Laparoscopic vs open approach for acute cholecystitis in octogenarians. A prospective multicenter observational nationwide study

Cirugia espanola Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-25 DOI:10.1016/j.cireng.2024.06.008
N. Lluís , C. Villodre , P. Zapater , M. Cantó , L. Mena , J.M. Ramia , F. Lluís , on behalf of the LUCENTUM Project Collaborative Group
{"title":"Laparoscopic vs open approach for acute cholecystitis in octogenarians. A prospective multicenter observational nationwide study","authors":"N. Lluís ,&nbsp;C. Villodre ,&nbsp;P. Zapater ,&nbsp;M. Cantó ,&nbsp;L. Mena ,&nbsp;J.M. Ramia ,&nbsp;F. Lluís ,&nbsp;on behalf of the LUCENTUM Project Collaborative Group","doi":"10.1016/j.cireng.2024.06.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The world population is aging, with octogenarians expected to reach over 400 million by 2050. Acute cholecystitis is a serious complication in the elderly. Age is not a contraindication for emergency cholecystectomy, an option that can both save lives and preserve quality of life.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The present study aimed to compare open and laparoscopic surgical approaches. Over six months, 38 emergency surgery units enrolled all consecutive octogenarians with acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy. Postoperative outcomes were compared after propensity score matching analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The study included 212 patients (84 years [81–86], 47.2% women). The open approach was used in 32.1% of patients, and the laparoscopic approach in 67.9%. After propensity score matching, a decrease in hospital stays (open, 8 days [6–13]; laparoscopic, 5 days [4–8]; P &lt; .001), 30-day morbidity (open, 48.5%; laparoscopic, 26.5%; P = .01), and 30-day mortality (open, 13.2%, laparoscopic, 1.5%; P = .02) was found. Among the specific postoperative complications, a decrease in septicemia (open, 14.7%; laparoscopic, 0%; P = .001) was observed.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Laparoscopic approach was used in two out of three octogenarians. After propensity score matching, octogenarians undergoing laparoscopic approach had shorter length of hospital stay, fewer 30-day postoperative complications, fewer episodes of septicemia, and less 30-day mortality than octogenarians undergoing open approach. These findings suggest that the laparoscopic approach may be the preferred choice for octogenarians with acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":93935,"journal":{"name":"Cirugia espanola","volume":"103 1","pages":"Pages 34-42"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cirugia espanola","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2173507724001704","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The world population is aging, with octogenarians expected to reach over 400 million by 2050. Acute cholecystitis is a serious complication in the elderly. Age is not a contraindication for emergency cholecystectomy, an option that can both save lives and preserve quality of life.

Methods

The present study aimed to compare open and laparoscopic surgical approaches. Over six months, 38 emergency surgery units enrolled all consecutive octogenarians with acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy. Postoperative outcomes were compared after propensity score matching analysis.

Results

The study included 212 patients (84 years [81–86], 47.2% women). The open approach was used in 32.1% of patients, and the laparoscopic approach in 67.9%. After propensity score matching, a decrease in hospital stays (open, 8 days [6–13]; laparoscopic, 5 days [4–8]; P < .001), 30-day morbidity (open, 48.5%; laparoscopic, 26.5%; P = .01), and 30-day mortality (open, 13.2%, laparoscopic, 1.5%; P = .02) was found. Among the specific postoperative complications, a decrease in septicemia (open, 14.7%; laparoscopic, 0%; P = .001) was observed.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic approach was used in two out of three octogenarians. After propensity score matching, octogenarians undergoing laparoscopic approach had shorter length of hospital stay, fewer 30-day postoperative complications, fewer episodes of septicemia, and less 30-day mortality than octogenarians undergoing open approach. These findings suggest that the laparoscopic approach may be the preferred choice for octogenarians with acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy.

Abstract Image

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
八旬老人急性胆囊炎的腹腔镜手术与开腹手术。一项全国性前瞻性多中心观察研究。
背景:世界人口正在老龄化,预计到 2050 年,八旬老人将超过 4 亿。急性胆囊炎是老年人的一种严重并发症。年龄并不是急诊胆囊切除术的禁忌症,这种手术既能挽救生命,又能保证生活质量:本研究旨在比较开腹和腹腔镜手术方法。在 6 个月的时间里,38 家急诊外科单位连续招募了所有患有急性胆囊炎并接受胆囊切除术的八旬老人。经过倾向得分匹配分析后,对术后结果进行了比较:研究共纳入 212 名患者(84 岁 [81-86],47.2% 为女性)。32.1%的患者采用开腹手术,67.9%的患者采用腹腔镜手术。经过倾向评分匹配后,住院时间有所缩短(开腹手术,8 天 [6-13];腹腔镜手术,5 天 [4-8];P 结论:开腹手术和腹腔镜手术的住院时间分别为 8 天和 5 天:三分之二的八旬老人采用了腹腔镜手术。经过倾向评分匹配后,与开腹手术相比,接受腹腔镜手术的八旬老人住院时间更短、术后 30 天并发症更少、脓毒血症发作次数更少、30 天死亡率更低。这些研究结果表明,对于患有急性胆囊炎并接受胆囊切除术的八旬老人来说,腹腔镜方法可能是首选。
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
Are we managing desmoid tumors correctly in Spain? Results of the first national survey. From trial to practice: real-world outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy ± radiotherapy in resectable locally advanced NSCLC. Comparison between robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and laparoscopic cholecystectomy using a systematic registry of adverse events. Is the robotic approach safe? Robotic thoracic surgery: association between operative time and complications in 454 patients. Commentary on: The Cost of Prolonged Surgical Training-Time Is Money.
×
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:604180095
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