Cholecystostomy: Are we using it correctly? - 24/05/19
, Travis M. Griffiths a , Douglas C. Robison a , Toby M. Enniss a , Jason B. Young a , Marta L. McCrum a , Jade M. Nunez a , Raminder Nirula a , Rulon L. Hardman b Abstract |
Background |
Percutaneous Cholecystostomy Tubes (PCT) have become an accepted and common modality of treating acute cholecystitis in patients that are not appropriate surgical candidates. As percutaneous gallbladder drainage has rapidly increased newer research suggests that the technique may be overused, and patients may be burdened with them for extended periods. We examined our experience with PCT placement to identify independent predictors of interval cholecystectomy versus destination PCT.
Methods |
All patients with cholecystitis initially treated with PCT from 2014 to 2017 were stratified by whether they underwent subsequent interval cholecystectomy. Demographic data, initial laboratory values, Tokyo Grade, Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA Class, complications related to PCT, complications related to cholecystectomy, and mortality data were retrospectively collected. Descriptive statistics, univariable, and multivariable Poisson regression were performed.
Results |
165 patients received an initial cholecystostomy tube to treat cholecystitis. 61 (37%) patients went on to have an interval cholecystectomy. There were 4 complications reported after cholecystectomy. A total of 46 (27.9%) deaths were reported, only one of which was in the cholecystectomy group. Age, Tokyo Grade, liver function tests, ASA Class, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly different between the interval cholecystectomy and no-cholecystectomy groups. Univariable regression was performed and variables with p < 0.2 were included in the multivariable model. Multivariable Poisson regression showed that increasing Tokyo Grade (IRR 0.454, p = 0.042, 95% CI 0.194–0.969); and increasing Charlson Comorbidity Score (IRR 0.890, p = 0.026, 95% CI 0.803–0.986) were associated with no-cholecystectomy. Higher Albumin (IRR 1.580, p = 0.011, 95% CI 1.111–2.244) was associated with having an interval cholecystectomy.
Conclusion |
Patients in the no-cholecystectomy group were older, had more comorbidities, higher Tokyo Grade, ASA Class, and initial liver function test values than those that had interval cholecystectomy. Since interval cholecystectomy was performed with a low rate of complications, we may be too conservative in performing cholecystectomy after drainage and condemning many patients to destination tubes.
Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.Highlights |
• | Patients that had destination cholecystostomy tube placement were older and more ill. Patients that had interval cholecystectomy had higher Albumin. |
• | Initial laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be performed in appropriate patients. |
• | Interval cholecystectomy can be performed with low morbidity and mortality. |
Mappa
Vol 217 - N° 6
P. 1010-1015 - giugno 2019 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente
- The southwestern surgical congress multi-center trial on suspected common duct stones
- Richard Frazee, Justin Regner, Michael S. Truitt, Vaidehi Agrawal, Megan Swope, Clay Cothren Burlew, Sharmila Dissanaike, Divya Vangipurum, Brandon Bruns, Lindsay O'Meara, John Stivers, Amy Kwok, Brandon T. Grover, Shanu N. Kothari, Chris Cibari, Julie Dunn, Robert C. McIntyre, Frank Wright, Elizabeth P. Scherer, Christopher Crane, Thomas J. Schroeppel, Emma Callaghan, Stephanie Gordy, Rob Todd
- This too shall pass: Standardized Gastrografin protocol for partial small bowel obstruction
- S. Long, B. Emigh, J.S. Wolf, C. Byrne, T.B. Coopwood, J. Aydelotte
Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.
Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?