Is Percutaneous Cholecystostomy a Good Alternative Treatment for Acute Cholecystitis in High-Risk Patients?

2017 ◽  
Vol 83 (6) ◽  
pp. 623-627 ◽  
Author(s):  
Davide Papis ◽  
Eiman Khalifa ◽  
Ricky Bhogal ◽  
Amit Nair ◽  
Saboor Khan ◽  
...  

Cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis but the management of high-risk surgical patients is a difficult dilemma. Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) could represent a safer and less invasive option. The aim of the study was to assess the outcomes of PC in high-risk patients. This is a retrospective single-center study; data were collected from our hospital electronic record system. From February 2009 to March 2014, there were 753 patients admitted with acute cholecystitis. Of these 39 were considered high risk for surgery and underwent PC during their hospital stay. The radiological approach was transperitoneal in 29 patients and transhepatic in 10 patients. Median follow-up was 19 months. There were 27 males (69.2%) and 12 females (30.8%) with a mean age of 72 years (range 41–90 years). Twenty-seven patients had PC as definitive treatment (group A) and 12 patients as a bridge to cholecystectomy (group B). There were no postprocedure complications. Five patients in group A were readmitted once with another episode of cholecystitis after PC (18.5%), one patient in group B was readmitted with cholecystitis after two years before proceeding to cholecystectomy, and two patients were readmitted after cholecystectomy (16.6%) for intra-abdominal collections treated with percutaneous radiological drainage. Seven patients died (17.9%) as a result of severe biliary sepsis during their index hospital admission. PC is a safe approach in high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis and can provide satisfactory long-term results when cholecystectomy is not a viable option.

2013 ◽  
Vol 79 (5) ◽  
pp. 524-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min Li ◽  
Ning Li ◽  
Wu Ji ◽  
Zhufu Quan ◽  
Xinbo Wan ◽  
...  

Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) is an alternative treatment for acute cholecystitis (AC) in elderly patients with high surgical risk and has lower morbidity and mortality than emergency cholecystectomy. There is controversy about whether cholecystectomy should be performed after PC in elderly high-risk patients. Medical records of patients with AC admitted to the Department of Surgery, Jinling Hospital, Nanjing University School of Medicine, China, between January 2004 and July 2009 were reviewed retrospectively. The elderly high-risk patients with AC who underwent PC were selected for further study. The safety, efficacy, and long-term outcome of PC without cholecystectomy were evaluated in these patients. The symptoms of AC resolved in 98.6 per cent of patients; drainage-related morbidity and mortality rates were 4.1 and 1.4 per cent, respectively. No patient underwent cholecystectomy after PC. The recurrence rate of cholecystitis was 4.1 per cent. The one-year survival rate was 82.2 per cent, and the three-year survival rate was 39.6 per cent. No death was related to cholecystitis, but one patient died of septic shock on the second day after PC. Considering limited survival and a low recurrence rate of cholecystitis in elderly high-risk patients with AC, we propose that PC is a definitive treatment and cholecystectomy is not necessary after resolution of AC symptoms.


2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (9) ◽  
pp. 1256-1259 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Welschbillig-Meunier ◽  
P. Pessaux ◽  
J. Lebigot ◽  
E. Lermite ◽  
Ch. Aube ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Petanovsk. Kostova

Abstract Study question Study aim is to compare implantation,clinical pregnancy and livebirth rates between giving1500IU of hCG4hours after GnRHagonist,on trigger day or GnRHagonist as alone trigger with luteal support withHCG1500IU.35h later on OPUday. Summary answer Adjuvant doze of1500IUhCG4h after bolus of GnRHagonist on trigger day significantly improve quality of blastocyst,implantation,clinical pregnancy and live birth rates without increasing the risk ofOHSS. What is known already The use of GnRHagonist for final oocyte maturation in antagonist cycle significantly decrease the incidence of OHSS,but there have been studies showing lower pregnancy rates in patients triggered with GnRHagonist compared with hCG in autologous cycles,attributed to a defective luteal phase, especially in high–risk patients despite intensive luteal phase support.To improve the results of IVF,an alternative approach is adding a small bolus dose of hCG(1500IU)35h later,on the OPU day after GnRHagonist trigger which provides more sustained support for the corpus luteum.The question is does low doses of hCGgiven on the same day with GnRHagonist trigger is making better quality oocytes. Study design, size, duration Single center prospective longitudinal cohort study fromJanuary2017 to Decembar2019.The initial inclusion criteria were:women age≥18and≤39years,AMH≥3,3ng/ml and ≥12 antral follicles on basal ultrasound.Patients with history of OHSS and PCO are also included in the study.Patients with applied “freeze-all” technique with peak estradiol≥4000pg/ml on trigger day>18oocytes on the OPU day,and recognized significant risk for developing OHSS were also included.The cumulative implantation,clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were analyzed,only in embryos from the same COS protocol in every patient. Participants/materials, setting, methods A total of 231 patients were entered for final analysis,who underwent a flexible antagonist protocol,ICSI and fresh or thawed ET on 3th(38.53%) or 5th( 61.47%)day in women’s autologous cycles.Patients were randomized in one of two groups: GroupA-Dual trigger group 1500IUof hCG 4h after GnRH agonist application on trigger day and GroupB –1500IU of HCG 35h later,on the OPU day.We used nonparametric and parametric statistical tests.Significant differences were considered all values ​​of p < 0.05 Main results and the role of chance Both groups are homogenous regarding several variables:age,BMI,type of sterility,smoking status,AMH,PCO, spermogram.There is no significant difference between the two(AvsB)groups according to average number of retrieved oocytes(13.6 vs 14.6 p > 0,05),M II oocytes(11.03 vs 11.99 p > 0.05).The dual trigger group(A)had a higher fertility rate(69.99% vs 64.11% p < 0,05)compared with GnRHagonist trigger group(B).There are no significant difference between groups(AvsB)according to cumulative average number of:transferred embryos(2.4vs2.5 p > 0.05)TQE transfered on 3th day(1.5.vs 1.3.p>0.05);transferred blastocyst(2.6 vs2.7 >0.05);cryo embryos(2.5vs1.9 p > 0.05),but there are significant difference according to cumulative implantation rate of transferred blastocyst in favor of group A(48.18% vs 33.89%p<0.05).Analyzes of morphological characteristics of transferred blastocyst depicted in the order of degree of blastocyst expansion,inner cellular mass(ICM)and trofoectoderm(TE) and ranking overall blastocysts quality from“excellent”,“good”,“average” and “pore” ,shows that there are significantly more percentage of patient with embryo transfer of “excellent” or even one “excellent” blastocyst in group A (30.56%,31.94% vs 21.54%,23.08% p < 0.05) in opposite of percentage of patients with embryo transfer with “poore “” blastocyst in group B (37.5% vs 46.15.%p<0.05). Clinical pregnanacy rate (71.68% vs 50.84% p < 0.05) , and live birth rate (60,18% vs 42,58% ), were significantly higher in group A. There were no cases of moderate or severe OHSS in both groups. Limitations, reasons for caution Dual trigger in GnRH antagonist protocols should be advocated as a safe approach but undetected high risk patients are reasons for caution for developing clinically significant OHSS. Wider implications of the findings: Adjuvant low dose of hCG on GnRHagonist trigger day improve clinical pregnancy and live birth rates without increasing the risk of clinically significant OHSS.Protocol of dual trigger and freezing all oocytes or embryos in patients with high risk of developing OHSS is promising technique in everyday practice. Trial registration number 8698


HPB ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. S334
Author(s):  
Kwangyeol Paik ◽  
Ji Seon Oh ◽  
Chul Seung Lee ◽  
Sung Hoon Yoon ◽  
Dong Do You

HPB ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. e669
Author(s):  
V. Costas-Fernandez ◽  
S. Cea-Pereira ◽  
M. Casal-Rivas ◽  
E. Casal-Nuñez ◽  
F. Ausania

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua Jiang ◽  
Guo Guo ◽  
Zhimin Yao ◽  
Yuehua Wang

Abstract Background Cholecystostomy offers an alternative method for patients unfit to undergo immediate cholecystectomy. Nevertheless, the role of cholecystostomy in the clinical management of high-risk surgical patients remains unclear. One of the main problems concerning the therapeutic effect in critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis is the lack of validated, well-established scoring systems to stratify the severity of patient disease states. APACHE IV scoring system was useful to estimate the hospital mortality for high-risk patients. We try to evaluate the performance of the APACHE IV scoring system in patients over 65 years of age with acute cholecystitis and the therapeutic effect of percutaneous cholecystostomy. Methods 597 patients over 65 years of age with acute cholecystitis between January 2011 and December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed with the APACHE IV scores. Results Among the 597 patients, 52 successfully underwent cholecystectomy (2 died, 3.85%), 65 underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy (1 died, 1.54%), and 480 received conservative therapy (27 died, 5.63%). The fitness of the APACHE IV score prediction is good with the area under the ROC curve of 0.894. The APACHE IV models were well-calibrated (with the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic). Using the method of binary regression analysis, for the patients whose estimated mortality rate was more than 10%, cholecystostomy was an important factor for prognosis (P = 0.048). The estimated mortality of PC patients before and after operation was compared, which indicated that the estimated mortality after puncture was significantly decreased, either in the whole patient group (P = 0.004) or in the group with an estimated mortality greater than 10% (P = 0.008). Conclusion The APACHE IV scoring system showed that cholecystostomy was a safe and effective treatment for elderly high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis.


Author(s):  
Yunus Seyrek ◽  
Murat Akkuş

Background: In this study, we conducted a retrospective review of patients at our institution with noninfectious sternal dehiscence (NISD) after median sternotomy who received thermoreactive nitinol clips (TRNC) treatment during a 10-year period. We compared TRNC patients with and without history of failed Robicsek repair. The purpose of the study was to analyze the impact of previous Robicsek repair on the treatment of sternal dehiscence with TRCN. Methods: Between December 2009 and January 2020, out of 283 patients with NISD who underwent refixation, we studied 34 cases who received TRNC treatment. We divided these 34 cases into two groups: patients who had a previously failed Robicsek procedure before TRNC treatment (group A, n=11) and patients who had been directly referred to TRCN treatment (group B, n= 23). Results: Postoperative complication rate was significantly higher in group A (p=0.026). Hospitalization duration was significantly longer in group A due to the higher complication rate (p=0.001). Operative time was significantly shorter and blood loss was significantly lower in group B (p=0.001). Conclusion: The Robicsek procedure is considered an effective method in the treatment of NISD but, in case of its failure, subsequent TRNC treatment might become cumbersome in high-risk patients. In our study, a previously failed Robicsek procedure caused significantly higher morbidity and additional operative risk in later TRNC treatment of high-risk cases. Ultimately, we speculate that a direct TRNC treatment for NISD is favorable in high-risk patients.


2018 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 124-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Aroori ◽  
C. Mangan ◽  
L. Reza ◽  
N. Gafoor

Background: Acute cholecystitis has the potential to cause sepsis and death, particularly in patients with poor physiological reserve. The gold standard treatment of acute cholecystitis (cholecystectomy) is often not safe in high-risk patients and recourse is made to percutaneous cholecystostomy as either definite treatment or temporizing measure. The aim of this study is to evaluate early and late outcomes following percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients with acute cholecystitis treated at our institution. Methods: All patients who underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis (excluding patients with malignancy) between January 2005 and September 2014 were included in the study. Results: A total of 53 patients (22 female, median age, 74 years; range, 27–95 years) underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy during the study period. In total, 12 patients (22.6%) had acalculous cholecystitis. The main indications for percutaneous cholecystostomy were significant co-morbidities (n = 28, 52.8%) and patients too unstable for surgery (n = 21, 39.6%). The median time to percutaneous cholecystostomy from diagnosis of acute cholecystitis was 3.6 days (range, 0–45 days). The median length of hospital stay was 27 (range, 4–87) days. The overall 90-day mortality was 9.3% with two further deaths at 12-month follow up. The mortality was significantly higher in patients with American Society of Anesthesiology grade 4–5 (18% vs 0% in American Society of Anesthesiology grade 2–3, p = 0.026) and in patients with acalculous cholecystitis (25% vs 4.5%, p = 0.035). The overall readmission rate was 18%. A total of 24 (45.2%) patients had surgery: laparoscopic cholecystectomy, n = 11; laparoscopic converted to open, n = 5; open total cholecystectomy, n = 5; open cholecystectomy, n = 1; laparotomy and washout, n = 1; laparotomy partial cholecystectomy and closure of perforated small intestine and gastrostomy, n = 1. Conclusion: Percutaneous cholecystostomy is a useful temporary or permanent procedure in patients with acute cholecystitis of both calculous and acalculous origin, who are unfit for surgery.


1987 ◽  
Vol 153 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Klimberg ◽  
Irvin Hawkins ◽  
Stephen B. Vogel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document