Transhepatic or transperitoneal technique for cholecystostomy: results of the multicentre retrospective audit of cholecystostomy and further interventions (MACAFI)

Abstract

Objective: This analysis of the MACAFI (multicentre audit of cholecystostomy and further interventions) data aims to assess the procedural technique and technical specifications related to percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) insertion in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC). PC can be performed either with transperitoneal (TP) or a transhepatic (TH) approach. There is no clear evidence for the superiority of either technique. Methods: The data set included patients who underwent PC for ACC between first January 2019 and first January 2021. Data included patient demographics, imaging diagnosis, insertion technique, tube size, and outcomes including 6 month follow-up. Results: 1186 patients from 36 sites were identified through the MACAFI study with 913 patients having access route recorded. A transhepatic route was used in 572 [62.6%] compared to 308 TP [33.7%]. There was an increased rate of bleeding when using the TH route (2.6% vs 0.3%, p = 0.01) although other post-procedural complications (such as bile leak) were similar between the two groups. No significant difference was demonstrated in 30- or 90-day mortality (TH vs TP, 8.7vs 9.3%, p = 0.86 and 13.8vs 15.4%, p = 0.58, respectively). The readmission rate with recurrent cholecystitis was significantly greater in those with TH compared to TP approach (22.0% vs  14.9%, p = 0.01, respectively). Conclusion: The TP PC approach may be safer than TH, with lower bleeding complication rate and fewer readmissions. Advances in knowledge: A transperitoneal approach for cholecystostomy was associated with lower bleeding complication rate and lower rate of readmissions with recurrent cholecystitis compared to the transhepatic approach.