Iatrogenic gallbladder perforation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy and outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Spilled gallstone mimicking intra-abdominal seeding of gallbladder adenocarcinoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder rupture is common in laparoscopic cholecystectomy because the gallbladder is usually in acute or chronic inflammation status. The gallstones may sometime be spilled into the peritoneal cavity, resulting in intra-abdominal abscess if the gallstones were not retrieved. The diagnosis of intra-abdominal abscess caused by unretrieved gallstone can usually be correctly identified in the routine imaging studies, such as abdominal ultrasonography or computed tomography (CT). Here we present a case of abscess formation from unretrieved gallstone following laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which mimics the imaging findings of metastatic gallbladder adenocarcinoma.

CASE SUMMARY

This case described a 78-year-old man who received laparoscopic cholecystectomy and gallbladder adenocarcinoma was diagnosed after surgery. After adjuvant chemotherapy, the following up abdominal CT showed several small nodules at right upper abdomen and peritoneal carcinomatosis is considered. Repeated laparoscopic surgery for the excision of seeding tumor was conducted and the pathological diagnosis of the nodules and mass was inflammatory tissues and gallbladder stone.

CONCLUSION

Spilled gallstones are a common complication during laparoscopic cholecystectomy and some gallstones fail to be retrieved due to the size or the restricted view of laparoscopic surgery. For spilled gall bladder stones, surgeons may consider regular computerized tomography follow-up, and if necessary, laparoscopic examination can be used as a means of confirming the diagnostic and treatment.

Practices and Attitudes of Surgeons With Regard to Spilled Gallstones During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Cross-Sectional Study From Saudi Arabia

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder perforation and gallstone leakage are frequent complications following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Failure to remove gallstones may result in several issues that manifest immediately or years later. The goal of this study was to evaluate the attitudes of surgeons and the procedures used by them to deal with gallstone spillage during LC.

METHODS

A cross-sectional design was followed. Surgeons in nine healthcare facilities in the Qassim region of Saudi Arabia were approached through non-probability convivence sampling and the survey was distributed in each of the general surgery divisions. The study included general surgeons who currently performed LC and incomplete responses and interns were excluded. A self-administered questionnaire was developed with 18 questions regarding demographics, center, and designation at the hospital, surgeons' experience of LC, and exposure to gallstone spillage. Furthermore, items regarding knowledge, attitude, and self-reported practices related to gallstone spillage such as incidence, complications, and intervention taken to prevent gallstone spillage were also included. The level of significance was set at P <0.05.

RESULTS

There were 82 participants of both genders, including consultants, specialists, and residents. While only 23 (28%) participants had actually observed patients with complications from spilled stones, 46 (56.1%) participants were aware of this possibility, 53 (64.6%) deemed it inappropriate to bring up gallstone spillage when securing consent for LC, and 67 (81.7%) believed that such an incident needed to be documented in the operation notes. Only 11 (13.4%) thought that the complications arising out of the unretrieved gallstones should fall under the legal purview of the operative surgeon. There were very few complications of spilled gallstones that the participants were aware of, and none of them anticipated problems to arise more than three years after LC.

CONCLUSIONS

Awareness of the risks associated with gallstone spillage during LC needs to be raised, and it is imperative to standardize the practices related to their management.

Incidental gallbladder cancer: what is the prevalence and how do we perform cholecystectomy for presumably benign biliary disease?

OBJECTIVE

to determine the prevalence of incidental gallbladder cancer (IGBC) in cholecystectomies performed in a tertiary public hospital and to describe technical and epidemiological aspects of performing cholecystectomies for presumably benign disease.

METHOD

descriptive, retrospective observational study, based on analysis of medical records of patients undergoing cholecystectomy with preoperative hypothesis of benign disease between January 2018 and January 2022.

RESULTS

prevalence of gallbladder adenocarcinoma in our sample was 0.16%, similar to data in the literature. Technical aspects during cholecystectomy were also described with a frequency similar to that found in the literature.

CONCLUSION

despite a rare disease, IGBC is relevant in the routine of the General Surgeon. Its diagnosis, staging and treatment directly affect the prognosis. Technical aspects during cholecystectomy are not always remembered by surgeons and can interfere with the prognosis and subsequent treatment of the patient.

Câncer incidental de vesícula biliar: qual a prevalência e como operamos a colecistectomia por doença presumidamente benigna?

RESUMO Objetivos: determinar a prevalência de câncer incidental de vesícula biliar (CIVB) em colecistectomias realizadas em um hospital público terciário e descrever aspectos técnicos e epidemiológicos na realização de colecistectomias por doença presumidamente benigna. Método: estudo observacional descritivo, retrospectivo, a partir da análise de prontuários de pacientes submetidos à colecistectomia com hipótese pré-operatória de doença benigna entre janeiro de 2018 e janeiro de 2022. Resultados: a prevalência de adenocarcinoma de vesícula biliar na amostra avaliada foi de 0,16%, semelhante aos dados da literatura mundial. Os aspectos técnicos durante a realização da colecistectomia também foram descritos com frequência semelhante ao encontrado na literatura. Conclusão: o CIVB é uma doença rara mas de importância relevante na rotina do Cirurgião Geral. Seu diagnóstico, estadiamento e tratamento implicam diretamente no prognóstico. Aspectos técnicos durante a realização da colecistectomia nem sempre são lembrados pelos cirurgiões e podem interferir no prognóstico e tratamento subsequente do paciente.