difference was seen regarding complications, recurrent disease rate, or readmissions.G1 was comprised of 56 patients (37.1%), whereas G2 had 95 (62.9%). When G1 was compared with G2, no differences were seen in terms of complications. However, G1 presented a shorter duration of antibiotic treatment with 11 days (8 to 14 d) versus 15 days (12 to 23 d) in G2; P<0.001, but had a higher rate of recurrent disease 32.1% versus 14.7% in G2; P=0.014 and a higher rate of readmission 30.3% versus 13.6% in G2; P=0.019.

CONCLUSIONS

Removal of the PC during the index admission was not associated with a higher risk of complications. However, the PC removal before 7 days could be related to an increase in recurrent disease and readmissions.