| Literature DB >> 33528666 |
Ahmad H M Nassar1,2, Hisham El Zanati3,4, Hwei J Ng5,4, Khurram S Khan5,4, Colin Wood5,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Open conversion rates during laparoscopic cholecystectomy vary depending on many factors. Surgeon experience and operative difficulty influence the decision to convert on the grounds of patient safety but occasionally due to technical factors. We aim to evaluate the difficulties leading to conversion, the strategies used to minimise this event and how subspecialisation influenced conversion rates over time.Entities:
Keywords: Conversion; Difficult cholecystectomy; Fundus first cholecystectomy; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Nassar scale; Subtotal cholecystectomy
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33528666 PMCID: PMC8741693 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08316-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Surg Endosc ISSN: 0930-2794 Impact factor: 4.584
Fig. 1Modified epigastric access avoiding a midline scar and adhesions in the centre of the abdomen using a lateral camera port
Fig. 2A A contracted gallbladder with a sessile junction with the common bile duct may make it impossible to display the critical view of safety. B FFD culminating in the "funnel method' facilitating safer and further posterior dissection to achieve a complete cholecystectomy
Fig. 3Relationship between conversion rate, time and case volume
Conversion rates relative to specific preoperative risk factors
| Preoperative risk factors | Risk factor positive no | Conversion no (%) | Risk factor negative no | Conversion nso (%) | OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age ≥ 60 years | 1859 | 13 (0.7%) | 3879 | 15 (0.38%) | 0.154 | 1.814 (0.861, 3.20) |
| Male aged ≥ 60 years | 656 | 5 (0.76) | 830 | 5 (0.6%) | 0.757 | 1.267 (0.365, 4.396) |
| Emergency admission | 2551 | 19 (0.74%) | 3187 | 9 (0.28%) | 0.020 | 2.650 (1.197, 5.867) |
| Acute cholecystitis | 506 | 3 (0.6%) | 5232 | 25 (0.47%) | 0.733 | 1.242 (0.374, 4.129) |
| Jaundice | 1043 | 14 (1.3%) | 4695 | 14 (0.29%) | < 0.001 | 4.559 (2.162, 9.571) |
| Previous cholecystitis | 328 | 6 (1.8%) | 5410 | 22 (0.4%) | 0.004 | 4.577 (1.843, 11.367) |
| Previous jaundice | 304 | 2 (0.65%) | 5434 | 26 (0.48%) | 0.659 | 1.377 (0.325, 5.831) |
| USS thick or contracted GB | 872 | 7 (0.8%) | 4866 | 21 (0.43%) | 0.180 | 1.867 (0.791, 4.405) |
| USS Dilated CBD | 937 | 12 (1.28%) | 4801 | 16 (0.33%) | 0.001 | 3.880 (1.829, 8.228) |
| Previous abdominal surgery | 1759 | 5 (0.28%) | 3979 | 23 (0.57%) | 0.156 | 0.490 (0.186, 1.292) |
| Risk factors for CBD stones | 2047 | 19 (0.93%) | 3691 | 9 (0.24%) | 0.001 | 3.833 (1.731, 8.487) |
Causes of open conversion
| Main reason for conversion | Number of patients |
|---|---|
| Impacted CBD stones (Non Mirizzi) | 7 (25%) |
| Adhesions GB to omentum, hepatic flexure, duodenum | 7 (25%) |
| Adhesions. Distant. Bowel injury | 2 (7%) |
| Mirizzi ( includes 1 with impacted CBD stone) | 4 (14%) |
| Failure to establish pneumoperitoneum | 2 (7%) |
| Bleeding, liver cirrhosis | 1 (3.5%) |
| Suspicion of malignancy | 1 (3.5%) |
| Cholecystoduodenal fistula | 1 (3.5%) |
| Unclear anatomy | 1 (3.5%) |
| Slipped T tube after LCBDE | 1 (3.5%) |
| CBD stricture (cholangiocarcinoma) | 1 (3.5%) |
Complications encountered in the conversion patients in our series and their management
| Complication | Number | Readmission | Re-intervention | Clavien–Dindo classification | Hospital stay/days |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Retained stones | 3 (10.7%) | 1 | 3 ERCP | G IIIa | 24, 14, 10, |
| Abdominal collections | 2 (7%) | 1 | 1 P/C Drain 1 conservative | G IIIa G II | 30 21 |
| Bile leak | 1 (3.5%) | Conservative | G I | 12 | |
| Intestinal fistula/abdominal collection | 1 (3.5%) | 1 | P/C drain, settled | G IIIa | 95 |
| Chest infection | 1 (3.5%) | Conservative | G II | 7 | |
| Bile leak due to cholangiocarcinoma | 1 (3.5%) | ERCP | G IIIa | 21 |
Preoperative characteristics predictive of conversion in our series vs. CholeS study
| This study | CholeS | OR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conversions | 28/5738 (0.49%) | 221/6615 (3.34%)* | 0.00001 | 0.142 (0.096–0.211) |
| Age ≥ 50 years | 17 (60.7%) | 179 (81%) | 0.025 | 0.363 (0.158–0.831) |
| Male gender | 10 (35.7%) | 111 (50%) | 0.165 | 0.551 (0.243–1.246) |
| Emergency admission | 18 (64.3%) | 57 (26%) | 0.0001 | 5.179 (2.259–11.873) |
| Preoperative ERCP | 0% | 57 (26%) | 0.001 | Not applicable |
| Main indication for surgery | ||||
| Acute Cholecystitis | 3 (10.7%) | 123 (56%) | 0.001 | 0.096 (0.028–0.326) |
| Pancreatitis | 0% | 13 (6%) | 0.3714 | Not applicable |
| CBD stone/jaundice | 13 (46.4%) | 40 (18%) | 0.002 | 3.922 (1.731–8.885) |
| Thick-walled gall bladder on ultrasound | 7 (25%) | 122 (55%) | 0.0043 | 0.27 (0.110–0.662) |
| Dilated CBD on ultrasound | 11 (39.3%) | 66 (30%) | 0.385 | 1.520 (0.675–3.420) |
*CholeS data were divided into two random groups with similar conversion rates: one to produce a risk score and one to validate the resulting score
Operative parameters and postoperative outcomes of conversions
| This study no = 5738 | CholeS no = 8820 | OR (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No of conversions | 28 (0.49%) | 297(3.37%) | 0.00001 | 0.146 (0.099–0.215) |
| Nassar difficulty grade | ||||
| IV + V | 20 (71.4%) | 212 (71.4%) | 1 | 1.002 (0.425–2.363) |
| III | 4 (14.2%) | 65 (21.8%) | 0.4708 | 0.595 (0.199–1.776) |
| II | 2 (7.1%) | 12 (4%) | 1 | 1.827 (0.388–8.606 |
| I | 2 (7.1%) | 7 (2.3%) | 0.1674 | 3.187 (0.629–16.134 |
| Median operative time | 195 min | 120 min | ||
| Median Hospital stay | 11 days | 6 days | ||
| Mortality | 0% | 2 (0.7%) | 1 | Not applicable |
| Total morbidity | 9 (32%) | 98 (33%) | 0.8321 | 0.962 (0.420–2.204) |
| Bile leak | 1 (3.5%) | 25 (8%) | 0.7096 | 0.403 (0.053–3.091) |
| Bile duct injurya | 0% | 6 (2%) | 1 | Not applicable |
aTwo bile duct injuries occurred in this series but were not converted. They underwent open biliary reconstruction at a liver surgery unit within 24 h. Satisfactory symptom-free follow-up of 8 and 15 years
Comparison of the outcomes of fundus first dissection & subtotal cholecystectomy
| No of LC cases in series | Incidence of FFD/SC | Total conversion rate | Potential conversion without FF/SC | IOC with FFD/SC | Overall complication rate with FFD/SC (%) | Residual CBD stones after FFD/SC (%) | Lap CBD exploration | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nassar et al. This study | 5738 | 2.8%/0.08% | 0.49% (+ 3 open from start—0.052%) | 3.5% | 93.8% | 12.6 | 1.2 | Yes |
| Hubert et al. [ | 500 (elective only) | 7.1% | 2% (+ 52 open from star—9%) | 25.6% | 79.5% | 15.4 | 5.1 | No |
| ElShaer et al. [ | 1231 | 100% subtotal (meta-analysis) | 8% (+ 19% open from start) | 8% | 4/30 studies | 27 | 3 | No |
| Sormaz et al. [ | 213 | 6.2%/2.8% | 1.4% (+ 27 open from start excluded—11%) | 0% but 46% of FFD had SC | no | 15 | 7.5 | No |
Gupta et al. [ (FFD only not SC) | 145 | 18.6% in difficult LC | 2% (excluded fistulas, CBD stones, cancer) | 4.1% | no | 1.5 | 0 | No |
| Tuveri et al. [ | 1965 (> 72 h AC* excluded) | 1.5% | 3.4% | 20% | 60% | 20 | 6.9 | Yes |
aGupta randomised 31% LC to FFD preoperatively regardless of difficulty and resorted to FFD due to difficulty in an additional 18.6% in the conventional LC group