Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Thomas, Christophe
• Wintrip, Dorothy
• Horgan, Liam
• Brown, James

Titel

Outcomes of laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy: a comparative analysis of fenestrating and reconstituting approaches in 170 cases

Ist Teil von

• Surgical endoscopy, 2024-03, Vol.38 (3), p.1484-1490

Ort / Verlag

New York: Springer US

Erscheinungsjahr

2024

Quelle

MEDLINE

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Background Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (LSC) is a recognised alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) when it is unsafe to achieve the “critical view of safety”. Although LSC reduces the risk of bile duct injury, it is associated with increased morbidity, primarily due to bile leak. LSC can be classified as fenestrating (F-LSC) or reconstituting (R-LSC), with the latter being more complex. The objective of this study was to evaluate the two LSC techniques, their complications, and overall outcomes. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of all adult patients who underwent LSC between January 2015 and December 2021 using our electronic database. Data collected included patient demographics, prior acute biliary presentations, operative details/techniques, length of stay (LOS), 30-day complications, 30-day mortality, readmissions, and follow-up investigations/procedures. Descriptive statistics, Chi-squared tests, and relative risk were employed for data analysis. Results In the study period, LSC was performed on 170 patients, showing an increasing trend over time. Most procedures (76%) were performed in the acute setting, and 37.1% of patients had a history of previous acute biliary presentations. Fenestrating LSC was the most performed technique (115 [67.6%] vs. 55 [32.4%]). Complications occurred in 80 (47.1%) patients; 60 patients (35.3%) had a bile leak. 16 patients (9.4%) required reoperation, and readmission was observed in 14 patients (8.2%). F-LSC was associated with more complications [ p  = 0.03 RR 2.46 (95% CI 1.5–4)], more bile leaks [ p  < 0.01, RR 2.1 (95% CI 1.2–3.7)], greater need for rescue postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) [ p  < 0.01, RR 3.8 (95% CI 1.4–10.2)], and longer LOS (6 vs. 4 days p  < 0.01). Conclusion Although LSC is seen as a safe alternative to open conversion, our findings demonstrate a high morbidity, including reoperation/reintervention, readmissions, and complications, associated with LSC especially with F-LSC. We suggest that if LSC is performed, the reconstituted technique should be chosen, if feasible. Graphical Abstract