Dataset Information

Does ultrasongraphy predict intraoperative findings at cholecystectomy? An institutional review.

ABSTRACT: Ultrasonography (US) is the mainstay of biliary tract imaging, but few recent studies have tested its ability to diagnose acute cholecystitis (AC). Our objective was to determine how well a US diagnosis of AC correlates with the intraoperative diagnosis. We hypothesize that US underestimates this diagnosis, potentially leading to unexpected findings in the operating room (OR).This retrospective review included all patients admitted to the acute care surgical service of a tertiary hospital in 2011 with suspected biliary pathology who underwent US and subsequent cholecystectomy. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of US using the intraoperative diagnosis as the gold standard. Further analysis identified which US findings were most predictive of an intraoperative diagnosis of AC. We used a recursive partitioning method with random forests to identify unique combinations of US findings that, together, are most predictive of AC.In total, 254 patients underwent US for biliary symptoms; 152 had AC diagnosed, and 143 (94%) of them underwent emergency surgery (median time to OR 23.03 hr). Ultrasonography predicted intraoperative findings with a sensitivity of 73.2%, specificity of 85.5% and PPV of 93.7%. The NPV (52.0%) was quite low. The US indicators most predictive of AC were a thick wall, a positive sonographic Murphy sign and cholelithiasis. Recursive partitioning demonstrated that a positive sonographic Murphy sign is highly predictive of intraoperative AC.Ultrasonography is highly sensitive and specific for diagnosing AC. The poor NPV confirms our hypothesis that US can underestimate AC.

SUBMITTER: Stogryn S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4734913 | biostudies-other | 2016 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does ultrasongraphy predict intraoperative findings at cholecystectomy? An institutional review.

Stogryn Shannon S Metcalfe Jennifer J Vergis Ashley A Hardy Krista K

Canadian journal of surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie 20160201 1

<h4>Background</h4>Ultrasonography (US) is the mainstay of biliary tract imaging, but few recent studies have tested its ability to diagnose acute cholecystitis (AC). Our objective was to determine how well a US diagnosis of AC correlates with the intraoperative diagnosis. We hypothesize that US underestimates this diagnosis, potentially leading to unexpected findings in the operating room (OR).<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective review included all patients admitted to the acute care surgical se ...[more]

PMID: 26574703

Similar Datasets

Project description:Significant controversy exists regarding routine intraoperative cholangiography in preventing common duct injury during cholecystectomy.To investigate the association between intraoperative cholangiography use during cholecystectomy and common duct injury.Retrospective cohort study of all Texas Medicare claims data from 2000 through 2009. We identified Medicare beneficiaries 66 years or older who underwent inpatient or outpatient cholecystectomy for biliary colic or biliary dyskinesia, acute cholecystitis, or chronic cholecystitis. We compared results from multilevel logistic regression models to the instrumental variable analyses.Intraoperative cholangiography use during cholecystectomy was determined at the level of the patients (yes/no), hospitals (percentage intraoperative cholangiography use for all cholecystectomies at the hospital), and surgeons (percentage use for all cholecystectomies performed by the surgeon). Percentage of use at the hospital and percentage of use by surgeon were the instrumental variables.Patients with claims for common duct repair operations within 1 year of cholecystectomy were considered as having major common duct injury.Of 92,932 patients undergoing cholecystectomy, 37,533 (40.4%) underwent concurrent intraoperative cholangiography and 280 (0.30%) had a common duct injury. The common duct injury rate was 0.21% among patients with intraoperative cholangiography and 0.36% among patients without it. In a logistic regression model controlling for patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics, the odds of common duct injury for cholecystectomies performed without intraoperative cholangiography were increased compared with those performed with it (OR,?1.79 [95% CI, 1.35-2.36]; P?<?.001). When confounding was controlled with instrumental variable analysis, the association between cholecystectomy performed without intraoperative cholangiography and duct injury was no longer significant (OR,?1.26 [95% CI, 0.81-1.96]; P?=?.31).When confounders were controlled with instrumental variable analysis, there was no statistically significant association between intraoperative cholangiography and common duct injury. Intraoperative cholangiography is not effective as a preventive strategy against common duct injury during cholecystectomy.

Project description:BackgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the standard surgical approach in the treatment of cholelithiasis. Diverse surgical techniques and different imaging modalities have been described to evaluate the biliary anatomy and prevent or early detect bile duct injuries. X-ray intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) and near infrared indocyanine green fluorescent cholangiography (NIR-ICG) are safe and feasible techniques to assess biliary anatomy. The aim of this systematic review will be to evaluate if NIR-ICG can visualize extrahepatic biliary anatomy more efficiently and safer than IOC in minimally invasive cholecystectomy for gallstone disease.MethodsLiterature search will be performed via MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science Core Collection from 2009 to present. All randomized controlled clinical trials and prospective non-randomized controlled trials which report on comparison of NIR-ICG versus IOC will be included. All patients over 18 years old who require elective or urgent minimally invasive cholecystectomy (undergoing NIR-ICG during this procedure) due to gallstone disease both acute and chronic will be included. Since BDI has a low incidence, the primary outcome will be the ability to visualize extrahepatic biliary anatomy and the time to obtain relevant images of these structures. Two researchers will individually screen the identified records, according to a list of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Bias of the studies will be evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa score for non-randomized studies and with The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials. Quality of evidence for all outcomes will be determined with the GRADE system. The data will be registered in a predesigned database. If selected studies are sufficiently homogeneous, we will perform a meta-analysis of reported results. In the event of a substantial heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis will be provided. Subgroup analysis will be used to investigate possible sources of heterogeneity.DiscussionUnderstanding the benefits of this technique is critical to ensuring policymakers can make informed decisions as to where preventive efforts should be focused regarding specific imaging techniques. If ICG is proven to be faster and non-invasive, its routine use could be encouraged.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020177991 .

Project description:BackgroundIntraoperative laparoscopic ultrasonography (LUS) or intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) can be used for visualisation of the biliary tract during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this systematic review was to compare use of LUS with IOC.MethodsPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched (last update: April 2024). PICO: P = patients undergoing intraoperative imaging of the biliary tree during laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstone disease; I = intervention: LUS; C = comparison: IOC; O = outcomes: mortality, bile duct injury, retained gallstone, conversion to open cholecystectomy, procedural failure, operation time including imaging time. Included articles were critically appraised using checklists. Conclusions were based on studies without major risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models. Certainty of evidence was assessed according to GRADE.ResultsSixteen non-randomised studies met the PICO. Two before/after studies (594 versus 807 patients) contributed to conclusions regarding mortality (no events; very low certainty evidence), bile duct injury (1 versus 0 events; very low certainty evidence), retained gallstone (2 versus 2 events; very low certainty evidence), and conversion to open cholecystectomy (6 versus 21 events; risk ratio: 0.38 (95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.95); I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). Seven additional studies, using intra-individual comparisons, contributed to conclusions regarding procedural failure; risk ratio: 1.12 (95% confidence interval: 0.70-1.78; I2 = 83%; very low certainty evidence). No studies reported operation time. Mean imaging time for LUS and IOC, reported in 12 studies, was 4.8‒10.2 versus 10.9‒17.9 min (mean difference: - 7.8 min (95% confidence interval: - 9.3 to - 6.3); I2 = 95%; moderate certainty evidence).ConclusionIt is uncertain whether there is any difference in mortality/bile duct injury/retained gallstone using LUS compared with IOC, but LUS may be associated with fewer conversions to open cholecystectomy and is probably associated with shorter imaging time.

Project description:To assess the role of laparoscopic ultrasound (LUS) as a substitute for intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) during cholecystectomy.We present a MEDLINE and PubMed literature search, having used the key-words "laparoscopic intraoperative ultrasound" and "laparoscopic cholecystectomy". All relevant English language publications from 2000 to 2016 were identified, with data extracted for the role of LUS in the anatomical delineation of the biliary tract, detection of common bile duct stones (CBDS), prevention or early detection of biliary duct injury (BDI), and incidental findings during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Data for the role of LUS vs IOC in complex situations (i.e., inflammatory disease/fibrosis) were specifically analyzed.We report data from eighteen reports, 13 prospective non-randomized trials, 5 retrospective trials, and two meta-analyses assessing diagnostic accuracy, with one analysis also assessing costs, duration of the examination, and anatomical mapping. Overall, LUS was shown to provide highly sensitive mapping of the extra-pancreatic biliary anatomy in 92%-100% of patients, with more difficulty encountered in delineation of the intra-pancreatic segment of the biliary tract (73.8%-98%). Identification of vascular and biliary variations has been documented in two studies. Although inflammatory disease hampered accuracy, LUS was still advantageous vs IOC in patients with obscured anatomy. LUS can be performed before any dissection and repeated at will to guide the surgeon especially when hilar mapping is difficult due to fibrosis and inflammation. In two studies LUS prevented conversion in 91% of patients with difficult scenarios. Considering CBDS detection, LUS sensitivity and specificity were 76%-100% and 96.2%-100%, respectively. LUS allowed the diagnosis/treatment of incidental findings of adjacent organs. No valuable data for BDI prevention or detection could be retrieved, even if no BDI was documented in the reports analyzed. Literature analysis proved LUS as a safe, quick, non-irradiating, cost-effective technique, which is comparatively well known although largely under-utilized, probably due to the perception of a difficult learning curve.We highlight the advantages and limitations of laparoscopic ultrasound during cholecystectomy, and underline its value in difficult scenarios when the anatomy is obscured.

Dataset Information

Does ultrasongraphy predict intraoperative findings at cholecystectomy? An institutional review.

Publications

Does ultrasongraphy predict intraoperative findings at cholecystectomy? An institutional review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets