Literature DB >> 31312948

Ten-year Audit of Safe Bail-Out Alternatives to the Critical View of Safety in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

Dimitrios K Manatakis1, Dimitrios Papageorgiou2, Maria-Ioanna Antonopoulou1, Nikolaos Stamos3, Christos Agalianos1, Nikolaos Ivros3, Demetrios Davides1, Georgios Pechlivanides1, Ioannis Kyriazanos3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To prevent vasculobiliary injuries according to the Tokyo Guidelines, Critical View of Safety (CVS) is the recommended method for the identification of the cystic duct and cystic artery. Our aim was to audit laparoscopic cholecystectomies, in order to determine the rate of CVS feasibility and to explore safe bail-out alternatives, when CVS cannot be obtained.
METHODS: Patients who underwent either elective or emergent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, between January 2009 and December 2018, in whom the CVS was attempted, were retrospectively identified from the institutional electronic database. Dissection technique was documented in the operative notes. Bile duct injuries (BDI) were classified by the Strasberg classification, and their management and outcome were reported in the patient files.
RESULTS: In total, 1226 cases were included in the final analysis. CVS was feasible in 1128 cases (92.0%), whereas 65 patients (5.3%) were managed laparoscopically by a bail-out technique. Of those, 52 (4.3%) underwent a subtotal cholecystectomy, 12 (0.9%) a fundus-first cholecystectomy, and in one patient (0.1%) the operation was concluded by a tube cholecystostomy. Overall conversion rate was 2.7% (33/1226 cases). Male gender, older age, junior surgeons, and acute cholecystitis were significantly associated with higher conversion rates. Post-operatively, 10 patients (0.82%) developed a type A bile leakage. No major BDI (types B-E) were observed, either with CVS or the bail-out techniques.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that CVS and the bail-out alternatives complement each other in preventing major BDI and should belong to the armamentarium of every modern surgeon.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31312948     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-019-05082-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  34 in total

1.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy after a quarter century: why do we still convert?

Authors:  Balazs I Lengyel; Dan Azagury; Oliver Varban; Maria T Panizales; Jill Steinberg; David C Brooks; Stanley W Ashley; Ali Tavakkolizadeh
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Rationale and use of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Steven M Strasberg; L Michael Brunt
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  Medicolegal costs of bile duct injuries incurred during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Pankaj G Roy; Zahir F Soonawalla; Hugh W Grant
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.647

4.  Safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A systematic review of bile duct injury prevention.

Authors:  Floyd W van de Graaf; Ina Zaïmi; Laurents P S Stassen; Johan F Lange
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 6.071

5.  How often do surgeons obtain the critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

Authors:  Dimitrios Stefanidis; Nikita Chintalapudi; Brittany Anderson-Montoya; Bindhu Oommen; Daniel Tobben; Manuel Pimentel
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  IRCAD recommendation on safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Claudius Conrad; Go Wakabayashi; Horacio J Asbun; Bernard Dallemagne; Nicolas Demartines; Michele Diana; David Fuks; Mariano Eduardo Giménez; Claire Goumard; Hironori Kaneko; Riccardo Memeo; Alexandre Resende; Olivier Scatton; Anne-Sophie Schneck; Olivier Soubrane; Minoru Tanabe; Jacqueline van den Bos; Helmut Weiss; Masakazu Yamamoto; Jacques Marescaux; Patrick Pessaux
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 7.027

Review 7.  Tokyo Guidelines 2018: surgical management of acute cholecystitis: safe steps in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis (with videos).

Authors:  Go Wakabayashi; Yukio Iwashita; Taizo Hibi; Tadahiro Takada; Steven M Strasberg; Horacio J Asbun; Itaru Endo; Akiko Umezawa; Koji Asai; Kenji Suzuki; Yasuhisa Mori; Kohji Okamoto; Henry A Pitt; Ho-Seong Han; Tsann-Long Hwang; Yoo-Seok Yoon; Dong-Sup Yoon; In-Seok Choi; Wayne Shih-Wei Huang; Mariano Eduardo Giménez; O James Garden; Dirk J Gouma; Giulio Belli; Christos Dervenis; Palepu Jagannath; Angus C W Chan; Wan Yee Lau; Keng-Hao Liu; Cheng-Hsi Su; Takeyuki Misawa; Masafumi Nakamura; Akihiko Horiguchi; Nobumi Tagaya; Shuichi Fujioka; Ryota Higuchi; Satoru Shikata; Yoshinori Noguchi; Tomohiko Ukai; Masamichi Yokoe; Daniel Cherqui; Goro Honda; Atsushi Sugioka; Eduardo de Santibañes; Avinash Nivritti Supe; Hiromi Tokumura; Taizo Kimura; Masahiro Yoshida; Toshihiko Mayumi; Seigo Kitano; Masafumi Inomata; Koichi Hirata; Yoshinobu Sumiyama; Kazuo Inui; Masakazu Yamamoto
Journal:  J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 7.027

Review 8.  An analysis of the problem of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  S M Strasberg; M Hertl; N J Soper
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 6.113

9.  The heavy price of conversion from laparoscopic to open procedures for emergent cholecystectomies.

Authors:  Adil A Shah; Umar F Bhatti; Mikael Petrosyan; George Washington; Wasay Nizam; Mallory Williams; Daniel Tran; Edward E Cornwell; Terrence M Fullum
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 2.565

10.  Intra-operative gallbladder scoring predicts conversion of laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy: a WSES prospective collaborative study.

Authors:  Michael Sugrue; Federico Coccolini; Magda Bucholc; Alison Johnston
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 5.469

View more
  6 in total

1.  Morphology of the sulcus of the caudate process (Rouviere's sulcus) in a Greek population and a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Dimitrios K Manatakis; Nikolaos Tasis; Maria Ioanna Antonopoulou; Christos Agalianos; Maria Piagkou; John Tsiaoussis; Konstantinos Natsis; Dimitrios P Korkolis
Journal:  Anat Sci Int       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 1.741

2.  Patient and surgeon factors contributing to bailout cholecystectomies: a single-institutional retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Miya C Yoshida; Takuya Ogami; Kaylee Ho; Eileen X Bui; Shahenda Khedr; Chun-Cheng Chen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 3.453

3.  Peri-operative Mortality Following Cholecystectomy in Australia: Potential Preventability of Adverse Events.

Authors:  Laure Taher Mansour; Sean Brien; Jessica Reid; Guy J Maddern
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2020-10-11       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Are YouTube Videos a Reliable Training Method for Safe Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy? A Simulated Decision-Making Exercise to Assess the Critical View of Safety.

Authors:  Dimitrios K Manatakis; Emmanouil Mylonakis; Petros Anagnostopoulos; Konstantinos Lamprakakis; Christos Agalianos; Dimitrios P Korkolis; Christos Dervenis
Journal:  Surg J (N Y)       Date:  2021-12-23

5.  Routine extensive dissection of the cystic duct during laparoscopic cholecystectomy to reduce the risk of residual choledocholithiasis: an unnecessary step and a potentially hazardous concept.

Authors:  Charalampos Seretis; Mohamed Zohdy; Bethany Padgett; Pradeep Janardhanan
Journal:  Prz Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-03-18

6.  Critical View of Safety in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Word of Caution in Cases of Aberrant Anatomy.

Authors:  Maria Ioanna Antonopoulou; Dimitrios K Manatakis
Journal:  Surg J (N Y)       Date:  2022-10-18
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.