Literature DB >> 15107216

Does the complication rate increase in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis?

Oktar Asoglu1, Vahit Ozmen, Hasan Karanlik, Abdullah Igci, Mustafa Kecer, Mesut Parlak, Ersin Selcuk Unal.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has replaced open cholecystectomy for the treatment of gallbladder disease. Despite the well-accepted success of LC in chronic cholecystitis, the efficacy of this technique has been subject to some debate in acute cholecystitis (AC). This study was designed to evaluate our institution's experience with LC for AC and chronic symptomatic calculous cholecystitis (CC), based on complication and conversion rates to open surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 1158 patients with LC from September 1991 to December 2001 were analyzed. The parameters of age, gender, early and late complication rates, and conversion rates from LC to open cholecystectomy were compared in patients with AC and CC.
RESULTS: During the study period, LC was performed in 1158 patients. Of these, 162 patients had AC (group 1) and 996 patients had CC (group 2). The conversion rates were 4.3% (7/162) in group 1 and 2.4% (24/996) in group 2. The complication rates were not significantly different (5.6% in group 1, 5.1% in group 2, P > 0.05). Difficulty in dissection around Calot's triangle and obscure anatomy were the main reasons for conversion to conventional open surgery. The mortality rate was 1.2% in group 1 and 0.01% in group 2.
CONCLUSION: LC appears to be a reliable, safe, and effective treatment modality for AC and CC. The surgical approach should be performed carefully because of the spectrum of potential hazards of the laparoscopic procedure. Conversion and complication rates are similar in both AC and CC groups, and improve as surgeons gain experience.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15107216     DOI: 10.1089/109264204322973844

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A        ISSN: 1092-6429            Impact factor:   1.878


  6 in total

1.  SAGES guidelines for the clinical application of laparoscopic biliary tract surgery.

Authors:  D Wayne Overby; Keith N Apelgren; William Richardson; Robert Fanelli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-08-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Early versus delayed-interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a metaanalysis.

Authors:  H Lau; C Y Lo; N G Patil; W K Yuen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-10-24       Impact factor: 3.453

3.  The HAC trial (harmonic for acute cholecystitis): a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing the use of harmonic scalpel to monopolar diathermy for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in cases of acute cholecystitis.

Authors:  Fausto Catena; Salomone Di Saverio; Luca Ansaloni; Federico Coccolini; Massimo Sartelli; Carlo Vallicelli; Michele Cucchi; Antonio Tarasconi; Rodolfo Catena; GianLuigi De' Angelis; Hariscine Keng Abongwa; Daniel Lazzareschi; Antonio Pinna
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-10-20       Impact factor: 5.469

4.  The HAC Trial (Harmonic for Acute Cholecystitis) Study. Randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of Harmonic(H) versus Monopolar Diathermy (M) for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for acute cholecystitis (AC) in adults.

Authors:  Fausto Catena; Luca Ansaloni; Salomone Di Saverio; Filippo Gazzotti; Federico Coccolini; Antonio Daniele Pinna
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-05-26       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 5.  The impact of the Japanese clinical guidelines on the clinical management of patients with acute cholecystitis.

Authors:  Satoshi Shinya; Yuichi Yamashita; Tadahiro Takada
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 7.027

6.  The ACTIVE (Acute Cholecystitis Trial Invasive Versus Endoscopic) study: multicenter randomized, double-blind, controlled trial of laparoscopic (LC) versus open (LTC) surgery for acute cholecystitis (AC) in adults.

Authors:  Fausto Catena; Luca Ansaloni; Salomone Di Saverio; Filippo Gazzotti; Stefano Gagliardi; Federico Coccolini; Luigi D'Alessandro; Giorgio Ercolani; Carlo Talarico; Uberto A Bassi; Leonardo Leone; Filippo Calzolari; Antonio D Pinna
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 2.279

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.