Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with previous upper midline abdominal surgery: comparison of laparoscopic cholecystectomy after gastric surgery and non-gastric surgery using propensity score matching

The effects of previous abdominal surgery and the utilisation of modified access techniques on the operative difficulty and outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND

Early reports suggested that previous abdominal surgery was a relative contraindication to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) on account of difficulty and potential access complications. This study analyses different types/systems of previous surgery and locations of scars and how they affect access difficulties. As modified access techniques to minimise risk of complications are under-reported the study details and evaluates them.

METHOD

Prospectively collected data from consecutive LC and common bile duct explorations (LCBDE) performed by a single surgeon over 30 years was analysed. Previous abdominal surgery was documented and peri-operative outcomes were compared with patients who had no previous surgery using Chi-squared analysis.

RESULTS

Of 5916 LC and LCBDE, 1846 patients (31.2%) had previous abdominal surgery. The median age was 60 years. Those with previous surgery required more frequent duodenal (RR 1.07; p = 0.023), hepatic flexure (RR 1.11; p = 0.043) and distal adhesiolysis (RR 3.57; p < 0.001) and had more access related bowel injuries (0.4% vs. 0.0%; p < 0.001). Previous upper gastrointestinal and biliary surgery had the highest rates of adhesiolysis (76.3%), difficult cystic pedicles (58.8%), fundus-first approach (7.2%), difficulty grades (64.9% Grades 3-5) and utilisation of abdominal drains (71.1%). Previous open surgery resulted in longer operative time compared to previous laparoscopic procedures (65vs.55 min; p < 0.001), increased difficulty of pedicle dissection (42.4% vs. 36.0%; p < 0.05) and required more duodenal, hepatic flexure and distant adhesiolysis (p < 0.05) and fundus-first dissection (4% vs 2%; p < 0.05). Epigastric and supraumbilical access and access through umbilical and other hernias were used in 163 patients (8.8%) with no bowel complications.

CONCLUSION

The risks of access and adhesiolysis in patients with previous abdominal scars undergoing biliary surgery are dependent on the nature of previous surgery. Previous open, upper gastrointestinal and biliary surgery carried the most significant risks. Modified access techniques can be adopted to safely mitigate these risks.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Does previous gastrectomy history affect the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

PURPOSE

This current study aimed to explore whether gastrectomy history influenced surgical outcomes while undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible studies from inception to April 29, 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was adopted to assess the quality of included studies. The mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous variables, and the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated for dichotomous variables. RevMan 5.4 was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Seven studies enrolling 8193 patients were eligible for the final pooling up analysis (380 patients in the previous gastrectomy group and 7813 patients in the non-gastrectomy group). The patients in the gastrectomy group were older (MD = 11.11, 95%CI = 7.80-14.41, P < 0.01) and had a higher portion of males (OR = 3.74, 95%CI = 2.92-4.79, P < 0.01) than patients in the non-gastrectomy group patients. Moreover, the gastrectomy group had longer LC operation time (MD = 34.17, 95%CI = 25.20-43.14, P < 0.01), a higher conversion rate (OR = 6.74, 95%CI = 2.17-20.26, P = 0.01), more intraoperative blood loss (OR = 1.96, 95%CI = 0.59-3.32, P < 0.01) and longer postoperative hospital stays (MD = 1.07, 95%CI = 0.38-1.76, P < 0.01) than the non-gastrectomy group.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a previous gastrectomy history had longer operation time, a higher conversion rate, more intraoperative blood loss, and longer postoperative hospital stays than patients without while undergoing LC. Surgeons should pay more attention to these patients and make prudent decisions to avoid worse surgical outcomes as much as possible.

The necessity and safety of simultaneous cholecystectomy during gastric surgery for patients with asymptomatic cholelithiasis

OBJECTIVES

The incidence of cholelithiasis is higher among individuals who have undergone gastric surgery. The benefits of concomitant gallbladder removal in asymptomatic gallstone patients remain uncertain. The aim was to investigate the necessity and safety of simultaneous cholecystectomy in this particular patient population.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the incidence of asymptomatic cholelithiasis converting to symptomatic after gastric surgery and the complication rate associated with simultaneous cholecystectomy. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant articles published until 10 March 202210 March 2022.

RESULTS

Patients with asymptomatic cholelithiasis after gastric surgery were at a higher risk of developing symptomatic cholelithiasis compared to those without cholelithiasis (relative risk [RR] 2.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-4.25) and those with unknown gallbladder conditions (RR 2.70, 95% CI 1.54-4.73). Additionally, patients who underwent simultaneous cholecystectomy did not face a higher risk of complications compared to those who only underwent gastric surgery (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.48-1.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous cholecystectomy is both necessary and safe for patients with asymptomatic cholelithiasis undergoing gastric surgery. It is crucial to assess the gallbladder's condition before gastric surgery, and if the gallbladder status is unknown, simultaneous cholecystectomy should be avoided.