+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Percutaneous Cholecystostomy is a Reasonable Alternative for the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis in Critically Ill Patients: a Single Center Analysis

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Background / objective. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safe procedure and the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis. As an alternative treatment option in critically ill patients percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) is performed.Methods. Retrospective review of patients who had undergone PC from 2008 to 2017 at the Department of Surgery, Hospital of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinics. Patients were reviewed for demographic features, laboratory tests, ASA class, complications, outcomes, hospital stay and mortality rate.Results. Fifty-four patients were included in the study. Forty patients (74%) were ASA III and ten patients (18.5%) – ASA IV. Statistically signi­ficant decrease in white blood cell count (from 14.26±6.61 to 8.65±5.15) and C-reactive protein level (from 226.22±106.60 to 51.91±63.70) following PC was observed. The median hospital stay was 13.06 (range 2–68) days and 30-day mortality rate 13%. There were no deaths directly related to procedure. For eleven patients (20.4%) delayed cholecystectomy was scheduled.Conclusions. PC is a reasonable treatment option for high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis and co-morbidities. It can be used as a temporizing treatment option or as a definitive treatment with a low number of delayed cholecystectomies.

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Systematic review of cholecystostomy as a treatment option in acute cholecystitis.

          Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) is an established low-mortality treatment option for elderly and critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis. The primary aim of this review is to find out if there is any evidence in the literature to recommend PC rather than cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis in the elderly population. In April 2007, a systematic electronic database search was performed on the subject of PC and cholecystectomy in the elderly population. After exclusions, 53 studies remained, comprising 1918 patients. Three papers described randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but none compared the outcomes of PC and cholecystectomy. A total of 19 papers on mortality after cholecystectomy in patients aged >65 years were identified. Successful intervention was seen in 85.6% of patients with acute cholecystitis. A total of 40% of patients treated with PC were later cholecystectomized, with a mortality rate of 1.96%. Procedure mortality was 0.36%, but 30-day mortality rates were 15.4 % in patients treated with PC and 4.5% in those treated with acute cholecystectomy (P < 0.001). There are no controlled studies evaluating the outcome of PC vs. cholecystectomy and the papers reviewed are of evidence grade C. It is not possible to make definitive recommendations regarding treatment by PC or cholecystectomy in elderly or critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis. Low mortality rates after cholecystectomy in elderly patients with acute cholecystitis have been reported in recent years and therefore we believe it is time to launch an RCT to address this issue.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

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

            : 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. : 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. : 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). : ELC during acute cholecystitis appears safe and shortens the total hospital stay. Copyright (c) 2009 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              TG13: Updated Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis.

              In 2007, the Tokyo Guidelines for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis (TG07) were first published in the Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery. The fundamental policy of TG07 was to achieve the objectives of TG07 through the development of consensus among specialists in this field throughout the world. Considering such a situation, validation and feedback from the clinicians' viewpoints were indispensable. What had been pointed out from clinical practice was the low diagnostic sensitivity of TG07 for acute cholangitis and the presence of divergence between severity assessment and clinical judgment for acute cholangitis. In June 2010, we set up the Tokyo Guidelines Revision Committee for the revision of TG07 (TGRC) and started the validation of TG07. We also set up new diagnostic criteria and severity assessment criteria by retrospectively analyzing cases of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis, including cases of non-inflammatory biliary disease, collected from multiple institutions. TGRC held meetings a total of 35 times as well as international email exchanges with co-authors abroad. On June 9 and September 6, 2011, and on April 11, 2012, we held three International Meetings for the Clinical Assessment and Revision of Tokyo Guidelines. Through these meetings, the final draft of the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) was prepared on the basis of the evidence from retrospective multi-center analyses. To be specific, discussion took place involving the revised new diagnostic criteria, and the new severity assessment criteria, new flowcharts of the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis, recommended medical care for which new evidence had been added, new recommendations for gallbladder drainage and antimicrobial therapy, and the role of surgical intervention. Management bundles for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis were introduced for effective dissemination with the level of evidence and the grade of recommendations. GRADE systems were utilized to provide the level of evidence and the grade of recommendations. TG13 improved the diagnostic sensitivity for acute cholangitis and cholecystitis, and presented criteria with extremely low false positive rates adapted for clinical practice. Furthermore, severity assessment criteria adapted for clinical use, flowcharts, and many new diagnostic and therapeutic modalities were presented. The bundles for the management of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis are presented in a separate section in TG13. Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

                Author and article information

                Lietuvos chirurgija
                Vilnius University Press
                October 12 2019
                December 20 2019
                : 18
                : 4
                : 246-253
                © 2019

                All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.


                Linguistics & Semiotics,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law,Mathematics,History,Philosophy


                Comment on this article