Year 2018 / Volume 110 / Number 10
Original
The impact of a percutaneous cholecystostomy catheter in situ until the time of cholecystectomy on the development of recurrent acute cholecystitis: a historical cohort study

629-633

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5644/2018

Mustafa Hasbahceci, Merve Busra Cengiz, Fatma Umit Malya, Enver Kunduz, Naim Memmi,

Abstract
Background: the optimal duration of percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients with acute cholecystitis is unknown. Methods: this study was a retrospective analysis of patients (age ≥ 18 years) who underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy due to acute calculous cholecystitis. Patients were grouped according to treatment modality: percutaneous cholecystostomy as a definitive treatment (group 1), subsequent surgical treatment after the removal of the catheter (group 2) and those remaining in situ (group 3). The development of gallstone-related complications was the main outcome. Results: there were 24 females (43.6%) and 31 males (56.4%) included in the study with a mean age of 64.8 ± 15.9 years. There were 16 (29.1%), 19 (34.5%) and 20 (36.4%) patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The catheter withdrawal time for group 1 and group 2 was 18.2 ± 6.9 and 20.7 ± 13.4 days, respectively. Surgical treatment was performed after a mean of 85.4 ± 93.5 days following catheter removal in group 2 and a mean of 64 ± 32.5 days while the PC tube was in place in group 3. There were one (6.3%) and two cases of a recurrence (10.5%) in groups 1 and 2, respectively. Two patients developed choledocholithiasis (10%) in group 3. Conclusion: maintaining percutaneous cholecystostomy tubes in place until the time of surgery in surgically fit patients may help to prevent a recurrence after acute calculous cholecystitis.
Share Button
New comment
Comments
No comments for this article
References
1. Wang CH, Wu CY, Yang JC, et al. Long-Term Outcomes of Patients with Acute Cholecystitis after Successful Percutaneous Cholecystostomy Treatment and the Risk Factors for Recurrence: A Decade Experience at a Single Center. PLoS One. 2016; 11: e0148017.
2. Viste A, Jensen D, Angelsen JH, et al. Percutaneous cholecystostomy in acute cholecystitis; a retrospective analysis of a large series of 104 patients. BMC Surg. 2015; 15: 17.
3. Mizrahi I, Mazeh H, Yuval JB, et al. Perioperative outcomes of delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute calculous cholecystitis with and without percutaneous cholecystostomy. Surgery. 2015; 158: 728-35.
4. Hasbahçeci M, Alimoğlu O, Başak F, et al. Review of clinical experience with acute cholecystitis on the development of subsequent gallstone-related complications. Turk J Med Sci. 2014; 44: 883-8.
5. Popowicz A, Lundell L, Gerber P, et al. Cholecystostomy as Bridge to Surgery and as Definitive Treatment or Acute Cholecystectomy in Patients with Acute Cholecystitis. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2016; 2016: 3672416.
6. Hasbahceci M, Uludag M, Erol C, et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a single, non-teaching hospital: an analysis of 1557 patients. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2012; 22: 527-32.
7. Yeo CS, Tay VW, Low JK, et al. Outcomes of percutaneous cholecystostomy and predictors of eventual cholecystectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2016; 23: 65-73.
8. Bickel A, Hoffman RS, Loberant N, et al. Timing of percutaneous cholecystostomy affects conversion rate of delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for severe acute cholecystitis. Surg Endosc. 2016; 30: 1028-33.
9. McGillicuddy EA, Schuster KM, Barre K, et al. Non-operative management of acute cholecystitis in the elderly. Br J Surg. 2012; 99: 1254-61.
10. Jang WS, Lim JU, Joo KR, et al. Outcome of conservative percutaneous cholecystostomy in high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis and risk factors leading to surgery. Surg Endosc. 2015; 29: 2359-64.
11. Hsieh YC, Chen CK, Su CW, et al. Outcome after percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis: a single-center experience. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012; 16: 1860-8.
12. Macchini D, Degrate L, Oldani M, et al. Timing of percutaneous cholecystostomy tube removal: systematic review. Minerva Chir. 2016; 71: 415-426.
13. Yokoe M, Takada T, Strasberg SM, et al. TG13 diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholecystitis (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2013; 20: 35-46.
14. Morse BC, Smith JB, Lawdahl RB, et al. Management of acute cholecystitis in critically ill patients: contemporary role for cholecystostomy and subsequent cholecystectomy. Am Surg. 2010; 76: 708-12.
15. Venara A, Carretier V, Lebigot J, et al. Technique and indications of percutaneous cholecystostomy in the management of cholecystitis in 2014. J Visc Surg. 2014; 151: 435-9.
16. Sugiyama M, Tokuhara M, Atomi Y. Is percutaneous cholecystostomy the optimal treatment for acute cholecystitis in the very elderly? World J Surg. 1988; 22: 459-63.
Related articles

Letter

Recurrence of gastric schwannoma

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9480/2023

Letter

Acute cholecystitis treated by direct visualization endoscopy

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9432/2022

Digestive Diseases Image

Mirizzi syndrome: when the gallbladder meets bile ducts

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2019.5846/2018

Letter

Perforated emphysematous cholecystitis and Streptococcus bovis

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5826/2018

Digestive Diseases Image

Hemobilia due to a cystic artery pseudoaneurysm on ultrasound

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.4936/2017

Letter to the Editor

An unusual etiology of abdominal pain in children

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4168/2015

Digestive Diseases Image

Porcelain gallbladder

Citation tools
Hasbahceci M, Cengiz M, Malya F, Kunduz E, Memmi N. The impact of a percutaneous cholecystostomy catheter in situ until the time of cholecystectomy on the development of recurrent acute cholecystitis: a historical cohort study. 5644/2018


Download to a citation manager

Download the citation for this article by clicking on one of the following citation managers:

Metrics
This article has received 884 visits.
This article has been downloaded 171 times.

Statistics from Dimensions


Statistics from Plum Analytics

Publication history

Received: 10/04/2018

Accepted: 17/05/2018

Online First: 23/07/2018

Published: 01/10/2018

Article revision time: 31 days

Article Online First time: 104 days

Article editing time: 174 days


Share
This article has been rated by 3 readers.
Reader rating:
Valora este artículo:




Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva
The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology is the official organ of the Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva, the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva and the Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva
Cookie policy Privacy Policy Legal Notice © Copyright 2023 y Creative Commons. The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology