Prophylactic Cholecystectomy is Safe in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery With Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.

David N. Hanna, N. Khajoueinejad, M. O. Ghani, A. Hermina, Alexander Mina, C. Bailey, Noah A. Cohen, D. Labow, B. Golas, Umut Sarpel, K. Idrees, D. Magge
{"title":"Prophylactic Cholecystectomy is Safe in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery With Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.","authors":"David N. Hanna, N. Khajoueinejad, M. O. Ghani, A. Hermina, Alexander Mina, C. Bailey, Noah A. Cohen, D. Labow, B. Golas, Umut Sarpel, K. Idrees, D. Magge","doi":"10.1177/00031348241246171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nWhile cholecystectomy is one of the most common operations performed in the United States, there is a continued debate regarding its prophylactic role in elective surgery. Particularly among patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis who undergo cytoreduction surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC), further abdominal operations may pose increasing morbidity due to intraabdominal adhesions and potential recurrence. This bi-institutional retrospective study aims to assess postoperative morbidity associated with prophylactic cholecystectomy at the time of CRS-HIPEC.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe performed a bi-institutional retrospective analysis of 578 patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC from 2011 to 2021. Postoperative outcomes among patients who underwent prophylactic cholecystectomy at the time of CRS-HIPEC were compared to patients who did not, particularly rate of bile leak, hospital length of stay, rate of Clavien-Dindo classification morbidity grade III or greater, and number of hospital re-admissions within 30 days.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf the 535 patients available for analysis, 206 patients (38.3%) underwent a prophylactic cholecystectomy. Of the 3 bile leaks (1.5%) that occurred among patients who underwent prophylactic cholecystectomy, all 3 occurred in patients who underwent a concomitant liver resection. There were no significant differences in hospital length of stay, postoperative morbidity, and number of hospital re-admissions among patients who underwent prophylactic cholecystectomy compared to those who did not.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nProphylactic cholecystectomy in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC is not associated with increased morbidity or increased bile leak risk compared to historical data. While the benefits of prophylactic cholecystectomy are not yet elucidated, it may be considered to avoid potential future morbid operations for biliary disease.","PeriodicalId":325363,"journal":{"name":"The American Surgeon","volume":"36 8","pages":"31348241246171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Surgeon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00031348241246171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND While cholecystectomy is one of the most common operations performed in the United States, there is a continued debate regarding its prophylactic role in elective surgery. Particularly among patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis who undergo cytoreduction surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS-HIPEC), further abdominal operations may pose increasing morbidity due to intraabdominal adhesions and potential recurrence. This bi-institutional retrospective study aims to assess postoperative morbidity associated with prophylactic cholecystectomy at the time of CRS-HIPEC. METHODS We performed a bi-institutional retrospective analysis of 578 patients who underwent CRS-HIPEC from 2011 to 2021. Postoperative outcomes among patients who underwent prophylactic cholecystectomy at the time of CRS-HIPEC were compared to patients who did not, particularly rate of bile leak, hospital length of stay, rate of Clavien-Dindo classification morbidity grade III or greater, and number of hospital re-admissions within 30 days. RESULTS Of the 535 patients available for analysis, 206 patients (38.3%) underwent a prophylactic cholecystectomy. Of the 3 bile leaks (1.5%) that occurred among patients who underwent prophylactic cholecystectomy, all 3 occurred in patients who underwent a concomitant liver resection. There were no significant differences in hospital length of stay, postoperative morbidity, and number of hospital re-admissions among patients who underwent prophylactic cholecystectomy compared to those who did not. CONCLUSION Prophylactic cholecystectomy in patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC is not associated with increased morbidity or increased bile leak risk compared to historical data. While the benefits of prophylactic cholecystectomy are not yet elucidated, it may be considered to avoid potential future morbid operations for biliary disease.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预防性胆囊切除术对接受腹腔内热化疗的胆囊切除手术患者是安全的
背景虽然胆囊切除术是美国最常见的手术之一,但关于胆囊切除术在择期手术中的预防作用仍存在争议。尤其是腹膜癌患者在接受细胞减灭术和腹腔内热化疗(CRS-HIPEC)后,由于腹腔内粘连和潜在的复发,进一步的腹部手术可能会增加发病率。这项双机构回顾性研究旨在评估在接受 CRS-HIPEC 时进行预防性胆囊切除术的术后发病率。方法 我们对 2011 年至 2021 年期间接受 CRS-HIPEC 的 578 例患者进行了双机构回顾性分析。我们对在接受 CRS-HIPEC 时接受预防性胆囊切除术的患者与未接受预防性胆囊切除术的患者的术后结果进行了比较,尤其是胆漏发生率、住院时间、Clavien-Dindo 分类发病率 III 级或以上以及 30 天内再次入院的人数。在接受预防性胆囊切除术的患者中,有 3 例胆汁漏(1.5%),这 3 例胆汁漏均发生在同时接受肝切除术的患者身上。与未接受预防性胆囊切除术的患者相比,接受预防性胆囊切除术的患者在住院时间、术后发病率和再次入院人数方面没有明显差异。虽然预防性胆囊切除术的益处尚未阐明,但可以考虑采用这种方法来避免将来可能因胆道疾病而进行的高风险手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bile Duct Injuries During Urgent Cholecystectomy at a Safety Net Teaching Hospital: Attending Experience and Time of Day May Matter. From Bytes to Best Practices: Tracing ChatGPT-3.5's Evolution and Alignment With the National Comprehensive Cancer Network® Guidelines in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management. The USCENTCOM Walking Blood Bank Performance Benchmark and Anticipated Benefit of Universal Low Titer Type O Screening. Contemporary Outcomes and Patterns of Injury Associated With Parachuting Accidents. To Drain or Not: Drainage Procedures Remain a Central Tenet of Management of Infected Collections in Acute Pancreatitis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1