Simultaneous cholecystectomy during gastric and oesophageal resection: a retrospective analysis and critical review of literature

Higher incidence of cholelithiasis with Roux-en-Y reconstruction compared with Billroth-I after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Cholelithiasis occurs often after gastrectomy. However, no consensus has been established regarding the difference in the incidence of postgastrectomy cholelithiasis with different reconstruction methods. In this study, we examined the frequency of cholelithiasis after two major reconstruction methods, namely Billroth-I (B-I) and Roux-en-Y (R-Y) following laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG) for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Among 696 gastric cancer patients who underwent LDG between April 2000 and March 2017, after applying the exclusion criteria, 284 patients who underwent B-I and 310 who underwent R-Y were examined retrospectively. The estimated incidence of cholelithiasis was compared between the methods, and factors associated with the development of cholelithiasis in the gallbladder and/or common bile duct were investigated.

RESULTS

During the median follow-up of 61.2 months, 52 patients (8.8%) developed cholelithiasis postgastrectomy; 12 patients (4.2%) after B-I and 40 (12.9%) after R-Y (p = 0.0002). Among them, choledocholithiasis was more frequent in patients who underwent R-Y (n = 11, 27.5%) vs. B-I (n = 1, 8.3%) (p = 0.0056). Univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that male sex, body mass index > 22.5 kg/m2, and R-Y reconstruction were significant predictors of the development of postLDG cholelithiasis.

CONCLUSION

Regarding cholelithiasis development, B-I reconstruction should be preferred whenever possible during distal gastrectomy.

Gallstone formation and subsequent cholecystectomy after oncological gastric and esophageal resection

PURPOSE

Gallstone formation is increased after gastric (GR) or esophageal resection (ER); however, the exact pathophysiology is not fully understood yet. Symptomatic cholecystolithiasis and the need for subsequent cholecystectomy after upper gastrointestinal resection can alter the outcome in oncological patients. There is an ongoing discussion if these patients benefit from a simultaneous prophylactic cholecystectomy. This study aims to analyze the risk of gallstone formation after GR or ER and the perioperative course of a subsequent cholecystectomy.

METHODS

In this study, all patients were included, who underwent an oncological gastric or esophageal resection at the Medical University of Innsbruck, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery in the years 2003-2021.

RESULTS

A simultaneous cholecystectomy was performed in 29.8% with GR and in 2.1% with ER (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in complications or length-of-stay between patients with simultaneous vs. no simultaneous cholecystectomy. Newly developed gallstones tended to be more common after GR (16% vs. 10% ER), after reconstruction without preservation of the duodenal passage (17% vs. 11% with) and after GR with lymph node dissection (19% vs. 5% without). After ER, subsequent cholecystectomy was significant less frequently (11.4% vs. 2.9% OR) (p = 0.005). The subsequent cholecystectomy was performed openly in 57.1% with major complications classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a in 14.3%.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings of our study, we do not recommend simultaneous cholecystectomy routinely in oncological gastric or esophageal resections. An individualized approach depending on risk factors like extensive lymphadenectomy or duodenal passage can be discussed.

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.

Significance of cholecystectomy in cytoreductive surgery for advanced ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

There have been no studies concerning the complications or benefits of cholecystectomy in ovarian cancer. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of cholecystectomy performed during various time periods of the disease course and suggest a management strategy for cholecystectomy in ovarian cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with advanced ovarian cancer who underwent cholecystectomy during the cytoreductive surgery from 2009 to 2020. Cholecystectomy was primarily indicated when the gallbladder and surrounding structures were considered to have metastatic tumor invasion. If the final pathologic results showed free of malignant tumor, patients were placed into the no-infiltration group. Clinical outcomes including the recurrence rate and complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 62 patients underwent cholecystectomy, 48 of whom (77.4%) underwent cholecystectomy during primary or interval debulking surgery, whereas 14 (22.6%) underwent cholecystectomy during the follow-up period (five with benign disease and 9 with disease recurrence). Among the patients, 32 (51.6%) patients were included in the no-infiltration group in the final pathology. There were no complications observed in the no-infiltration group (n = 32). Seven (78%) of the nine patients who received cholecystectomy for disease recurrence had metastatic disease in the porta-hepatis or lesser sac at the time of primary surgery. However, no recurrent lesions were observed around the porta-hepatis in patients who received cholecystectomy during primary treatment.

CONCLUSION

Considering the safety of the procedure, as well as the risk of disease recurrence or cholecystitis, a cholecystectomy can be offered to patients with ovarian cancer who have metastatic lesions around the gallbladder and porta-hepatis at the time of primary surgery.

Prophylactic cholecystectomy: A valuable treatment strategy for cholecystolithiasis after gastric cancer surgery

The main treatment for gastric cancer is surgical excision. Gallstones are one of the common postoperative complications of gastric cancer. To avoid the adverse effects of gallstone formation after gastric cancer surgery, we reviewed the causes and risk factors and mechanisms involved in gallstone formation after gastric cancer surgery. The evidence and value regarding prophylactic cholecystectomy (PC) during gastric cancer surgery was also reviewed. Based on previous evidence, we summarized the mechanism and believe that injury or resection of the vagus nerve or changes in intestinal hormone secretion can lead to physiological dysfunction of the gallbladder and Oddi sphincter, and the lithogenic components in the bile are also changed, ultimately leading to CL. Previous studies also have identified many independent risk factors for CL after gastric cancer, such as type of gastrectomy, reconstruction of the digestive tract, degree of lymph node dissection, weight, liver function, sex, age, diabetes and gallbladder volume are closely related to CL development. At present, there are no uniform guidelines for the selection of treatment strategies. As a new treatment strategy, PC has undeniable advantages and is expected to become the standard treatment for CL after gastric cancer in the future. The individualized PC strategy for CL after gastric cancer is the main direction of future research.

Utility of Abdominal Drain in Gastrectomy (ADiGe) Trial: study protocol for a multicenter non-inferiority randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic use of abdominal drain in gastrectomy has been questioned in the last 15 years, and a 2015 Cochrane meta-analysis on four RCTs concluded that there was no convincing evidence to the routine drain placement in gastrectomy. Nevertheless, the authors evidenced the moderate/low quality of the included studies and highlighted how 3 out of 4 came from Eastern countries. After 2015, only retrospective studies have been published, all with inconsistent results.

METHODS

ADiGe (Abdominal Drain in Gastrectomy) Trial is a multicenter prospective randomized non-inferiority trial with a parallel design. It aimed to verify whether avoiding routine use of abdominal drain is burdened with complications, particularly an increase in postoperative invasive procedures. Patients with gastric cancer, scheduled for subtotal or total gastrectomy with curative intent, are eligible for inclusion, irrespective of previous oncological treatment. The primary composite endpoint is reoperation or percutaneous drainage procedures within 30 postoperative days. The primary analysis will verify whether the incidence of the primary composite endpoint is higher in the experimental arm, avoiding routine drain placement, than control arm, undergoing prophylactic drain placement, in order to falsify or support the null hypothesis of inferiority. Secondary endpoints assessed for superiority are overall morbidity and mortality, Comprehensive Complications Index, incidence and time for diagnosis of anastomotic and duodenal leaks, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate. Assuming one-sided alpha of 5%, and cumulative incidence of the primary composite endpoint of 6.4% in the control arm and 4.2% in the experimental one, 364 patients allow to achieve 80% power to detect a non-inferiority margin difference between the arm proportions of 3.6%. Considering a 10% drop-out rate, 404 patients are needed. In order to have a balanced percentage between total and subtotal gastrectomy, recruitment will end at 202 patients for each type of gastrectomy. The surgeon and the patient are blinded until the end of the operation, while postoperative course is not blinded to the patient and caregivers.

DISCUSSION

ADiGe Trial could contribute to critically re-evaluate the role of prophylactic drain in gastrectomy, a still widely used procedure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered (last updated on 29 October 2020) at ClinicalTrials.gov with the identifier NCT04227951 .

Cholecystectomy during esophagectomy is safe but unnecessary

Background: Prophylactic cholecystectomy has been proposed as a concomitant procedure during upper gastrointestinal surgery. This study evaluates the safety and the need of concurrent cholecystectomy during esophagectomy for cancer.Methods: All consecutive esophagectomies for esophageal cancer at the Center for Esophageal Diseases in Padova (Italy) between 1992 and 2011 were included. The safety of concurrent cholecystectomy was evaluated by surgical outcomes (length of stay, postoperative mortality and perioperative complications). The need for concurrent cholecystectomy was evaluated by occurrence of biliary duct stones and of cholelithiasis/cholecystitis after esophagectomy.Results: Cholecystectomy was performed during 67 out of 1087 esophagectomies (6.2%). Cirrhosis or chronic liver disease was associated with receiving cholecystectomy during esophagectomy (OR: 1.99, 95%C.I. 1.10-3.56). Patients receiving and those not receiving cholecystectomy showed similar length of stay (median 14 days, p = .87), postoperative mortality (3.0% vs. 2.5%, p = .68), intraoperative complication (4.5% vs. 7.1%, p = .62), early complications (52.2% vs. 44.6%, p = .25) and late complications (20.9% vs. 24.8%, p = .56). Cholelithiasis/cholecystitis after esophagectomy occurred in 61 (6.1%) patients, with only four requiring cholecystectomy during follow-up. The biliary stone occurrence was nil. Only pathologic stage III-IV (OR: 2.17, 95%C.I. 1.19-3.96) was associated with cholelithiasis/cholecystitis after esophagectomy.Conclusion: Routine prophylactic cholecystectomy during esophagectomy could be safe but unnecessary.

Clinical analysis of prophylactic cholecystectomy during gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients: a retrospective study of 1753 patients

Background

Performance of gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients can lead to an increased incidence of cholecystolithiasis (CL) and a higher morbidity rate. However, the value of prophylactic cholecystectomy performed during gastric cancer surgery is still being debated.

Methods

We carried out a retrospective study on patients with gastric cancer who underwent subtotal or total gastrectomy, with preservation of the gallbladder or simultaneous cholecystectomy from January 2010 to March 2018.

Results

Cholecystolithiasis occurred in 152 of 1691 (8.98%) patients after gastric cancer surgery, with 45 (2.67%) patients undergoing subsequent cholecystectomy. Postoperative body mass index (BMI) decrease > 5% in 3 months was an independent risk factor for cholecystolithiasis [BMI decrease > 5%/≤5%: OR (95%CI): 1.812 (1.225–2.681), p = 0.003). Gastrectomy method and diabetes mellitus were independent risk factors for both cholecystolithiasis [gastrectomy method (no-Billroth I/Billroth I): OR (95%CI): 1.801 (1.097–2.959), p = 0.002; diabetes mellitus (yes/no): OR (95%CI): 1.544 (1.030–2.316), p = 0.036] and subsequent cholecystectomy [gastrectomy method (no-Billroth I/Billroth I): OR (95%CI): 5.432 (1.309–22.539), p = 0.020; diabetes mellitus (yes/no): OR (95%CI): 2.136 (1.106–4.125), p = 0.024]. Simultaneous cholecystectomy was performed in 62 of 1753 (3.5%) patients. The mortality and morbidity rates did not differ significantly between the combined surgery group and the gastrectomy only group (8.1% vs. 8.9 and 1.6% vs. 2.2%, respectively, p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Prophylactic cholecystectomy may be necessary in gastric cancer patients without Billroth I gastrectomy and with diabetes mellitus. Simultaneous cholecystectomy during gastric cancer surgery does not increase the postoperative mortality and morbidity rates.

The Cholegas trial: long-term results of prophylactic cholecystectomy during gastrectomy for cancer-a randomized-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The incidence of cholelithiasis has been shown to be higher for patients after gastrectomy than for the general population, due to vagal branch damage and gastrointestinal reconstruction. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the need for routine concomitant prophylactic cholecystectomy (PC) during gastrectomy for cancer.

METHODS

A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial was conducted between November 2008 and March 2017. Of the total 130 included patients, 65 underwent PC and 65 underwent standard gastric surgery only for curable cancers. The primary endpoint was cholelithiasis-free survival after gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Cholelithiasis was detected by ultrasound exam.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 62 months, eight patients (12.3%) in the control group developed biliary abnormalities (four cases of gallbladder calculi and four cases of biliary sludge), with only three (4.6%) being clinically relevant (two cholecystectomies needed, one acute pancreatitis). One patient in the PC group had asymptomatic biliary dilatation during sonography after surgery. The cholelithiasis-free survival did not show statistical significance between the two groups (P = 0.267). The number needed to treat with PC to avoid reoperation for cholelithiasis was 1:32.5.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant PC during gastric surgery for malignancies, although reducing the absolute number of biliary abnormalities, has no significant impact on the natural course of patients.

Gallstone, cholecystectomy and risk of gastric cancer

Backgrounds/Aims

The aim of this retrospective study is to compare stomach cancer incidence, characteristics between gallstones, cholecystectomy and control groups. It also aims to investigate key variables' potential effects on overall survival.

Methods

A total of 99 patients, diagnosed with stomach cancers between April 1994 and December 2015, were identified. We excluded stomach cancer patients, accrued during the first year of follow-up in both the gallstones and cholecystectomy groups, assuming that they missed cancers. The main analyses addressing the objective were a chi-square analysis and a survival analysis.

Results

The incidence of stomach cancers was increased in both the gallstone and cholecystectomy groups, compared with the control group (p=0.003). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the overall survival in gallstones, cholecystectomy group patients as compared with those in the control group decreased (HR=6.66, 95 CI: 1.94–22.80, p=0.003). Also, T-stage was found to statistically affect the rate of overall survival (HR=9.85, 95% CI: 3.09–31.39, p=.000). The stomach cancer showed the worse survival at the posterior, greater curvature location than anterior, lesser curvature of the stomach. (HR=0.30, 95% CI: 0.11–0.80, p=0.017).

Conclusions

We provided an awareness of the possible increased risks of stomach cancer in gallstone and cholecystectomy group patients, which might be induced by duodenogastric bile reflux. Also, the survival rate was poor (p<0.000). Therefore, close follow-up strategies for early detection are recommended for such patients.