Delayed Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy With Fluorescent Cholangiography for Acute Cholecystitis: Is It Safe?

IF 0.9 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Tsuyoshi Igami, Takuya Ishikawa, Kentaro Yamao, Yasuyuki Mizutani, Yukihiro Yokoyama, Takashi Mizuno, Junpei Yamaguchi, Shunsuke Onoe, Masaki Sunagawa, Nobuyuki Watanabe, Shoji Kawakatsu, Hiroki Kawashima, Tomoki Ebata
{"title":"Delayed Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy With Fluorescent Cholangiography for Acute Cholecystitis: Is It Safe?","authors":"Tsuyoshi Igami,&nbsp;Takuya Ishikawa,&nbsp;Kentaro Yamao,&nbsp;Yasuyuki Mizutani,&nbsp;Yukihiro Yokoyama,&nbsp;Takashi Mizuno,&nbsp;Junpei Yamaguchi,&nbsp;Shunsuke Onoe,&nbsp;Masaki Sunagawa,&nbsp;Nobuyuki Watanabe,&nbsp;Shoji Kawakatsu,&nbsp;Hiroki Kawashima,&nbsp;Tomoki Ebata","doi":"10.1111/ases.70092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>According to the Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG-18), delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) after recovering from acute cholecystitis (AC) is recommended for patients with poor status. Moreover, DLC for patients with good status remains controversial, and TG-18 does not include clinical questions regarding fluorescent cholangiography (FC). In this study, we evaluated the clinical value and safety of FC during DLC.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We performed DLC in 226 patients after recovering from AC. The electronic medical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed, focusing on preoperative assessment and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Biliary and/or arterial injuries were treated as intraoperative complications.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of the study patients, 144 underwent DLC with FC. Among the remaining 82 patients who underwent DLC without FC, the rate of intraoperative complications was 7.3% (<i>n</i> = 6), which was significantly higher than in those who underwent DLC with FC (0%) (<i>p</i> = 0.002). The rate of conversion to open cholecystectomy during DLC with FC (1.4%) was significantly lower than that during DLC without FC (15.9%). The mean operative time was not significantly different between the patients who underwent DLC with and without FC (<i>p</i> = 0.503). The mean blood loss and postoperative complications in patients who underwent DLC with FC were significantly lower than those who underwent DLC without FC (<i>p</i> = 0.041 and <i>p</i> = 0.002, respectively).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Utilizing FC can reduce intraoperative and postoperative complications, the conversion rate, and blood loss during DLC; therefore, DLC with FC is recognized as a safe procedure for patients with AC.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47019,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ases.70092","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ases.70092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

According to the Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG-18), delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) after recovering from acute cholecystitis (AC) is recommended for patients with poor status. Moreover, DLC for patients with good status remains controversial, and TG-18 does not include clinical questions regarding fluorescent cholangiography (FC). In this study, we evaluated the clinical value and safety of FC during DLC.

Methods

We performed DLC in 226 patients after recovering from AC. The electronic medical records of these patients were retrospectively reviewed, focusing on preoperative assessment and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Biliary and/or arterial injuries were treated as intraoperative complications.

Results

Of the study patients, 144 underwent DLC with FC. Among the remaining 82 patients who underwent DLC without FC, the rate of intraoperative complications was 7.3% (n = 6), which was significantly higher than in those who underwent DLC with FC (0%) (p = 0.002). The rate of conversion to open cholecystectomy during DLC with FC (1.4%) was significantly lower than that during DLC without FC (15.9%). The mean operative time was not significantly different between the patients who underwent DLC with and without FC (p = 0.503). The mean blood loss and postoperative complications in patients who underwent DLC with FC were significantly lower than those who underwent DLC without FC (p = 0.041 and p = 0.002, respectively).

Conclusions

Utilizing FC can reduce intraoperative and postoperative complications, the conversion rate, and blood loss during DLC; therefore, DLC with FC is recognized as a safe procedure for patients with AC.

Abstract Image

延迟腹腔镜胆囊切除术联合荧光胆管造影治疗急性胆囊炎:安全吗?
背景根据2018年东京指南(TG-18),对于病情不佳的患者,建议在急性胆囊炎(AC)恢复后进行延迟腹腔镜胆囊切除术(DLC)。此外,对于状态良好患者的DLC仍存在争议,TG-18未包括有关荧光胆管造影(FC)的临床问题。在这项研究中,我们评估了FC在DLC期间的临床价值和安全性。方法对226例AC术后康复患者行DLC,回顾性分析患者的电子病历,重点分析术前评估及术中、术后预后。胆道和/或动脉损伤作为术中并发症处理。结果144例患者行DLC合并FC。其余82例无FC的DLC患者,术中并发症发生率为7.3% (n = 6),明显高于合并FC的DLC组(0%)(p = 0.002)。合并FC的DLC转为开腹胆囊切除术的比率(1.4%)明显低于未合并FC的DLC(15.9%)。合并FC和不合并FC的DLC患者的平均手术时间无显著差异(p = 0.503)。合并FC的DLC患者的平均出血量和术后并发症明显低于未合并FC的DLC患者(p = 0.041和p = 0.002)。结论应用FC可减少DLC术中、术后并发症、转换率及出血量;因此,DLC联合FC被认为是AC患者的安全手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
129
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信