How to predict difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy? Proposal for a simple preoperative scoring system - 22/10/16
, Julien Mancini, M.D., Ph.D. b, Tristan Monchal, M.D. a, Ronan Calvary, M.D. a, Julien Bordes, M.D. c, Paul Balandraud, M.D. aAbstract |
Background |
Few studies have used operative time as a reflection of the surgical difficulty to create a preoperative score of operative difficulty in laparoscopic cholecystectomies (DiLCs score).
Methods |
Patients who benefited from cholecystectomy between 2010 and 2015 were reviewed. Difficult procedures were identified using the deviations from the operative time for simple cholecystectomies. Logistic regression analyses were carried out to build risk-assessment models and derive the DiLC score.
Results |
Overall, 644 patients were identified. Multivariate analyses identified male sex, previous cholecystitis attack, fibrinogen, neutrophil, and alkaline phosphatase count to be predictive of operative difficulties. Risk-assessment model was generated with an area under the receiver-operator curve of .80. Internal validation was performed using the bootstrap method.
Conclusions |
The DiLC score is a simple and reliable tool which could be used to improve patient counseling, optimize surgical planning, detect procedures at risk, identify patients eligible for outpatient care, and enhance resident training.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Highlights |
• | Operative difficulty for laparoscopic cholecystectomy is hard to predict. |
• | Deviations from the standard operative time were used to compare procedures. |
• | The score for difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DiLC score) was generated. |
• | Area under the ROC curve was .80, and a diagnostic accuracy was 75.5%. |
• | The simplicity of the DiLC score makes it easy to integrate into clinical practice. |
Keywords : Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic, Cholecystitis, acute, Cholecystolithiasis, Scoring system, Operative difficulty
Plan
| There were no relevant financial relationships or any sources of support in the form of grants, equipment, or drugs. |
|
| The authors declare no conflicts of interest. |
Vol 212 - N° 5
P. 873-881 - novembre 2016 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
