The efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy without discontinuation in patients on antithrombotic therapy

Surgeons have hesitated early cholecystectomy because of cardiovascular comorbidities during adoption of guidelines

The introduction of the guidelines has resulted in an increase of laparoscopic surgeries performed, but the rate of early surgery was still low. Here, the initial effect of the introduction of the guideline was confirmed in single center, and factors disturbing early cholecystectomy were analyzed. This study included 141 patients who were treated for acute cholecystitis from January 2010 to October 2014 at Kanazawa Medical Center. Each patient was assigned into a group according to when they received treatment. Patients in Group A were treated before the Tokyo Guidelines were introduced (n = 48 cases), those in Group B were treated after the introduction of the guidelines (93 cases). After the introduction of the guidelines, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy was significantly increased (P < 0.001), however, the rate of early operations was still 38.7% only. There are many cases with cardiovascular disease in delayed group, the prevalence had reached 50% as compared with early group of 24% (P < 0.01). Approximately 25% of patients continued antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. In the early days of guidelines introduction, the factor which most disturbed early surgery was the coexistence of cardiovascular disease. These contents could be described in the next revision of the guidelines.

The Bad Gallbladder

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a common operation; approximately 20 million Americans have gallstones, the most common indication. Surgeons who operate on the biliary tree must be familiar with the presentations and treatment options for acute and chronic biliary pathology. We focus on the difficult "bad" gallbladder. We explore the available evidence as to what to do when a gallbladder is too inflamed, too technically challenging, or a patient is too sick to undergo standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We discuss whether or not open cholecystectomy is a relevant tool and what can be done to manage common bile duct stones found unexpectedly intraoperatively.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis is feasible for patients receiving antithrombotic therapy

OBJECTIVES

Patients with acute cholecystitis receiving antithrombotic therapy (ATT) have an increased risk of bleeding complications during surgery and percutaneous drainage. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is recommended for such cases; however, evidence is limited. To investigate this issue further, we performed a retrospective multicenter study.

METHODS

One hundred thirty patients with acute cholecystitis who underwent ETGBD were enrolled. They were divided into an ATT group (continuation of ATT on the day of the procedure and/or heparin substitution) and a Non-ATT group (discontinuation or no use of ATT). The primary outcome was bleeding complication rate, and the secondary outcomes were technical success rate, clinical success rate and total complication rate.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were enrolled in the ATT group, and 47 were enrolled in the Non-ATT group. In the ATT group, 42.2% continued multi-agent ATT. No bleeding complications occurred in either group. There were no significant differences between the ATT and Non-ATT groups in the technical success rate (84.3% vs 89.4%, P = 0.426 respectively) or the clinical success rate (97.1% vs 100%, P = 0.259, respectively). The overall early complication rate was 3.1% (4/130): mild pancreatitis (n = 3) and cholangitis (n = 1). Stent dysfunction was found in 10.9% of patients (at 196 days on average), and the 12-month stent patency rate was 69.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference was found in the bleeding complication rate between ETGBD with and without ATT. ETGBD may be an ideal drainage method for patients with acute cholecystitis receiving ATT.

Emergent cholecystectomy in patients on antithrombotic therapy

The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) recommend emergent cholecystectomy (EC) for acute cholecystitis. However, the number of patients on antithrombotic therapy (AT) has increased significantly, and no evidence has yet suggested that EC should be performed for acute cholecystitis in such patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether EC is as safe for patients on AT as for patients not on AT. We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent EC from 2007 to 2018 at a single center. First, patients were divided into two groups according to the use of antithrombotic agents: AT; and no-AT. Second, the AT group was divided into three sub-groups according to the use of single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT), double antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), or anticoagulant with or without antiplatelet therapy (AC ± APT). We then evaluated outcomes of EC among all four groups. The primary outcome was 30- and 90- day mortality rate, and secondary outcomes were morbidity rate and surgical outcomes. A total of 478 patients were enrolled (AT, n = 123, no-AT, n = 355) patients. No differences in morbidity rate (6.5% vs. 3.7%, respectively; P = 0.203), 30-day mortality rate (1.6% vs. 1.4%, respectively; P = 1.0) or 90-day mortality rate (1.6% vs. 1.4%, respectively; P = 1.0) were evident between AT and no-AT groups. Between the no-AT and AC ± APT groups, a significant difference was seen in blood loss (10 mL vs. 114 mL, respectively; P = 0.017). Among the three AT sub-groups and the no-AT group, no differences were evident in morbidity rate (3.7% vs. 8.9% vs. 0% vs. 6.5%, respectively; P = 0.201) or 30-day mortality (1.4% vs. 0% vs. 0% vs. 4.3%, respectively; P = 0.351). No hemorrhagic or thrombotic morbidities were identified after EC in any group. In conclusion, EC for acute cholecystitis is as safe for patients on AT as for patients not on AT.

Current Status in the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis Patients Receiving Antithrombotic Therapy: Is Endoscopic Drainage Feasible?- A Systematic Review

The bleeding complication risk of surgery or percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) may increase in patients with acute cholecystitis receiving antithrombotic therapy (ATT). Endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) may be recommended for such patients. English articles published between 1991 and 2018 in peer-reviewed journals that discuss cholecystectomy, PTGBD, and EGBD in patients with ATT or coagulopathy were reviewed to assess the safety of the procedures, especially in terms of the bleeding complication. There were 8 studies on cholecystectomy, 3 on PTGBD, and 1 on endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) in patients receiving ATT. With respect to EGBD, 28 studies on ETGBD (including 1 study already mentioned above) and 26 studies on endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) were also analyzed. The overall bleeding complication rate in patients with ATT who underwent cholecystectomy was significantly higher than that in patients without ATT (6.5% [23/354] vs. 1.2% [26/2,224], p<0.001). However, the bleeding risk of cholecystectomy and PTGBD in patients receiving ATT was controversial. The overall technical success, clinical success, and bleeding complication rates of ETGBD vs. EUS-GBD were 84% vs. 96% (p<0.001), 92% vs. 97% (p<0.001), and 0.65% vs. 2.1% (p=0.005), respectively. One patient treated with ETGBD experienced bleeding complication among 191 patients with bleeding tendency. ETGBD may be an ideal drainage procedure for patients receiving ATT from the viewpoint of bleeding, although EUS-GBD is also efficacious.

Safety of laparoscopic surgery in digestive diseases with special reference to antithrombotic therapy: A systematic review of the literature

AIM

To elucidate the effect of antithrombotic therapy (ATT) on bleeding and thromboembolic complications during or after laparoscopic digestive surgery.

METHODS

Published articles or internationally accepted abstracts between 2000 and 2017 were searched from PubMed, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar, and studies involving laparoscopic digestive surgery and antiplatelet therapy (APT) and/or anticoagulation therapy (ACT) were included after careful review of each study. Data such as study design, type of surgical procedures, antithrombotic drugs used, and surgical outcome (both bleeding and thromboembolic complications) were extracted from each study.

RESULTS

Thirteen published articles and two internationally accepted abstracts were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. Only one study concerning elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with perioperative heparin bridging for ACT showed that the risk of postoperative bleeding was higher compared with those without ACT. The remaining 14 studies reported no significant differences in the incidence of bleeding complications between the ATT group and the group without ATT. The risk of thromboembolic events (TE) associated with laparoscopic digestive surgery in patients receiving ATT was not significantly higher than those with no ATT or interrupted APT.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic digestive surgery in ATT-burdened patients for prevention of bleeding and TE showed satisfactory results. The risk of hemorrhagic complication during or after these procedures in patients with continued APT or heparin bridging was not significantly higher than in patients with no ATT or interrupted APT.