Techniques of biliary drainage for acute cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tsuyuguchi T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2784517 | biostudies-other | 2007
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Biliary decompression and drainage done in a timely manner is the cornerstone of acute cholangitis treatment. The mortality rate of acute cholangitis was extremely high when no interventional procedures, other than open drainage, were available. At present, endoscopic drainage is the procedure of first choice, in view of its safety and effectiveness. In patients with severe (grade III) disease, defined according to the severity assessment criteria in the Guidelines, biliary drainage should be done promptly with respiration management, while patients with moderate (grade II) disease also need to undergo drainage promptly with close monitoring of their responses to the primary care. For endoscopic drainage, endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or stent placement procedures are performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported no difference in the drainage effect of these two procedures, but case-series studies have indicated the frequent occurrence of hemorrhage associated with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), and complications such as pancreatitis. Although the usefulness of percutaneous transhepatic drainage is supported by the case-series studies, its lower success rate and higher complication rates makes it a second-option procedure.
| S-EPMC2784512 | biostudies-other
Project description:Biliary drainage is a radical method to relieve cholestasis, a cause of acute cholangitis, and takes a central part in the treatment of acute cholangitis. Emergent drainage is essential for severe cases, whereas patients with moderate and mild disease should also receive drainage as soon as possible if they do not respond to conservative treatment, and their condition has not improved. Biliary drainage can be achieved via three different routes/procedures: endoscopic, percutaneous transhepatic, and open methods. The clinical value of both endoscopic and percutaneous transhepatic drainage is well known. Endoscopic drainage is associated with a low morbidity rate and shorter duration of hospitalization; therefore, this approach is advocated whenever it is applicable. In endoscopic drainage, either endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) or tube stent placement can be used. There is no significant difference in the success rate, effectiveness, and morbidity between the two procedures. The decision to perform endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is made based on the patient's condition and the number and diameter of common bile duct stones. Open drainage, on the other hand, should be applied only in patients for whom endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic drainage is contraindicated or has not been successfully performed. Cholecystectomy is recommended in patients with gallbladder stones, following the resolution of acute cholangitis with medical treatment, unless the patient has poor operative risk factors or declines surgery.
| S-EPMC2799047 | biostudies-other
Project description:Acute cholecystitis consists of various morbid conditions, ranging from mild cases that are relieved by the oral administration of antimicrobial drugs or that resolve even without antimicrobials to severe cases complicated by biliary peritonitis. Microbial cultures should be performed by collecting bile at all available opportunities to identify both aerobic and anaerobic organisms. Empirically selected antimicrobials should be administered. Antimicrobial activity against potential causative organisms, the severity of the cholecystitis, the patient's past history of antimicrobial therapy, and local susceptibility patterns (antibiogram) must be taken into consideration in the choice of antimicrobial drugs. In mild cases which closely mimic biliary colic, the administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) is recommended to prevent the progression of inflammation (recommendation grade A). When causative organisms are identified, the antimicrobial drug should be changed for a narrower-spectrum antimicrobial agent on the basis of the species and their susceptibility testing results.
| S-EPMC2784497 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundAcute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) is the second most frequent surgical condition in emergency departments. The recommended treatment is the early laparoscopic cholecystectomy; however, the Tokyo Guidelines (TG) advocate for different initial treatments in some subgroups of patients without a strong evidence that all patients will benefit from them. There is no clear consensus in the literature about who is the unfit patient for surgical treatment. The primary aim of the study is to identify the risk factors for mortality in ACC and compare them with Tokyo Guidelines (TG) classification.MethodsRetrospective unicentric cohort study of patients emergently admitted with and ACC during 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2016. The study comprised 963 patients. Primary outcome was the mortality after the diagnosis. A propensity score method was used to avoid confounding factors comparing surgical treatment and non-surgical treatment.ResultsThe overall mortality was 3.6%. Mortality was associated with older age (68 + IQR 27 vs. 83 + IQR 5.5; P = 0.001) and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (3.5 + 5.3 vs. 0+2; P = 0.001). A logistic regression model isolated four mortality risk factors (ACME): chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR 4.66 95% CI 1.7-12.8 P = 0.001), dementia (OR 4.12; 95% CI 1.34-12.7, P = 0.001), age > 80 years (OR 1.12: 95% CI 1.02-1.21, P = 0.001) and the need of preoperative vasoactive amines (OR 9.9: 95% CI 3.5-28.3, P = 0.001) which predicted the mortality in a 92% of the patients. The receiver operating characteristic curve yielded an area of 88% significantly higher that 68% (P = 0.003) from the TG classification. When comparing subgroups selected using propensity score matching with the same morbidity and severity of ACC, mortality was higher in the non-surgical treatment group. (26.2% vs. 10.5%).ConclusionsMortality was higher in ACC patients treated with non-surgical treatment. ACME identifies high-risk patients. The validation to ACME with a prospective multicenter study population could allow us to create a new alternative guideline to TG for treating ACC.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered and recorded in Clinical Trials. NCT04744441.
| S-EPMC8111736 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cholecystectomy has been widely performed in the treatment of acute cholecystitis, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been increasingly adopted as the method of surgery over the past 15 years. Despite the success of laparoscopic cholecystectomy as an elective treatment for symptomatic gallstones, acute cholecystitis was initially considered a contraindication for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The reasons for it being considered a contraindication were the technical difficulty of performing it in acute cholecystitis and the development of complications, including bile duct injury, bowel injury, and hepatic injury. However, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is now accepted as being safe for acute cholecystitis, when surgeons who are expert at the laparoscopic technique perform it. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been found to be superior to open cholecystectomy as a treatment for acute cholecystitis because of a lower incidence of complications, shorter length of postoperative hospital stay, quicker recuperation, and earlier return to work. However, laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis has not become routine, because the timing and approach to the surgical management in patients with acute cholecystitis is still a matter of controversy. These Guidelines describe the timing of and the optimal surgical treatment of acute cholecystitis in a question-and-answer format.
| S-EPMC2784499 | biostudies-other
Project description:Diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for acute biliary inflammation/infection (acute cholangitis and acute cholecystitis), according to severity grade, have not yet been established in the world. Therefore we formulated flowcharts for the management of acute biliary inflammation/infection in accordance with severity grade. For mild (grade I) acute cholangitis, medical treatment may be sufficient/appropriate. For moderate (grade II) acute cholangitis, early biliary drainage should be performed. For severe (grade III) acute cholangitis, appropriate organ support such as ventilatory/circulatory management is required. After hemodynamic stabilization is achieved, urgent endoscopic or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage should be performed. For patients with acute cholangitis of any grade of severity, treatment for the underlying etiology, including endoscopic, percutaneous, or surgical treatment should be performed after the patient's general condition has improved. For patients with mild (grade I) cholecystitis, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred treatment. For patients with moderate (grade II) acute cholecystitis, early laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy is preferred. In patients with extensive local inflammation, elective cholecystectomy is recommended after initial management with percutaneous gallbladder drainage and/or cholecystostomy. For the patient with severe (grade III) acute cholecystitis, multiorgan support is a critical part of management. Biliary peritonitis due to perforation of the gallbladder is an indication for urgent cholecystectomy and/or drainage. Delayed elective cholecystectomy may be performed after initial treatment with gallbladder drainage and improvement of the patient's general medical condition.
| S-EPMC2784508 | biostudies-other
Project description:The Tokyo Guidelines 2013 classifies acute cholecystitis (AC) into three grades and recommends appropriate therapy for each grade. For grade II AC, either early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) or percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) should be performed. This study aimed to identify the risk factors for difficulty of LC for treating grade II AC.Totally, 122 patients who underwent LC for grade II AC were enrolled and divided into difficult LC (DLC) and nondifficult LC (NDLC) groups. The DLC group included patients who experienced one of the following conditions: conversion from LC to open cholecystectomy, operating time???180 min, or blood loss ?300 ml. Preoperative characteristics and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.In univariate analysis, risk factors included male sex, interval between symptom onset and admission, interval between symptom onset and LC, and anticoagulant therapy. The incidence of postoperative complications was higher in the DLC group than in the NDLC group (23.5% vs. 4.6%, p?=?0.0016). According to receiver operating characteristic curves, the optimal cutoff value was calculated, and multivariate analysis showed that male sex [odds ratio (OR), 5.76; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.979-19.51; p?=?0.0009) and interval between symptom onset and LC of over 96 h (OR, 6.32; 95% CI, 2.126-20.15; p?=?0.0009) were independent risk factors for difficulty of LC.In patients with grade II AC, LC was technically difficult when performed over 96 h after symptom onset. Moreover, male sex was a risk factor. Therefore, PTGBD should be considered in these patients.
| S-EPMC5706415 | biostudies-other
Project description:Antimicrobial agents should be administered to all patients with suspected acute cholangitis as a priority as soon as possible. Bile cultures should be performed at the earliest opportunity. The important factors which should be considered in selecting antimicrobial therapy include the agent's activity against potentially infecting bacteria, the severity of the cholangitis, the presence or absence of renal and hepatic diseases, the patient's recent history of antimicrobial therapy, and any recent culture results, if available. Biliary penetration of the microbial agents should also be considered in the selection of antimicrobials, but activity against the infecting isolates is of greatest importance. If the causative organisms are identified, empirically chosen antimicrobial drugs should be replaced by narrower-spectrum antimicrobial agents, the most appropriate for the species and the site of the infection.
| S-EPMC2784514 | biostudies-other
Project description:Acute cholecystitis is a common and frequently occurring disease, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred treatment method. Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage is regarded as the first-line palliative procedure for elderly patients with poor cardiopulmonary function who cannot tolerate general anesthesia. However, for patients with acute cholecystitis who are undergoing treatment with oral antithrombotics or who have abnormal coagulation mechanisms, endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage may be a good choice. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage is an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-based technique that drains the gallbladder by placing a tube into the cavity of the gallbladder though the cystic gall duct. It is the application of the concept of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in the biliary system. This technique can not only achieve gallbladder drainage but can also minimize the risk of procedure-induced bleeding. In this paper, we describe a representative case to introduce the key points of this procedure and the associated clinical care, hoping to provide useful information for clinicians and nurses.
| S-EPMC8168036 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCholecystectomy (CCY) is the gold standard treatment of acute cholecystitis (AC). Nonsurgical management of AC includes percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD). This study aims to compare outcomes of patients who undergo CCY after having received EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD.MethodsA multicenter international study was conducted in patients with AC who underwent EUS-GBD or PT-GBD, followed by an attempted CCY, between January 2018 and October 2021. Demographics, clinical characteristics, procedural details, postprocedure outcomes, and surgical details and outcomes were compared.ResultsOne hundred thirty-nine patients were included: EUS-GBD in 46 patients (27% male, mean age 74 years) and PT-GBD in 93 patients (50% male, mean age 72 years). Surgical technical success was not significantly different between the 2 groups. In the EUS-GBD group, there was decreased operative time (84.2 vs 165.4 minutes, P < 0.00001), time to symptom resolution (4.2 vs 6.3 days, P = 0.005), and length of stay (5.4 vs 12.3 days, P = 0.001) compared with the PT-GBD group. There was no difference in the rate of conversion from laparoscopic to open CCY: 5 of 46 (11%) in the EUS-GBD arm and 18 of 93 (19%) in the PT-GBD group ( P value 0.2324).DiscussionPatients who received EUS-GBD had a significantly shorter interval between gallbladder drainage and CCY, shorter surgical procedure times, and shorter length of stay for the CCY compared with those who received PT-GBD. EUS-GBD should be considered an acceptable modality for gallbladder drainage and should not preclude patients from eventual CCY.
| S-EPMC10299765 | biostudies-literature