Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a district general hospital: is it safe and feasible?

Comparison of the safety profile, conversion rate and hospitalization duration between early and delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Although the past decade has witnessed unprecedented medical progress, no consensus has been reached on the optimal approach for patients with acute cholecystitis. Herein, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the differences in patient outcomes between Early Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (ELC) and Delayed Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy (DLC) in the treatment of acute cholecystitis. Our protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (registration number: CRD42023389238).

Objectives

We sought to investigate the differences in efficacy, safety, and potential benefits between ELC and DLC in acute cholecystitis patients by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

The online databases PubMed, Springer, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies published between Jan 1, 1999 and Jan 1, 2022.

Results

21 RCTs and 13 retrospective studies with a total of 7,601 cases were included in this research. After a fixed-effects model was applied, the pooled analysis showed that DLC was associated with a significantly high conversion rate (OR: 0.6247; 95%CI: 0.5115-0.7630; z = -4.61, p < 0.0001) and incidence of postoperative complications (OR: 0.7548; 95%CI: 0.6197-0.9192; z = -2.80, p = 0.0051). However, after applying a random-effects model, ELC was associated with significantly shorter total hospitalization duration than DLC (MD: -4.0657; 95%CI: -5.0747 to -3.0566; z = -7.90, p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

ELC represents a safe and feasible approach for acute cholecystitis patients since it shortens hospitalization duration and decreases the incidence of postoperative complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=389238, identifier (CRD42023389238).

Evaluation of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute calculous cholecystitis: a prospective, randomized study

Purpose

Uncertainty exists about whether early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is an appropriate surgical treatment for acute calculous cholecystitis. This study aimed to compare early vs. late LC for acute calculous cholecystitis regarding intraoperative difficulty and postoperative outcomes.

Methods

This was a prospective randomized study carried out between December 2015 and June 2017; 60 patients with acute calculous cholecystitis were divided into two groups (early and delayed groups), each comprising 30 patients. Thirty patients treated with LC within 3 to 5 days of arrival at the hospital were assigned to the early group. The other 30 patients were placed in the delayed group, first treated conservatively, and followed by LC 3 to 6 weeks later.

Results

The conversion rates in both groups were 6.7% and 0%, respectively (p = 0.143). The operating time was 56.67 ± 11.70 minutes in the early group and 75.67 ± 20.52 minutes in the delayed group (p = 0.001), and both groups observed equal levels of postoperative complications. Early LC patients, on the other hand, required much fewer postoperative hospital stay (3.40 ± 1.99 vs. 6.27 ± 2.90 days, p = 0.006).

Conclusion

Considering shorter operative time and hospital stay without significant increase of open conversion rates, early LC might have benefits over late LC.

Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a prospective, randomized study

We aimed to compare the clinical outcome and cost of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Sixty patients with acute cholecystitis were randomized into early (within 24 hours of admission) or delayed (after 6-8 weeks of conservative treatment) laparoscopic cholecystectomy groups. There was no significant difference between study groups in terms of operation time and rates for conversion to open cholecystectomy. On the other hand, total hospital stay was longer (5.2 ± 1.40 versus 7.8 ± 1.65 days; P = 0.04) and total costs were higher (2500.97 ± 755.265 versus 3713.47 ± 517.331 Turkish Lira; P = 0.03) in the delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy group. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded in 8 patients in the early laparoscopic cholecystectomy group, whereas no complications occurred in the delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy group (P = 0.002). Despite intraoperative and postoperative complications being associated more with early laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared with delayed intervention, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be preferred for treatment of acute cholecystitis because of its advantages of shorter hospital stay and lower cost.