Patient reported outcomes in elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Occam’s razor or Hickam’s dictum-COVID-19 is not a textbook aetiology of acute pancreatitis: A modified Naranjo Score appraisal

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a disease spectrum ranging from mild to severe disease. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, numerous reports of AP have been published, with most authors concluding a causal relationship between COVID-19 and AP. Retrospective case reports or small case series are unable to accurately determine the cause-effect relationship between COVID-19 and AP.

AIM

To establish whether COVID-19 is a cause of AP using the modified Naranjo scoring system.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted on PubMed, World of Science and Embase for articles reporting COVID-19 and AP from inception to August 2021. Exclusion criteria were cases of AP which were not reported to be due to COVID-19 infection, age < 18 years old, review articles and retrospective cohort studies. The original 10-item Naranjo scoring system (total score 13) was devised to approximate the likelihood of a clinical presentation to be secondary to an adverse drug reaction. We modified the original scoring system into a 8-item modified Naranjo scoring system (total score 9) to determine the cause-effect relationship between COVID-19 and AP. A cumulative score was decided for each case presented in the included articles. Interpretation of the modified Naranjo scoring system is as follows: ≤ 3: Doubtful, 4-6: Possible, ≥ 7: Probable cause.

RESULTS

The initial search resulted in 909 articles, with 740 articles after removal of duplicates. A total of 67 articles were included in the final analysis, with 76 patients which had AP reported to be due to COVID-19. The mean age was 47.8 (range 18-94) years. Majority of patients (73.3%) had ≤ 7 d between onset of COVID-19 infection and diagnosis of AP. There were only 45 (59.2%) patients who had adequate investigations to rule out common aetiologies (gallstones, choledocholithiasis, alcohol, hypertriglyceridemia, hypercalcemia and trauma) of AP. Immunoglobulin G4 testing was conducted in 9 (13.5%) patients to rule out autoimmune AP. Only 5 (6.6%) patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound and/or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatogram to rule out occult microlithiasis, pancreatic malignancy and pancreas divisum. None of the patients had other recently diagnosed viral infections apart from COVID-19 infection, or underwent genetic testing to rule out hereditary AP. There were 32 (42.1%), 39 (51.3%) and 5 (6.6%) patients with doubtful, possible, and probable cause-effect relationship respectively between COVID-19 and AP.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence is weak to establish a strong link between COVID-19 and AP. Investigations should be performed to rule out other causes of AP before establishing COVID-19 as an aetiology.

Propensity score matching analysis of perioperative outcomes including quality of life after multi-port vs. single port laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a nationwide prospective multicenter study in Korea

INTRODUCTION

The usefulness of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) as compared to multi-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (MPLC) remains controversial. Between SPLC and MPLC, we compared outcomes, especially subjective aspects, such as quality of life (QoL).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This multi-center study, involving 20 institutions from 2016 to 2017, enrolled 2507 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Various perioperative outcomes, pain assessed by the numeric rating scale (NRS) score, and QoL evaluated by the gastrointestinal QoL index (GIQLI) questionnaire, were compared between the two procedures. We generated balanced groups after propensity score matching (PSM) using preoperative factors that influence the decision to perform MPLC or SPLC.

RESULTS

MPLC and SPLC were performed in 2176 and 331 patients, respectively. Nine hundred and twelve and 329 patients, respectively, were selected from the two groups by PSM. Operation time was longer and surgical difficulty was lower in SPLC. There were no significant differences in most outcomes, including biliary complications. Significant superiority of SPLC over MPLC was shorter hospitalization, lower NRS score, and favorable GIQLI.

CONCLUSIONS

From nationwide prospective data, SPLC showed outcomes comparable to MPLC. In SPLC, morbidity was not high and postoperative QoL was favorable. In the future, more implementations and studies are needed to ensure the safety and feasibility of SPLC.

Learning Curve of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review

Background: Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with cholecystectomy has superior outcomes over two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram with interval cholecystectomy. With decreasing trend of LCBDE, this study aims to summarize the literature on learning curve (LC) in LCBDE. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for articles from inception to June 3, 2022 (PROSPERO Ref No: CRD42022328451). Basic clinical demographics were collected. Poisson means (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) was used to determine the number of cases required to surmount the LC (N_LC). Results: Eight articles (n = 2071 patients) reported LC outcomes in LCBDE with mean study period of 5.9 ± 2.8 years. Majority of studies (62.5%) used arbitrary methods of LC analysis. Most common outcomes reported were complications (any or major) (75%), open conversion (75%), length of stay (62.5%), and operating time (50%). Mean CBD diameter was 11.3 ± 4.8 mm (n = 1122 patients). Incidence of acute cholecystitis, acute cholangitis, and acute pancreatitis were 13.9% (n = 232/1668), 7.8% (n = 128/1629), and 13.7% (n = 229/1668), respectively. Pooled analysis of all the included studies showed N_LC of 78.8 cases (95% CI: 71.9-86.3). Studies that used cumulative sum control chart analysis, nonarbitrary methods, and arbitrary-based LC had N_LC of 152.0 (95% CI: 135.4-170.1), 108.0 (95% CI: 96.6-120.4), and 49.7 (95% CI: 42.0-58.3) cases, respectively. N_LC was 37.0 cases (95% CI: 29.1-46.5) for single surgeon LC, and 99.8 cases (95% CI: 90.2-110.0) for institutional LC. Conclusion: Studies reporting N_LC in LCBDE are heterogeneous. Further studies should use nonarbitrary methods of analysis for patient-reported outcome measures and procedure-specific morbidity.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic surgical services in Singapore: Experience Paper

Background

At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) unit had to reorganize its surgical case volume due to the rationing of health care resources. We report on a local audit evaluating the impact of COVID-19 on the HPB unit and the HPB surgical oncology practice.

Objective

The aim of this study was to review the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the HPB unit’s elective and emergency surgical cases. The secondary aims were to investigate the impact on the HPB surgical oncology operative case volume.

Methods

We performed a comparative audit of the HPB unit surgical case volume for January-June 2019 (baseline) and 2020 (COVID-19). Elective and emergency cases performed under general anesthesia were audited. Elective cases included hernia and gallbladder operations and liver and pancreatic resections. Emergency cases included cholecystectomies and laparotomies performed for general surgical indications. We excluded endoscopies and procedures done under local anesthesia. The retrospective data collected during the 2 time periods were compared. This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000040265).

Results

The elective surgical case volume decreased by 41.8% (351 cases in 2019 compared to 204 cases in 2020) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The number of hernia operations decreased by 63.9% (155 in 2019 compared to 56 in 2020; P<.001) and cholecystectomies decreased by 40.1% (157 in 2019 compared to 94 in 2020; P=.83). The liver and pancreatic resection volume increased by 16.7% (30 cases in 2019 compared to 35 cases in 2020; P=.004) and 111.1% (9 cases in 2019 compared to 19 cases in 2020; P=.001), respectively. The emergency surgical workload decreased by 40.9% (193 cases in 2019 compared to 114 cases in 2020). The most significant reduction in the emergency workload was observed in March (41 to 23 cases, a 43.9% reduction; P=.94), April (35 to 8 cases, a 77.1% reduction; P=.01), and May (32 to 14 cases, a 56.3% reduction; P=.39); however, only April had a statistically significant reduction in workload (P=.01).

Conclusions

The reallocation of resources due to the COVID-19 pandemic did not adversely impact elective HPB oncology work. With prudent measures in place, essential surgical services can be maintained during a pandemic.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000040265); https://tinyurl.com/ms9kpr6x

Patient decision-making in symptomatic gallbladder disease

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Healthcare requires patient feedback to improve outcomes and experience. This study undertook a systematic review of the depth, variability, and digital suitability of current patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods

A PROSPERO-registered (registration number CRD42021261707) systematic review was undertaken for all relevant English language articles using PubMed version of MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases in June 2021. The search used Boolean operators and wildcards and included the keywords: laparoscopic cholecystectomy AND patient outcome OR patient-reported outcome OR patient-reported outcome measure OR PRO OR PROM. Medical Subjects Heading terms were used to search PubMed and Scopus. Articles published from 1 January 2011 to 2 June 2021 were included.

Results

A total of 4960 individual articles were reviewed in this study, of which 44 were found to evaluate PROMs in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and underwent methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) grading. Twenty-one articles spanning 19 countries and four continents met all inclusion criteria and were included in the qualitative data synthesis. There was significant heterogeneity in PROMs identified with eight different comprehensive PROM tools used in the 21 studies. There was wide variation in the time points at which PROMs were recorded. Fourteen of 21 studies recorded PROMs before and after surgery, and 7 of 21 recorded PROMs only after surgery. Follow-up intervals ranged from 3 days to 2 years after surgery.

Conclusions

This study identified that while post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy PROMs are infrequently measured currently, tools are widely available to achieve this in clinical practice. PROMs may not capture all the outcomes but should be incorporated into future cholecystectomy outcome research. The EQ-5D™ (EuroQoL Group, Rotterdam, the Netherlands) provides a simple platform for the modern digital era.

Outcomes of omental patch repair in large or giant perforated peptic ulcer are comparable to gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) complicates 2 to 10% of patients with peptic ulcer disease and has mortality risk of up to 20%. Omental patch repair is the mainstay of surgical management and gastric resectional procedures are advocated for a large/giant ulcer or suspected malignancy. Emergency gastrectomy is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of omental patch repair with gastrectomy in patients with large PPU (≥ 20 mm).

METHODS

A retrospective review of all PPU patients who underwent surgery from January 2008 to December 2014 was done. Patients with PPU < 20 mm were excluded. Patient demographics and perioperative data were recorded. Length of hospital stay, post-operative complications, need for intensive care unit admission and all-cause mortality are reported.

RESULTS

110 patients with a median age of 69.1 (range 28-90) years had PPU ≥ 20 mm. 42 (38.2%) patients presented within 24 h from the onset of abdominal pain. The median American Society of Anaesthesiology score was 3 (range 1-4). 52 patients had omental patch repair and 58 patients had gastrectomy. The overall incidence of intra-abdominal collection, post-operative leakage, re-operation and all-cause mortality was 16.4%, 11.8%, 6.4% and 19.1%, respectively. No difference in post-operative outcomes between the two groups was detected: intra-abdominal collection (p = 0.793), post-operative leakage (p = 0.813), re-operation (p = 0.809) and all-cause mortality (p = 0.736).

CONCLUSION

Omental patch repair confers similar perioperative outcomes as compared to gastrectomy in patients with large PPU.

Improving postoperative mobilisation rates in patients undergoing elective major hepatopancreatobiliary surgery

BACKGROUND

Early mobilisation reduces postoperative complications such as pneumonia, deep vein thrombosis and hospital length of stay. Many authors have reported poor compliance with early mobilisation within Enhanced Recovery After Surgery initiatives.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to increase postoperative day (POD) 2 mobilisation rate from 23% to 75% in patients undergoing elective major hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery within 6 months.

METHODS

We report a multidisciplinary team clinical practice improvement project (CPIP) to improve postoperative mobilisation of patients undergoing elective major HPB surgery. We identified the common barriers to mobilisation and analysed using the fishbone or cause-and-effect diagram and Pareto chart. A series of Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles followed this. We tracked the rate of early mobilisation and mean distance walked. In the post hoc analysis, we examined the potential cost savings based on reduced hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Mobilisation rate on POD 2 following elective major HPB surgery improved from 23% to 78.9%, and this sustained at 6 months after the CPIP. Wound pain was the most common reason for failure to ambulate on POD 2. Hospital length of stay reduced from a median of 8 days to 6 days with an estimated cost saving of S$2228 per hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Multidisciplinary quality improvement intervention effort resulted in an improved POD 2 mobilisation rate for patients who underwent elective major HPB surgery. This observed outcome was sustained at 6 months after completion of the CPIP with potential cost savings.

Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy: comparison of reconstituting and fenestrating techniques

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy (LSC) is a safe bailout procedure in situations when dissection of "critical view of safety" is not possible. After the proposed classification of subtotal cholecystectomy into "fenestrating" and "reconstituting" techniques in 2016, a comparative review of the outcomes of both methods is timely.

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science database was conducted up to January 31, 2020 for studies that reported LSC. Studies reporting LSC only in patients with Mirizzi syndrome or xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis were excluded. Our analysis includes 39 studies with 1784 cases of LSC. We report a comparison of outcomes between reconstituting and fenestrating LSC on 1505 cases [935 reconstituting (62.1%) and 570 fenestrating (37.9%)].

RESULTS

Following LSC, the rate of open conversion is 7.7%, hemorrhage is 0.4%, bile duct injury is 0.3%, bile leak is 15.4%, retained stone is 4.6%, subhepatic or subphrenic collection is 2.9%, superficial surgical site infection is 2.0% and 30-day mortality is 0.2%. 8.8% of patients required postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), 1.1% required percutaneous intervention, and 2.2% required reoperation. Compared to reconstituting LSC, fenestrating LSC has a higher incidence of open conversion (n = 58, 10.2% vs. n = 43, 4.6%, p < 0.001), retained stones (n = 38, 6.7% vs. n = 38, 4.1%, p = 0.0253), subhepatic or subphrenic collections (n = 33, 5.8% vs. n = 13, 1.4%, p < 0.001), superficial surgical site infections (n = 18, 3.2% vs. n = 14, 1.5%, p = 0.0303), postoperative ERCP (n = 82, 14.4% vs. n = 62, 6.6%, p < 0.001), and need for reoperation (n = 20, 3.5% vs. n = 12, 1.3%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although reconstituting LSC has better outcomes, both techniques are complementary. Intraoperative findings and surgical expertise impact the choice.

Long-term patient-reported outcomes following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A prospective multicenter observational study

Several studies have reported short-term results for post-cholecystectomy symptoms and quality of life (QoL). However, reports on long-term results are still limited. This study aimed to identify risk factors affecting short- and long-term patient-reported outcome (PRO) following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.From 2016 to 2017, a total of 476 patients from 5 institutions were enrolled. PRO was examined using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain score and the Gastrointestinal (GI) QoL Index questionnaire at postoperative 1 month and 1 year.Most of patients recovered well at postoperative 1 year compared to postoperative 1 month for the NRS pain score, QoL score, and GI symptoms. A high operative difficulty score (HR 1.740, P = .031) and pathology of acute or complicated cholecystitis (HR 1.524, P = .048) were identified as independent risk factors for high NRS pain scores at postoperative 1 month. Similarly, female sex (HR 1.571, P = .003) at postoperative 1 month and postoperative complications (HR 5.567, P = .001) at postoperative 1 year were independent risk factors for a low QoL. Also, age above 50 (HR 1.842, P = .001), female sex (HR 1.531, P = .006), and preoperative gallbladder drainage (HR 3.086, P = .001) were identified as independent risk factors for GI symptoms at postoperative 1 month.Most patients showed improved long-term PRO measurement in terms of pain, QoL, and GI symptoms. There were no independent risk factors for long-term postoperative pain and GI symptoms. However, postoperative complications were identified to affect QoL adversely at postoperative 1 year. Careful and long-term follow up is thus necessary for patients who experienced postoperative complications.

Prehabilitation Program Improves Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Elective Liver Resection

BACKGROUND

Preoperative phase can be effectively used by multidisciplinary teams to optimize the surgical candidate to improve perioperative outcomes. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of prehabilitation program (PP) in patients undergoing elective liver resection (LR).

METHODS

This was a prospective study including patients undergoing elective LR from February 2016 to October 2017. Outcomes of patients enrolled into PP were compared with patients receiving standard care. PP involved physiotherapist, dietitian, and case managers along with surgical and anesthetic services. Postoperative morbidity, length of stay, 90-day mortality, readmission rate, quality of life, and cost were measured.

RESULTS

Seventy patients were enrolled into PP and compared with 34 patients receiving standard care. Median Charlson comorbidity index was higher in PP group (4 versus 3, P = 0.03). PP showed reduction in overall morbidity (30% versus 52.9%, P = 0.02) and social issues (nil versus 3, P = 0.03). Quality of life survey showed improved social well-being. A tendency to cost savings was observed in prehabilitation group with 16.5% ($1359) cost reduction (median cost $6892 versus $8251, P = 0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

PP improves outcomes in patients undergoing elective LR.

Trans-arterial chemoembolization + radiofrequency ablation versus surgical resection in hepatocellular carcinoma - A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) remains the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide, with countries in Asia being affected the most. The mainstay of curative therapy for early HCC is radiofrequency ablation (RFA) or surgery; either surgical resection (SR) or liver transplantation. Latest evidence however suggests that combination of TACE+ RFA may provide outcomes comparable to SR.

AIM

To compare oncologic outcomes and safety profile of TACE + RFA to SR alone in HCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted through Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for literature published before April 2019. Outcomes measured were disease-free survival(DFS), overall survival(OS) and major complications. DFS was further divided into local tumour progression(LTP), intrahepatic distant recurrence(IDR) and distant metastasis(DM).

RESULTS

Eight retrospective studies and one randomized controlled trial, involving 1892 patients met eligibility criteria and were included. Unadjusted pooled analysis demonstrated no significant difference in 1-year, 3-year and 5-year OS and 1-year DFS between TACE+RFA and SR. SR had superior 3-year DFS (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62-0.98, p = 0.03) and 5-year DFS (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, p = 0.02) compared to TACE+RFA. When analysing only the propensity matched data, the difference in 3-year DFS and 5-year DFS was not significant. TACE+RFA had a higher LTP rate (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.05-5.86, p = 0.04) compared to SR but IDR and DM rates were not significant.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

TACE+RFA offer comparable oncologic outcomes in patients with HCC as compared with SR and with added benefit of lower morbidity.