Jacob Bundy1, Ravi N Srinivasa2, Joseph J Gemmete1, James J Shields1, Jeffrey Forris Beecham Chick1. 1. Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. 2. Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. medravi@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To report technical success and clinical outcome of cholecystostomy tube placement along with timing-and method-of tube removal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of cholecystostomy tubes placed from January 2010 to September 2017 was performed at a single academic center. This search yielded 1160 patients. Of these patients, 324 (27.9%) met inclusion criteria for cholecystostomy placement, 199 (61.4%) males and 125 (38.6%) females, with mean age of 67 years (range 6-101 years). The indication for cholecystostomy tube placement, technical success, surgical candidacy, medical comorbidities, clinical outcome, tube indwelling time, complications, and follow-up were recorded. RESULTS: Indications for cholecystostomy tube placement included: acute cholecystitis (n = 270; 83.3%), perforated cholecystitis (n = 22; 6.8%), emphysematous cholecystitis (n = 18; 5.6%), and other (n = 14; 4.3%). Technical success was 100%. Many patients had multiple medical comorbidities including (most commonly): debilitation (n = 211; 65.1%), cardiovascular disease (n = 194; 59.9%), multisystem disease (n = 181; 55.9%), and malignancy (n = 131; 40.4%). After tube placement, 96 (29.6%) patients underwent definitive cholecystectomy, 94 expired (29.0%), 36 (11.1%) had a patent cystic duct on follow-up cholangiogram and subsequent cholecystostomy removal, 14 (4.3%) underwent cholecystoscopy with stone removal, and 3 (0.9%) had liver transplantation. Forty-five (13.9%) patients had indwelling tubes at the end of the study period. Mean tube indwelling time was 89 days (range 0-586 days). CONCLUSION: Technical success for cholecystostomy tube placement was 100% with all patients having clinical resolution of acute cholecystitis. Many patients were able to have tubes subsequently removed.
PURPOSE: To report technical success and clinical outcome of cholecystostomy tube placement along with timing-and method-of tube removal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of cholecystostomy tubes placed from January 2010 to September 2017 was performed at a single academic center. This search yielded 1160 patients. Of these patients, 324 (27.9%) met inclusion criteria for cholecystostomy placement, 199 (61.4%) males and 125 (38.6%) females, with mean age of 67 years (range 6-101 years). The indication for cholecystostomy tube placement, technical success, surgical candidacy, medical comorbidities, clinical outcome, tube indwelling time, complications, and follow-up were recorded. RESULTS: Indications for cholecystostomy tube placement included: acute cholecystitis (n = 270; 83.3%), perforated cholecystitis (n = 22; 6.8%), emphysematous cholecystitis (n = 18; 5.6%), and other (n = 14; 4.3%). Technical success was 100%. Many patients had multiple medical comorbidities including (most commonly): debilitation (n = 211; 65.1%), cardiovascular disease (n = 194; 59.9%), multisystem disease (n = 181; 55.9%), and malignancy (n = 131; 40.4%). After tube placement, 96 (29.6%) patients underwent definitive cholecystectomy, 94 expired (29.0%), 36 (11.1%) had a patent cystic duct on follow-up cholangiogram and subsequent cholecystostomy removal, 14 (4.3%) underwent cholecystoscopy with stone removal, and 3 (0.9%) had liver transplantation. Forty-five (13.9%) patients had indwelling tubes at the end of the study period. Mean tube indwelling time was 89 days (range 0-586 days). CONCLUSION: Technical success for cholecystostomy tube placement was 100% with all patients having clinical resolution of acute cholecystitis. Many patients were able to have tubes subsequently removed.
Authors: Francisco Schlottmann; Charles Gaber; Paula D Strassle; Marco G Patti; Anthony G Charles Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2018-09-17 Impact factor: 3.452