AIMS: Several recent papers have advocated emergency cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis, stating that it is safe, cost effective and leads to less time off work. This study was designed to assess current practice in the management of acute cholecystitis in the UK. METHODS: A postal questionnaire was sent to 357 consultant surgeons who were thought to be involved in a general surgical on-call rota, to ascertain their current management of patients with acute cholecystitis. Replies were received from 250 consultants (70 per cent) of whom 242 (68 per cent) were involved in a general surgical take. Sixteen of these consultants, however, handed their patients with acute cholecystitis on to a different team the following day for further management. RESULTS: Twenty-seven consultants (12 per cent) routinely treat their patients by emergency cholecystectomy whenever possible, with 24 stating that they would do this within 72 h. Limiting factors to this practice were stated to be availability of surgical staff (15), theatre space (nine) and radiological investigations (four). The remaining consultants (n = 199) routinely manage their patients conservatively initially and providing they settle, either (1) book directly for cholecystectomy (n = 94, 47 per cent), (2) reassess as an outpatient (n = 65, 33 per cent), (3) either of above (n = 21; 11 per cent) or (4) refer on to a colleague (n = 19, 10 per cent). The commonest indications for acute cholecystectomy stated by consultants whose initial treatment policy is conservative are spreading peritonitis due to bile leak (93 per cent), empyema (89 per cent), unexpected space on a theatre list (28 per cent) and failure of an acute episode to settle (21 per cent). The laparoscopic method is the commonest for both elective and emergency cholecystectomy, but the percentage of consultants using an open method rises dramatically from 9 per cent in the elective situation to 48 per cent for emergency cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence to support the increased use of emergency cholecystectomy, this practice is routinely carried out by only 12 per cent of consultants. However, of the consultants who treat their patients conservatively, 28 per cent are prepared to undertake emergency cholecystectomy if an unexpected space appears on the theatre list.
AIMS: Several recent papers have advocated emergency cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis, stating that it is safe, cost effective and leads to less time off work. This study was designed to assess current practice in the management of acute cholecystitis in the UK. METHODS: A postal questionnaire was sent to 357 consultant surgeons who were thought to be involved in a general surgical on-call rota, to ascertain their current management of patients with acute cholecystitis. Replies were received from 250 consultants (70 per cent) of whom 242 (68 per cent) were involved in a general surgical take. Sixteen of these consultants, however, handed their patients with acute cholecystitis on to a different team the following day for further management. RESULTS: Twenty-seven consultants (12 per cent) routinely treat their patients by emergency cholecystectomy whenever possible, with 24 stating that they would do this within 72 h. Limiting factors to this practice were stated to be availability of surgical staff (15), theatre space (nine) and radiological investigations (four). The remaining consultants (n = 199) routinely manage their patients conservatively initially and providing they settle, either (1) book directly for cholecystectomy (n = 94, 47 per cent), (2) reassess as an outpatient (n = 65, 33 per cent), (3) either of above (n = 21; 11 per cent) or (4) refer on to a colleague (n = 19, 10 per cent). The commonest indications for acute cholecystectomy stated by consultants whose initial treatment policy is conservative are spreading peritonitis due to bile leak (93 per cent), empyema (89 per cent), unexpected space on a theatre list (28 per cent) and failure of an acute episode to settle (21 per cent). The laparoscopic method is the commonest for both elective and emergency cholecystectomy, but the percentage of consultants using an open method rises dramatically from 9 per cent in the elective situation to 48 per cent for emergency cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence to support the increased use of emergency cholecystectomy, this practice is routinely carried out by only 12 per cent of consultants. However, of the consultants who treat their patients conservatively, 28 per cent are prepared to undertake emergency cholecystectomy if an unexpected space appears on the theatre list.