"Missed Gall Bladder Cancer During Cholecystectomy - What Price Do We Pay?" An Experience of a Tertiary Care Center from India

Q4 Medicine
S. Irrinki, Pradeep Kumar, K. Kurdia, Vikas Gupta, B. Mittal, Rajender Kumar, A. Das, Thakur Deen Yadav
{"title":"\"Missed Gall Bladder Cancer During Cholecystectomy - What Price Do We Pay?\" An Experience of a Tertiary Care Center from India","authors":"S. Irrinki, Pradeep Kumar, K. Kurdia, Vikas Gupta, B. Mittal, Rajender Kumar, A. Das, Thakur Deen Yadav","doi":"10.21614/sgo-559","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The incidence of missed gall bladder cancer (GBC) is increasing with rising numbers of cholecystectomies in North India. Most of these are misrepresented as Incidental gall bladder (IGBC) cancer at referral. Our aim was to analyze the differences in presentation patterns and outcomes of missed GBC and IGBC. Material and methods: A Retrospective analysis of patients referred to as IGBC. Missed GBC were identified as IGBC presenting with any one criteria (Suspicious findings on preoperative ultrasound and/or intraoperative during the Cholecystectomy; Presentation with symptoms or metastasis within one month; pT4 lesion). The outcome of missed GBC was compared to remaining IGBC patients. Results: Sixty-seven patients were included in the study. The median age of presentation was 50 years and the majority were females (83.6%). Index-cholecystectomy was Laparoscopic, open, and lap converted to open in 44.7%,50.7 and 4.4% respectively. The median time to presentation was 30 days (15-720 days). Forty-eight (71.6%) had features of malignancy before index cholecystectomy (ultrasound-21; intraoperative findings-27). Thirty-four (50.7%) had metastatic disease at presentation (Liver-28; peritoneal-23; omental-six). Twenty-one (31.3%) underwent completed extended cholecystectomy (HDR-8; multi-visceral resections-3). Missed GBC had a poorer overall survival over IGBC (16.5Vs 35.3 months P=0.05). Conclusion: Significant proportion of IGBC were missed GBC. This emphasizes the need for careful interpretation of imaging before cholecystectomy in areas endemic to GBC.","PeriodicalId":22101,"journal":{"name":"Surgery, Gastroenterology and Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery, Gastroenterology and Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21614/sgo-559","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The incidence of missed gall bladder cancer (GBC) is increasing with rising numbers of cholecystectomies in North India. Most of these are misrepresented as Incidental gall bladder (IGBC) cancer at referral. Our aim was to analyze the differences in presentation patterns and outcomes of missed GBC and IGBC. Material and methods: A Retrospective analysis of patients referred to as IGBC. Missed GBC were identified as IGBC presenting with any one criteria (Suspicious findings on preoperative ultrasound and/or intraoperative during the Cholecystectomy; Presentation with symptoms or metastasis within one month; pT4 lesion). The outcome of missed GBC was compared to remaining IGBC patients. Results: Sixty-seven patients were included in the study. The median age of presentation was 50 years and the majority were females (83.6%). Index-cholecystectomy was Laparoscopic, open, and lap converted to open in 44.7%,50.7 and 4.4% respectively. The median time to presentation was 30 days (15-720 days). Forty-eight (71.6%) had features of malignancy before index cholecystectomy (ultrasound-21; intraoperative findings-27). Thirty-four (50.7%) had metastatic disease at presentation (Liver-28; peritoneal-23; omental-six). Twenty-one (31.3%) underwent completed extended cholecystectomy (HDR-8; multi-visceral resections-3). Missed GBC had a poorer overall survival over IGBC (16.5Vs 35.3 months P=0.05). Conclusion: Significant proportion of IGBC were missed GBC. This emphasizes the need for careful interpretation of imaging before cholecystectomy in areas endemic to GBC.
胆囊切除术中遗漏的胆囊癌——我们要付出什么代价?印度三级保健中心的经验
背景:在印度北部,随着胆囊切除术数量的增加,胆囊癌(GBC)的漏诊率也在增加。其中大多数在转诊时被误诊为偶发性胆囊癌(IGBC)。我们的目的是分析GBC和IGBC遗漏的表现模式和结果的差异。材料和方法:对IGBC患者进行回顾性分析。遗漏的GBC被确定为有任何一个标准的IGBC(术前超声和/或胆囊切除术中术中可疑发现;1个月内出现症状或转移;pT4病变)。遗漏GBC的结果与剩余IGBC患者的结果进行比较。结果:67例患者纳入研究。中位发病年龄为50岁,以女性居多(83.6%)。指数胆囊切除术为腹腔镜、开腹、膝转开腹分别占44.7%、50.7%和4.4%。到就诊的中位时间为30天(15-720天)。48例(71.6%)在指数胆囊切除术前有恶性肿瘤特征(超声-21;术中findings-27)。34例(50.7%)患者就诊时有转移性疾病(Liver-28;peritoneal-23;omental-six)。21例(31.3%)完成了扩展胆囊切除术(HDR-8;脏器resections-3)。遗漏GBC患者的总生存期较IGBC患者差(16.5个月vs 35.3个月P=0.05)。结论:IGBC漏检比例显著。这强调了在GBC特有的区域胆囊切除术前仔细解释影像学的必要性。
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
Surgery, Gastroenterology and Oncology
Surgery, Gastroenterology and Oncology Medicine-Gastroenterology
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Starting with this issue "Annals of Fundeni Hospital", founded in 1996 as the scientific journal of the prestigious hospital Fundeni becomes "Journal of Translational Medicine and Research" (JTMR), an Journal of the Academy of Medical Sciences of Romania. Therefore, an 18 years old Journal, attested and indexed in Elsevier Bibliographic Databases, Amsterdam and also indexed in SCOPUS, is continuing a tradition of excellence that lasted almost two decades. The new title of the Journal is inspired first of all from the important developments of translational research In Fundeni Clinical Institute and the "C.C Iliescu Institute for Cardio-Vascular Diseases", in parallel with the national and international trend to promote and develop this important area or medical research. Although devoted mainly to translational research, JTMR will continue to promote both basic and clinical research.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信