Dataset Information

Comparison of clinical safety and outcomes of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: To compare the clinical safety and outcomes of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.Pertinent studies were selected from the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases, references from published articles, and reviews. Seven randomized controlled trials (early laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy) were selected. Conventional meta-analysis according to Cochrane Collaboration was used for the pooling of the results.Seven trials with 1106 patients were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of bile duct injury (Peto odds ratio 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.05 to 4.72); P = 0.54) or conversion to open cholecystectomy (risk ratio 0.91 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 1.20); P = 0.50). The total hospital stay was shorter by 4 days for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (mean difference -4.12 (95% confidence interval -5.22 to -3.03) days; P < 0.00001).Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy during acute cholecystitis is safe and shortens the total hospital stay.

SUBMITTER: Zhou MW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4123505 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of clinical safety and outcomes of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a meta-analysis.

Zhou Min-Wei MW Gu Xiao-Dong XD Xiang Jian-Bin JB Chen Zong-You ZY

TheScientificWorldJournal 20140714

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the clinical safety and outcomes of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.<h4>Methods</h4>Pertinent studies were selected from the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases, references from published articles, and reviews. Seven randomized controlled trials (early laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy) were selected. Conventional meta-analysis according to Cochra ...[more]

PMID: 25133217

Similar Datasets

Project description: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.

Project description:BackgroundSevere adhesions and fibrosis between the posterior wall of the gallbladder and liver bed often render total cholecystectomy after percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) difficult, leading to high open conversion rates. Since the publication of Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18), our policy has shifted from open conversion to subtotal cholecystectomy (SC) when total laparoscopic cholecystectomy for difficult cases of cholecystitis is not feasible. Recently, SC has been frequently applied as bailout surgery for complicated cholecystitis. Nonetheless, the efficacy and validity of laparoscopic SC after PTGBD remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic SC after PTGBD for grade II or III acute cholecystitis (AC) by comparing two periods of altered surgical strategies.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2013 and December 2020. A total of 44 eligible patients with grade II or III AC were divided according to the time of cholecystitis onset into the pre-TG18 group (2013-2017, n = 17) and post-TG18 group (2018-2020, n = 27). Patients' background demographics, surgical method, surgical results, and postoperative complications were compared.ResultsThe interval between PTGBD and surgery was significantly longer in the post-TG18 group than in the pre-TG18 group (15 [interquartile range: 9-42] days vs. 8 [4-11] days; P = 0.010). The frequency of laparoscopic cholecystectomy significantly increased from 52.9% in the pre-TG18 group to 88.9% in the post-TG18 group (P = 0.007), whereas the frequency of SC was 23.5% and 40.7%, respectively, which showed no statistically significant difference (P = 0.241). However, the rate of laparoscopic SC significantly increased from 0 to 90.9% among 15 SC cases, whereas the rate of open SC significantly plummeted from 100 to 9.1% (P = 0.001). Significant differences in the operative time, amount of intraoperative bleeding, and incidence of postoperative complications (wound infection and subhepatic abscess) were not observed. Mortality, bile leakage, and bile duct injury did not occur in either group.ConclusionsFor grade II or III AC after PTGBD, aggressive adoption of SC increased the completion rate of laparoscopic surgery. Laparoscopic SC is a safe and feasible treatment option.

Dataset Information

Comparison of clinical safety and outcomes of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a meta-analysis.

Publications

Comparison of clinical safety and outcomes of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets