Timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis: Any controversy?

Objective: The timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis remains controversial. This article reviews the latest evidence for the timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of acute cholecystitis. Methodology: Trials comparing early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC; carried out within 1 week of onset of symptoms) versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC; carried out at least 6 weeks after symptoms settled) for acute cholecystitis were identified from Ovid Medline, Cochrane Library and PubMed database. Only meta‐analyses and randomized clinical trials were reviewed. Results: A total of seven prospective randomized trials including 670 patients and four meta‐analyses were reviewed. ELC was superior to DLC in terms of a shorter hospital stay without any significant difference in perioperative mortality and morbidity. Conclusions: Current evidence supports ELC as the preferred treatment strategy for acute cholecystitis. It allows a shorter hospital stay, but shares similar operative morbidity, mortality and conversion rate as DLC.     

Is early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis preferable to delayed surgery?: Best evidence topic (BET)

A best evidence topic was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) in patients presenting with a short history of acute cholecystitis provides better post-operative outcomes than a delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC). A total of 92 papers were found using the reported searches of which 10 represented the best evidence; 3 meta-analyses, 4 randomized control trials, 1 prospective controlled study and 2 retrospective cohort studies were included. The authors, date, journal, study type, population, main outcome measures and results were tabulated. No significant difference in complication or conversion rates were shown between the ELC and the DLC group, in the meta-analyses of Gurusamy et?al, Lau et?al and Siddiqui et?al. The ELC group had a decreased hospital stay whereas the DLC group presented a considerable risk for subsequent emergency surgery during the interval period, with a high rate of conversion to open cholecystectomy. All three meta-analyses were based on the randomized control trials of Lo et?al, Lai et?al, Kolla et?al and Johansson et?al; the results of each study are summarized. We conclude that there is strong evidence that early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis offers an advantage in the length of hospital stay without increasing the morbidity or mortality. The operating time in ELC can be longer, however the incidence of serious complications (i.e. common bile duct injury), is comparable to the DLC group. Larger randomized studies are required before solid conclusions are reached.     

Early versus delayed-interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been advocated for the management of acute cholecystitis, but little evidence exists to support the superiority of this approach over delayed-interval operation. The current systematic review was undertaken to compare the outcomes and efficacy between early and delayed-interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis in an evidence-based approach using metaanalytical techniques. METHODS: A search of electronic databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, was conducted to identify relevant articles published between January 1988 and June 2004. Only randomized or quasi-randomized prospective clinical trials in the English language comparing the outcomes of early and delayed-interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis were recruited. Both qualitative and quantitative statistical analyses were performed. The effect size of outcome parameters was estimated by odds ratio or weighted mean difference where feasible and appropriate. RESULTS: A total of four clinical trials comprising 504 patients met the inclusion criteria. Failure of conservative treatment requiring emergency cholecystectomy occurred for 43 patients (23%) in the delayed group. Metaanalyses demonstrated a significantly shortened total length of hospital stay in the early group (weighted mean difference, -1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.42 to -0.99; p < 0.001). Pooled estimates did not show any significant differences between the two approaches in terms of operation time, conversion rate, overall complication rate, incidence of bile leakage, and intraabdominal collection. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and efficacy of early and delayed-interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis were comparable. Because evidence suggested that early laparoscopic cholecystectomy reduced the total length of hospital stay and the risk of readmissions attributable to recurrent acute cholecystitis, it is therefore a more cost-effective approach for the management of acute cholecystitis.     

早期与晚期腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎有效性和安全性的评价

目的:评价早期与晚期腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎的有效性和安全性。方法:计算机检索PubMed、EMbase、Cochrane数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库、中文科技期刊数据库,均从建库检索至2010年1月,并筛选已获文献的参考文献,纳入早期与晚期腹腔镜胆囊切除术的随机对照试验。由2名研究者独立进行质量评价和数据提取,采用RevMan5.0.2软件进行Meta分析。结果:共纳入5个随机对照试验,合计425例患者。Meta分析结果显示,两组间的并发症(RR=0.92,95%CI:0.44-1.92;P=0.83)和中转开腹率(RR=0.95,95%CI:0.60-1.50;P=0.82)差异无统计学意义。总住院时间早期组短于晚期组(MD=-3.35,95%CI:-4.03--2.67;P0.01),差异有统计学意义。结论:早期腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗急性胆囊炎安全有效,可缩短住院时间。     

Meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials on the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

Background:

In many countries laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis is mainly performed after the acute episode has settled because of the anticipated increased risk of morbidity and higher conversion rate from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy.

Methods:

A systematic review was performed with meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC; performed within 1 week of onset of symptoms) versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (performed at least 6 weeks after symptoms settled) for acute cholecystitis. Trials were identified from The Cochrane Library trials register, Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and reference lists. Risk ratio (RR) or mean difference was calculated with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.) based on intention‐to‐treat analysis.

Results:

Five trials with 451 patients were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of bile duct injury (RR 0·64 (95 per cent c.i. 0·15 to 2·65)) or conversion to open cholecystectomy (RR 0·88 (95 per cent c.i. 0·62 to 1·25)). The total hospital stay was shorter by 4 days for ELC (mean difference ?4·12 (95 per cent c.i. ?5·22 to ?3·03) days).

Conclusion:

ELC during acute cholecystitis appears safe and shortens the total hospital stay. Copyright © 2009 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a prospective randomized trial

Background: The role of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis is not yet clearly established. The aim of this prospective randomized study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis and to compare the results with delayed cholecystectomy.Methods: Between January 2001 and November 2002, 40 patients with a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis were assigned randomly to early laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 24 h of admission (early group, n = 20) or to initial conservative treatment followed by delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 6 to 12 weeks later (delayed group, n = 20).Results: There was no significant difference in the conversion rates (early, 25% vs delayed, 25%), operating times (early, 104 min vs delayed, 93 min), postoperative analgesia requirements (early, 5.3 days vs delayed, 4.8 days), or postoperative complications (early, 15% vs delayed, 20%). However, the early group had significantly more blood loss (228 vs 114 ml) and shorter hospital stay (4.1 vs 10.1 days).Conclusions: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis is safe and feasible, offering the additional benefit of a shorter hospital stay. It should be offered to patients with acute cholecystitis, provided the surgery is performed within 72 to 96 h of the onset of symptoms.     

Operative timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis in a Japanese institute

Background and Objectives:

In patients with acute cholecystitis who cannot undergo early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (within 72 hours), 6 weeks to 12 weeks after onset is widely considered the optimal timing for delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, there has been no clear consensus about it. We aimed to determine optimal timing for delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

Methods:

Medical records of 100 patients who underwent standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were divided into group 1, patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 72 hours of onset; group 2, between 4 days to 14 days; group 3, between 3 weeks to 6 weeks; group 4, >6 weeks.

Results:

No significant differences existed between groups in conversion rate to open surgery, operation time, blood loss, or postoperative morbidity, and hospital stay. However, total hospital stay in groups 1 and 2 was significantly shorter than that in groups 3 and 4 (P<.01). In addition, the total hospital stay in group 3 was also significantly shorter than that in group 4 (P<.01).

Conclusions:

Best timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis may be within 72 hours, and the delayed timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients who cannot undergo early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is probably as soon as possible after they can tolerate laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

Early Versus Delayed Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis: A Prospective,Randomized Study

We aimed to compare the clinical outcome and cost of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Sixty patients with acute cholecystitis were randomized into early (within 24 hours of admission) or delayed (after 6–8 weeks of conservative treatment) laparoscopic cholecystectomy groups. There was no significant difference between study groups in terms of operation time and rates for conversion to open cholecystectomy. On the other hand, total hospital stay was longer (5.2 ± 1.40 versus 7.8 ± 1.65 days; P = 0.04) and total costs were higher (2500.97 ± 755.265 versus 3713.47 ± 517.331 Turkish Lira; P = 0.03) in the delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded in 8 patients in the early laparoscopic cholecystectomy group, whereas no complications occurred in the delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy group (P = 0.002). Despite intraoperative and postoperative complications being associated more with early laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared with delayed intervention, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be preferred for treatment of acute cholecystitis because of its advantages of shorter hospital stay and lower cost.Key words: Acute cholecystitis, Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, Outcome assessment, Cost and cost analysisElective laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the gold standard for treatment of symptomatic gallstones.¹ However, in the early days, acute cholecystitis was a contraindication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and patients with acute cholecystitis were managed conservatively and discharged for re-admission in order to have elective surgery performed for the definitive treatment.^2,3 Then, randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses had shown the benefits of early surgery (within the acute admission period, which is 24 to 72 hours) compared with delayed cholecystectomy with respect to hospital stay and costs, with no significant difference in morbidity and mortality.^2,4,5 Thus, in the late 1980s early surgery for acute cholecystitis had gained popularity. The updated Tokyo Guidelines announced in 2013 by the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery suggested that early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the first-line treatment in patients with mild acute cholecystitis, whereas in patients with moderate acute cholecystitis, delayed/elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy after initial medical treatment with antimicrobial agent is the first-line treatment.⁶With the increased experience in laparoscopy, surgeons started to attempt early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.² However, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is still performed by only a minority of surgeons.^7–9 Furthermore, the exact timing, potential benefits, and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acutely inflamed gallbladder have not been clearly established and continue to be controversial.^1,10The aim of this study was to compare the intra-operative and postoperative outcomes, and cost of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.     

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective study was to compare the outcome of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in patients with acute cholecystitis versus those with chronic cholecystitis and to determine the optimal timing for LC in patients with acute cholecystitis. METHODS: From January 1991 to July 1998, 796 patients (542 women and 254 men) underwent LC. In 132 patients (67 women and 65 men), acute cholecystitis was confirmed via histopathological examination. These patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 (n = 85) had an LC prior to 3 days after the onset of the symptoms of acute cholecystitis, and group 2 (n = 47) had an LC after 3 days. RESULTS: There were no mortalities. The conversion rates were 38.6% in acute cholecystitis and 9.6% in chronic cholecystitis (p<10(-8)). Length of surgery (150.3 min vs. 107.8 min; p<10(-9)), postoperative morbidity (15% vs. 6.6%; p = 0.001), and postoperative length of stay (7.9 days vs. 5 days; p< 10(-9)) were significantly different between LC for acute cholecystitis and elective LC. For acute cholecystitis, we found a statistical difference between the successful group and the conversion group in terms of length of surgery and postoperative stay. The conversion rates in patients operated on before and after 3 days following the onset of symptoms were 27% and 59.5%, respectively (p = 0.0002). There was no statistical difference between early and delayed surgery in terms of operative time and postoperative complications. However, total hospital stay was significantly shorter for group 1. CONCLUSIONS: LC for acute cholecystitis is a safe procedure with a shorter postoperative stay, lower morbidity, and less mortality than open surgery. LC should be carried out as soon as the diagnosis of acute cholecystitis is established and preferably before 3 days following the onset of symptoms. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy can reduce both the conversion rate and the total hospital stay as medical and economic benefits.     

Total gastrectomy. Updated operative mortality and long-term survival with particular reference to patients older than 70 years of age.

OBJECTIVE: The current study compared the results of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although recent reports have suggested the use of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis, the complication and conversion rates remain high. No data are available on whether initial medical treatment can improve the results. METHOD: Among 497 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 52 (10.5%) had a clinical diagnosis of acute cholecystitis confirmed by ultrasonography. Twenty-seven of these patients had early surgery, that is, within 120 hours of admission, and 25 had interval cholecystectomy after initial medical treatment. RESULTS: The early group required modifications in operative technique more frequently (p < 0.001). The conversion rate (7.4%) and minor complication rate (22%) were comparable. Successful early laparoscopic cholecystectomy required a longer operative time (137.2 minutes vs. 98.0 minutes; p < 0.05) and postoperative hospital stay (4.6 days vs. 2.5 days; p < 0.005) but reduced the total hospital stay (6.4 days vs. 12.4 days; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the treatment of acute cholecystitis has no adverse effect on complication and conversion rates. Although it is technically demanding and time consuming, this procedure provides the economic advantage of a markedly reduced total hospital stay.     

Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gangrenous cholecystitis

Treatment of severe acute cholecystitis by laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains controversial because of technical difficulties and high rates of complications and conversion to open cholecystectomy. We investigated whether early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is appropriate for acute gangrenous cholecystitis. Pathologic diagnoses and outcomes were analyzed in patients who underwent laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy at our hospital, January 2002 to September 2005. Of 30 patients with acute gangrenous cholecystitis, 16 underwent early laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 10 underwent open cholecystectomy, and 4 were converted to open cholecystectomy (conversion rate, 20.0%). There was no significant difference in operation time or intraoperative bleeding. The requirement for postoperative analgesics was significantly lower (6.4+/-7.3 vs. 1.5+/-1.2 doses, P<0.05) and hospital stay significantly shorter (8.6+/-2.1 vs. 15.6+/-6.3 d, P<0.01) after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There were no postoperative complications in either group. Thus, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy seems appropriate for acute gangrenous cholecystitis. Conversion to open cholecystectomy may be required in difficult cases with complications.     

Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to demonstrate the importance of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. METHODS: From 1998 to 2000, 66 patients were submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. All patients were submitted to US scans preoperatively and operated on by surgeon skilled in emergency laparoscopic operative technique. RESULTS: Only one patient (1.5%) had conversion to open cholecystectomy. There was no mortality and no bile duct or major vascular injuries. The overall operative morbidity rate was 3%. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 3.1 days. CONCLUSIONS: Author's experience and results support the validity of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis, since it reduces the postoperative length of hospital stay and hospital costs. Early treatment is always helpful for inflamed and oedematous tissue which favours dissection.     

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis

Background: In the light of laparoscopic cholecystectomy increasingly applied to all forms of cholecystitis, this study aimed at evaluating the safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy applied to all cases of acute cholecystitis, and at determining factors associated with the risk of conversion to open cholecystectomy. Methods: The clinical, biochemical, radiologic, and operative data from 124 consecutive cases of acute cholecystitis were analyzed retrospectively to determine the complications and morbidity after operation. The data were analyzed further by univariate and multivariate analysis to identify factors associated with conversion. Results: No major bile duct injury or mortality occurred. Bile leak from the stump of the cystic duct developed in four patients. These were managed successfully by endoscopic biliary stent placement. The mean duration of hospital stay was 3.8 days in the laparoscopic group and 8.2 days in the open group. Of the 124 patients (18.5%), 23 underwent conversion to open cholecystectomy. Univariate analysis identified the following factors as associated with conversion: common duct dilation greater than 7 mm observed on ultrasound, (p < 0.05), pericholecystic collection seen on ultrasound (p < 0.0001), emphysematous cholecystitis (p < 0.01), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographic evidence of Mirizzi syndrome (p < 0.05), and pericholecystic collection at operation (p < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, only pericholecystic collection (p < 0.015) and gallbladder wall thickness greater than 5 mm (p < 0.013) were statistically significant. Conclusions: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis can be applied safely to all comers, offering the advantage of a shortened hospital stay. Pericholecystic collection, as observed on ultrasound, is associated with a high risk of conversion to open cholecystectomy.     

Prospective randomized study of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

OBJECTIVE: A prospective randomized study was undertaken to compare early with delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis is associated with high complication and conversion rates. It is not known whether there is a role for initial conservative treatment followed by interval elective operation. METHOD: During a 26-month period, 99 patients with a clinical diagnosis of acute cholecystitis were randomly assigned to early laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 72 hours of admission (early group, n = 49) or delayed interval surgery after initial medical treatment (delayed group, n = 50). Thirteen patients (four in the early group and nine in the delayed group) were excluded because of refusal of operation (n = 6), misdiagnosis (n = 5), contraindication for surgery (n = 1), or loss to follow-up (n = 1). RESULTS: Eight of 41 patients in the delayed group underwent urgent operation at a median of 63 hours (range, 32 to 140 hours) after admission because of spreading peritonitis (n = 3) and persistent fever (n = 5). Although the delayed group required less frequent modifications in operative technique and a shorter operative time, there was a tendency toward a higher conversion rate (23% vs. 11%; p = 0.174) and complication rate (29% vs. 13%; p = 0.07). For 38 patients with symptoms exceeding 72 hours before admission, the conversion rate remained high after delayed surgery (30% vs. 17%; p = 0.454). In addition, delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy prolonged the total hospital stay (11 days vs. 6 days; p < 0.001) and recuperation period (19 days vs. 12 days; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Initial conservative treatment followed by delayed interval surgery cannot reduce the morbidity and conversion rate of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Early operation within 72 hours of admission has both medical and socioeconomic benefits and is the preferred approach for patients managed by surgeons with adequate experience in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

Management of acute cholecystitis in the laparoscopic era: Results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial

The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to determine whether laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be performed as an early or a delayed operation in patients with acute cholecystitis. After diagnostic workup, patients were randomized to one of two groups: (1) early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (i.e., within 7 days after onset of symptoms) or (2) initial conservative treatment followed by delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy 6 to 8 weeks later. Seventy-four patients were placed in the early-operation group, and 71 patients were assigned to the delayed-operation strategy. There was no significant difference in conversion rates (early 31% vs. delayed 29%), operating times (early 98 [range 30 to 355] minutes vs. delayed 100 [45 to 280] minutes), or complications. Failure with the conservative treatment strategy was noted in 26% of these patients. The total hospital stay was significantly shorter in the early group (5 [range 3 to 63] days) vs. the delayed group (8 [range 4 to 50] days; P < 0.05). Despite a high conversion rate, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy offered significant advantages in the management of acute cholecystitis compared to a conservative strategy. The greatest advantage was a reduced total hospital stay.     

Early conversion for gangrenous cholecystitis: impact on outcome

Background Early conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy for patients with gangrenous cholecystitis has been advocated. This study investigated the impact of early conversion on patient outcome. Methods Data from all patients with gangrenous cholecystitis undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy between 1992 and 2002 whose procedure had been converted to open surgery were prospectively collected and analyzed. Morbidity, length of stay, intensive care unit admission, and operative time served as outcome measures. Results Of the 97 patients in the study, 33 underwent conversion to open cholecystectomy. The conversion was early for 24% of the patients, after the initial dissection, for 33% and after an extended attempt at completion of the laparoscopic cholecystectomy for 37%. There was no difference in the overall morbidity among the groups, whereas the length of hospital stay appeared to be longer in the early conversion group. The operative time was significantly shorter after early conversion (p < 0.01, chi-square test). Conclusion Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is not feasible for all patients with gangrenous cholecystitis. However, a concerted effort to perform the cholecystectomy with the minimally invasive approach does not have an adverse impact on patient outcome and is likely to benefit patients although it poses a moderate risk of conversion. Presented at the 9th World Congress of Endoscopic Surgery, Cancun, Mexico 2–7 February 2004     

Prospective evaluation of emergency versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for early cholecystitis

Treatment of acute cholecystitis is still under debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) in comparison with conservative treatment followed by delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) in the management of acute cholecystitis. This prospective comparative study involved two groups of patients presenting with acute cholecystitis within 72 hours of the onset of symptoms. ELC was performed in 82 consecutive patients, whereas DLC was performed in 87 patients who previously underwent medical treatment. Surgical variables, hospital stay, and postoperative morbidity were evaluated in both groups. Time of surgery and conversion rate were lower in the ELC group. Postoperative morbidity was similar in both groups. Overall hospital stay was shorter in the ELC group. ELC within 72 hours of the onset of acute cholecystitis is a safe procedure with better results than DLC in terms of surgical timing, conversion rate, and hospital stay.     

Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the appropriate management for acute gangrenous cholecystitis

Treatment of severe acute cholecystitis by laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains controversial because of technical difficulties and high rates of complications. We determined whether early laparoscopic cholecystectomy is appropriate for acute gangrenous cholecystitis. The medical records of 116 patients with acute gangrenous cholecystitis admitted to the Korea University Guro Hospital between January 2005 and December 2009 were reviewed. The early operation group, those patients who had cholecystectomies within 4 days of the diagnosis, was compared with the delayed operation group, who had cholecystectomies 4 days after the diagnosis. Of the 116 patients, 57 were in the early operation group and 59 were in the delayed operation group. There were no statistical differences between the groups with respect to gender, age, body mass index, operative methods, major complications, duration of symptoms, mean operative time (98 vs 107 minutes), or postoperative hospital stay. However, the total hospital stay was significantly longer in the delayed operation group. More patients underwent preoperative percutaneous cholecystostomy in the delayed operation group (3.5 vs 15.3%). Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gangrenous cholecystitis is safe and feasible. There is no advantage to postponing an urgent operation in patients with acute gangrenous cholecystitis.     

An alternative approach to acute cholecystitis

Background: The mainstay of therapy for acute cholecystitis is cholecystectomy, which has a mortality of 5–30% in high-risk patients such as the elderly or critically ill. An alternative treatment option in patients suffering from acute cholecystitis with contraindications to emergency surgery is percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) followed by interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Percutaneous cholecystostomy yields 10–12% mortality in high-risk patients and is therefore a safe temporizing measure, allowing delayed, elective cholecystectomy when the patient is in better condition for surgery. Methods: Hospital charts and radiology films were reviewed for all 50 patients who underwent PC for acute cholecystitis between January 1990 and September 1993. Most patients were high risk for emergency cholecystectomy by virtue of their critical illness or underlying medical condition. Twenty-five patients went on to have interval cholecystectomies. We recorded whether they underwent laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy, as elective or emergency procedures, and we recorded direct complications, mortality, and postoperative length of hospital stay. Results: Relief of symptoms occurred within 48 h of PC in 90% of patients, and two patients had complications of PC. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was attempted in 13 patients and competed in nine. Four patients (31%) required conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomies due to extensive adhesions (3) or bleeding (1). Three patients had direct complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. There was no mortality or major bile duct injury. Conclusion: Percutaneous cholecystostomy followed by interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe, minimally invasive approach which can be employed safely in the critically ill patient when contraindications to emergency surgery exist.     

Laparoscopic surgery for acute cholecystitis in the elderly. Our experience

Acute cholecystitis in the elderly is a severe illness with high operative risks and mortality, which, even if less than in the past, is still too high. The surgical approach has significantly changed over the past 10 years: conservative therapy in the early 1990's was considered the only sure approach, while the laparoscopic surgical approach is recommended today for the emergency treatment of acute cholecystitis, also in the elderly. The aim of this retrospective study was to define the safety and effectiveness of early surgery for acute cholecystitis with the laparoscopic approach in the elderly. From September 2002 to September 2006, 287 patients were admitted to our unit for cholelithiasis, including 135 for acute cholecystitis. The patients with acute illness and age > 70 yrs numbered 73. After immediate monitoring of vital parameters and a brief diagnostic and therapeutic interval to restore the patient's general condition in intensive care (fasting, SNG, antibiotics, parenteral fluid therapy and analgesic drugs) all patients underwent emergency surgery within 24-96 hours. Fifty-nine (80.8%) underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, whereas the remaining 14 (19.2%) underwent open cholecystectomy due to their high-risk for cardiovascular, respiratory and metabolic status (ASA III-IV). In group 1 treated laparoscopically, morbidity was 11.9% versus 35.7% in group 2 treated with open cholecystectomy (p < 0.001). Mortality was 0 in group 1; and 7% (1 patient) in group 2 (p < 0.05). The median hospital stay was 3.87 (2-9) days in group 1 vs 10.5 (8-29) days in group 2 (p < 0.001). The results of our study confirm the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in expert hands in the management of acute cholecystitis in elderly patients. This choice allowed a statistically significant reduction in morbidity and overall hospital stay. Nevertheless, open cholecystectomy remains a valuable procedure for high-risk elderly patients undergoing emergency surgery. Poor outcome is related to the almost constant presence of comorbidity in the elderly = ASA score (ASA II vs. IV: p < 0.001) and independent of the type of surgical intervention (laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs open cholecystecotmy: p = n.s.). Early cholecystectomy in case of symptomatic cholelithiasis, before infectious complications set in, could partly reduce the poor prognosis in the elderly.