指数胆囊切除术后的结果:英国纵向多中心队列研究。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Aditya Borakati, S Frances Hughes, Hemant M Kocher, Humza Malik, Humza Malik
{"title":"指数胆囊切除术后的结果:英国纵向多中心队列研究。","authors":"Aditya Borakati, S Frances Hughes, Hemant M Kocher, Humza Malik, Humza Malik","doi":"10.1007/s00423-024-03567-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>International guidelines for management of acute biliary pathology recommend emergency cholecystectomy (EmC), citing improved outcomes compared to elective cholecystectomy (ElC) based on trials which may not reflect the capacity constraints in clinical practice, nor selection based on multiple prior attendances with emergency biliary pathology or attendances following a decision for ElC. We therefore conducted a longitudinal retrospective study evaluating all attendances with biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy with the aim of assessing whether EmC is justified in this context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data was collected on patients undergoing cholecystectomy between 2016 and 2021 at four centres. Patients who had an emergency presentation with a biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy up to 2010 were included. Patients were divided into EmC and ElC groups, EmC was defined as cholecystectomy occurring during an emergency admission with biliary pathology. Multilevel regression modelling was used to identify independent predictors for time to surgery from index presentation, number of re-attendances and length of stay (LoS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>2,056 patients were included: 1,786 (86.9%) had ElC and 270 (13.1%) EmC. EmC was independently associated with a reduction in time to surgery (-112.32 days [95% CI -140.22 to -84.42]). However, there was a significant increase in both post-operative and overall LoS (+ 3.34 days [95% CI 1.81-4.86]) across all admissions with EmC. EmC did not significantly reduce rates of emergency re-attendance prior to surgery overall.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although EmC reduces time to surgery, it does not reduce the number of emergency re-attendances and increases LoS. In the context of limited emergency theatre capacity, it may be beneficial to prioritise those who benefit most from EmC.</p>","PeriodicalId":17983,"journal":{"name":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","volume":"410 1","pages":"27"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes after index cholecystectomy: a UK longitudinal multi-centre cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Aditya Borakati, S Frances Hughes, Hemant M Kocher, Humza Malik, Humza Malik\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00423-024-03567-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>International guidelines for management of acute biliary pathology recommend emergency cholecystectomy (EmC), citing improved outcomes compared to elective cholecystectomy (ElC) based on trials which may not reflect the capacity constraints in clinical practice, nor selection based on multiple prior attendances with emergency biliary pathology or attendances following a decision for ElC. We therefore conducted a longitudinal retrospective study evaluating all attendances with biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy with the aim of assessing whether EmC is justified in this context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data was collected on patients undergoing cholecystectomy between 2016 and 2021 at four centres. Patients who had an emergency presentation with a biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy up to 2010 were included. Patients were divided into EmC and ElC groups, EmC was defined as cholecystectomy occurring during an emergency admission with biliary pathology. Multilevel regression modelling was used to identify independent predictors for time to surgery from index presentation, number of re-attendances and length of stay (LoS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>2,056 patients were included: 1,786 (86.9%) had ElC and 270 (13.1%) EmC. EmC was independently associated with a reduction in time to surgery (-112.32 days [95% CI -140.22 to -84.42]). However, there was a significant increase in both post-operative and overall LoS (+ 3.34 days [95% CI 1.81-4.86]) across all admissions with EmC. EmC did not significantly reduce rates of emergency re-attendance prior to surgery overall.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although EmC reduces time to surgery, it does not reduce the number of emergency re-attendances and increases LoS. In the context of limited emergency theatre capacity, it may be beneficial to prioritise those who benefit most from EmC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"410 1\",\"pages\":\"27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03567-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03567-7","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

摘要

目的:国际急性胆道病理管理指南推荐急诊胆囊切除术(EmC),理由是与选择性胆囊切除术(ElC)相比,急诊胆囊切除术(EmC)的结果更好,而选择性胆囊切除术(ElC)是基于临床实践中可能无法反映能力限制的试验,也不是基于多次急诊胆道病理就诊或决定进行ElC后就诊的选择。因此,我们进行了一项纵向回顾性研究,评估胆囊切除术前所有胆道病理患者的就诊情况,目的是评估在这种情况下EmC是否合理。方法:收集2016年至2021年在四个中心接受胆囊切除术的患者的数据。在2010年之前,胆囊切除术前出现胆道病理急症的患者被纳入研究。将患者分为EmC组和ElC组,EmC定义为急诊入院时因胆道病理发生胆囊切除术。采用多水平回归模型从指数表现、复诊次数和住院时间(LoS)确定手术时间的独立预测因子。结果:共纳入2056例患者,其中ElC 1786例(86.9%),EmC 270例(13.1%)。EmC与手术时间缩短独立相关(-112.32天[95% CI -140.22至-84.42])。然而,在所有入院的EmC患者中,术后和总LoS均显著增加(+ 3.34天[95% CI 1.81-4.86])。总体而言,EmC并没有显著降低手术前急诊复诊率。结论:EmC虽然缩短了手术时间,但并没有减少急诊复诊次数,也没有增加住院时间。在急诊区能力有限的情况下,优先考虑那些从EmC中受益最多的人可能是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Outcomes after index cholecystectomy: a UK longitudinal multi-centre cohort Study.

Purpose: International guidelines for management of acute biliary pathology recommend emergency cholecystectomy (EmC), citing improved outcomes compared to elective cholecystectomy (ElC) based on trials which may not reflect the capacity constraints in clinical practice, nor selection based on multiple prior attendances with emergency biliary pathology or attendances following a decision for ElC. We therefore conducted a longitudinal retrospective study evaluating all attendances with biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy with the aim of assessing whether EmC is justified in this context.

Methods: Data was collected on patients undergoing cholecystectomy between 2016 and 2021 at four centres. Patients who had an emergency presentation with a biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy up to 2010 were included. Patients were divided into EmC and ElC groups, EmC was defined as cholecystectomy occurring during an emergency admission with biliary pathology. Multilevel regression modelling was used to identify independent predictors for time to surgery from index presentation, number of re-attendances and length of stay (LoS).

Results: 2,056 patients were included: 1,786 (86.9%) had ElC and 270 (13.1%) EmC. EmC was independently associated with a reduction in time to surgery (-112.32 days [95% CI -140.22 to -84.42]). However, there was a significant increase in both post-operative and overall LoS (+ 3.34 days [95% CI 1.81-4.86]) across all admissions with EmC. EmC did not significantly reduce rates of emergency re-attendance prior to surgery overall.

Conclusion: Although EmC reduces time to surgery, it does not reduce the number of emergency re-attendances and increases LoS. In the context of limited emergency theatre capacity, it may be beneficial to prioritise those who benefit most from EmC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
342
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Langenbeck''s Archives of Surgery aims to publish the best results in the field of clinical surgery and basic surgical research. The main focus is on providing the highest level of clinical research and clinically relevant basic research. The journal, published exclusively in English, will provide an international discussion forum for the controlled results of clinical surgery. The majority of published contributions will be original articles reporting on clinical data from general and visceral surgery, while endocrine surgery will also be covered. Papers on basic surgical principles from the fields of traumatology, vascular and thoracic surgery are also welcome. Evidence-based medicine is an important criterion for the acceptance of papers.
×
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