Optimal timing for cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy: insights from a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Antonio Pesce, Camilo Ramírez-Giraldo, Matteo Matteucci, Juan Camilo Toro-Rodríguez, Simón Macías-Segura, Gaetano Piccolo, Riccardo Masserano, Gabriella Capolupo, Valentina Miacci, Filippo Carannante, Giovanni Cestaro, Carlo Stracqualursi, Francesco Roscio, Alessandro Gemini, Antonia Rizzuto, Mimi Yen, Andrea Mingoli, Bruno Cirillo, Augusto Lauro, Vito D'Andrea, Andrés Isaza-Restrepo, Roberto Cirocchi
{"title":"Optimal timing for cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy: insights from a multicenter retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Antonio Pesce, Camilo Ramírez-Giraldo, Matteo Matteucci, Juan Camilo Toro-Rodríguez, Simón Macías-Segura, Gaetano Piccolo, Riccardo Masserano, Gabriella Capolupo, Valentina Miacci, Filippo Carannante, Giovanni Cestaro, Carlo Stracqualursi, Francesco Roscio, Alessandro Gemini, Antonia Rizzuto, Mimi Yen, Andrea Mingoli, Bruno Cirillo, Augusto Lauro, Vito D'Andrea, Andrés Isaza-Restrepo, Roberto Cirocchi","doi":"10.1007/s13304-025-02398-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard of care for patients with acute cholecystitis. However, in high-risk surgical candidates who do not respond to conservative management, percutaneous cholecystostomy is recommended. When used as bridge therapy, the optimal timing for performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy as definitive treatment still remains uncertain. The primary outcome of this study was to assess the incidence of major perioperative complications, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III. A retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study was conducted across nine hospitals-seven in Italy and two in Colombia. We reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy at the participating institutions between January 2020 and December 2024. Patients were stratified into two groups based on the 50th percentile (median) of the time interval between procedures, which was 59 days. Accordingly, the groups were defined as ≤ 59 days (approximately ≤ 8 weeks) and > 59 days (approximately > 8 weeks). A total of 123 patients were included in the study. The median age was 75.0 years, and the majority were male (56.1%). Logistic regression analysis showed that older age and an open surgical approach were significantly associated with a higher risk of major complications. The time interval between cholecystostomy and cholecystectomy was not significantly associated with the risk of major complications in any model. However, in the sensitivity analysis-after excluding outliers above the 95th percentile and below the 5th percentile-the incidence of major complications was 21.1% in the ≤ 8 weeks group versus 11.3% in the > 8 weeks group, without statistically significant differences (p = 0.262). The results of this study suggest that, within the observed range of intervals, no definitive advantage can be attributed to either earlier or delayed surgery based solely on timing. There remains a critical need for a rigorously designed, multicenter prospective study to determine the optimal timing of surgery based on clinically meaningful endpoints.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02398-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard of care for patients with acute cholecystitis. However, in high-risk surgical candidates who do not respond to conservative management, percutaneous cholecystostomy is recommended. When used as bridge therapy, the optimal timing for performing laparoscopic cholecystectomy as definitive treatment still remains uncertain. The primary outcome of this study was to assess the incidence of major perioperative complications, defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III. A retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study was conducted across nine hospitals-seven in Italy and two in Colombia. We reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy at the participating institutions between January 2020 and December 2024. Patients were stratified into two groups based on the 50th percentile (median) of the time interval between procedures, which was 59 days. Accordingly, the groups were defined as ≤ 59 days (approximately ≤ 8 weeks) and > 59 days (approximately > 8 weeks). A total of 123 patients were included in the study. The median age was 75.0 years, and the majority were male (56.1%). Logistic regression analysis showed that older age and an open surgical approach were significantly associated with a higher risk of major complications. The time interval between cholecystostomy and cholecystectomy was not significantly associated with the risk of major complications in any model. However, in the sensitivity analysis-after excluding outliers above the 95th percentile and below the 5th percentile-the incidence of major complications was 21.1% in the ≤ 8 weeks group versus 11.3% in the > 8 weeks group, without statistically significant differences (p = 0.262). The results of this study suggest that, within the observed range of intervals, no definitive advantage can be attributed to either earlier or delayed surgery based solely on timing. There remains a critical need for a rigorously designed, multicenter prospective study to determine the optimal timing of surgery based on clinically meaningful endpoints.

经皮胆囊造口术后胆囊切除术的最佳时机:来自多中心回顾性队列研究的见解。
腹腔镜胆囊切除术是急性胆囊炎患者的标准治疗方法。然而,对于保守治疗无效的高危手术患者,建议采用经皮胆囊造瘘术。当作为桥梁治疗时,腹腔镜胆囊切除术作为最终治疗的最佳时机仍然不确定。本研究的主要结局是评估主要围手术期并发症的发生率,定义为Clavien-Dindo分级≥III。一项回顾性、多中心、观察性队列研究在9家医院进行,其中7家在意大利,2家在哥伦比亚。我们回顾了2020年1月至2024年12月在参与机构接受经皮胆囊造瘘术后胆囊切除术的所有患者的医疗记录。根据手术间隔时间(59天)的第50百分位数(中位数)将患者分为两组。据此,各组被定义为≤59天(约≤8周)和bb0 59天(约bb1 8周)。研究共纳入123例患者。年龄中位数为75.0岁,男性居多(56.1%)。Logistic回归分析显示,年龄和开放手术入路与主要并发症的高风险显著相关。在所有模型中,胆囊造瘘和胆囊切除术的时间间隔与主要并发症的发生风险无显著相关。然而,在敏感性分析中,在排除高于95百分位和低于5百分位的异常值后,≤8周组的主要并发症发生率为21.1%,而> 8周组为11.3%,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.262)。本研究的结果表明,在观察到的时间间隔范围内,单纯基于时间的早期或延迟手术都没有明确的优势。目前仍迫切需要一项严格设计的多中心前瞻性研究,以确定基于临床有意义终点的最佳手术时机。
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
Updates in Surgery
Updates in Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
208
期刊介绍: Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future. Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts. Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.
×
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