An Indian surgeon's perspective on management of asymptomatic gallstones

INTRODUCTION

Cholelithiasis is widely prevalent in India, with a majority of patients being asymptomatic while a small proportion experiencing mild complications. In the laparoscopic era, the rate of cholecystectomies has increased owing to early recovery and fewer complications. In asymptomatic patients, the risk of complications must be balanced against the treatment benefit. Recent guidelines suggest no prophylactic cholecystectomy in asymptomatic patients. We aimed to find out the Indian surgeons' perspective on asymptomatic gallstone management.

METHODS

A cross-sectional e-survey was conducted of practicing surgeons, onco-surgeons and gastrointestinal-surgeons in India. The survey had questions regarding their perspective on laparoscopic cholecystectomy and treatment modalities in asymptomatic gallstones.

RESULTS

A total of 196 surgeons responded to the survey. Their mean age was 42.3 years. Overall, 111 (57%) respondents worked in the private sector. Most surgeons (164) agreed that the rate of cholecystectomy has increased since the advent of laparoscopy; 137 (70%) respondents agreed that they would not operate on patients without risk factors. Common bile duct stones, chronic hemolytic diseases, transplant recipients, and diabetes mellitus were the risk factors. Majority of the participants agreed on not performing a cholecystectomy in patients with asymptomatic gallstones.

CONCLUSION

There exists a lack of consensus among Indian surgeons on asymptomatic gallstone management in India. Where the majority of cases are asymptomatic and do not require surgery, certain comorbidities can influence the line of treatment in individual patients. Currently, the treatment guidelines for asymptomatic patients need to be established as cholecystectomies may be overperformed due to the fear of development of complications.

Acute pancreatitis: It can be the first sign of silent gallstones

Objectives

The management of asymptomatic cholelithiasis is controversial. Silent gallstones are generally assumed to cause complications after at least one episode of biliary colic. The ratio of those silent stones that had initially caused, -or were diagnosed as the etiological agent of- acute pancreatitis has not been reported in the literature yet. Our study was designed to investigate the ratio of asymptomatic cholelithiasis in acute biliary pancreatitis cases.

Material and Methods

One hundred and seventy-one patients of 305 cases, who were followed up with the diagnosis of acute biliary pancreatitis, were identified retrospectively. Demographic specifications, laboratory findings and clinical progressions of the patients were inspected. Clinical histories were detailed by phone calls. Gallstones were radiologically detected in 85 out of 171 cases. Those patients were divided as symptomatic and asymptomatic. Clinical findings and follow-ups were evaluated by "Chi-square" test.

Results

In the study group, 80% of the patients were asymptomatic (n= 68) and 16.47% of the patients (n= 14) had complicated pancreatitis. Regarding the severity of the clinical course, being symptomatic or not was not identified as a significant factor (p= 0.108). In regard of creating symptoms, the size of the stone was not significant (p= 0.561) and obtained no prediction about the clinical severity of the pancreatitis (p= 0.728).

Conclusion

Asymptomatic cholelithiasis patients had a major percentage in acute biliary pancreatitis cases. The "wait and see" approach should be re-evaluated for silent gallstones in prospective trials.