Outcomes of early and interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis at a teaching hospital in Kerala: A prospective observational comparative study

Thomas J, Oommen An, M. J, A. V., Joy Rr
{"title":"Outcomes of early and interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis at a teaching hospital in Kerala: A prospective observational comparative study","authors":"Thomas J, Oommen An, M. J, A. V., Joy Rr","doi":"10.17727/jmsr.2023/11-13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a widely used treatment modality for acute cholecystitis remains controversial. This prospective observational comparative study investigated patient outcomes for early (ELC) and interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ILC) in patients with acute cholecystitis admitted to the General Surgery Department at a tertiary care centre in Thrissur, Kerala, between December 2018 and June 2020. Of 67 patients, 34 were assigned to ELC and 33 to ILC groups and followed up for 2 weeks post-surgery. Patient characteristics, clinical features, investigations, intra operative details and post operative outcomes were tabulated. Comparison of age was statistically analyzed using student’s ‘t’ test, demographics and morbidity data using Fisher’s exact test/ Chi-square test and length of hospital stay using Mann Whitney U test. Mean age was significantly higher in the ILC group. 66% of study participants were females with a higher proportion of females observed in the ILC group. Post-surgical complications were not significantly higher in ELC group compared to ILC group. Total length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the ILC group than in ELC group (10.2 ±4.5 vs. 7.1 ±3.0) days, p value: 0.001). Duration of hospital stay for the laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure taken separately, was longer in ELC group comparatively, 7 ±3.01 versus 4 ±-2.38, (p value: <0.001). There was no mortality. It was observed in the present study that ELC is preferable to ILC for acute cholecystitis with added benefit of shorter hospital stay. Further large randomized trials would be valuable to make recommendations for future management. Keywords: acute cholecystitis; laparoscopic cholecystectomy; hospital stay; conversion rate","PeriodicalId":32890,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical and Scientific Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical and Scientific Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17727/jmsr.2023/11-13","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

Timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a widely used treatment modality for acute cholecystitis remains controversial. This prospective observational comparative study investigated patient outcomes for early (ELC) and interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ILC) in patients with acute cholecystitis admitted to the General Surgery Department at a tertiary care centre in Thrissur, Kerala, between December 2018 and June 2020. Of 67 patients, 34 were assigned to ELC and 33 to ILC groups and followed up for 2 weeks post-surgery. Patient characteristics, clinical features, investigations, intra operative details and post operative outcomes were tabulated. Comparison of age was statistically analyzed using student’s ‘t’ test, demographics and morbidity data using Fisher’s exact test/ Chi-square test and length of hospital stay using Mann Whitney U test. Mean age was significantly higher in the ILC group. 66% of study participants were females with a higher proportion of females observed in the ILC group. Post-surgical complications were not significantly higher in ELC group compared to ILC group. Total length of hospital stay was significantly longer in the ILC group than in ELC group (10.2 ±4.5 vs. 7.1 ±3.0) days, p value: 0.001). Duration of hospital stay for the laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure taken separately, was longer in ELC group comparatively, 7 ±3.01 versus 4 ±-2.38, (p value: <0.001). There was no mortality. It was observed in the present study that ELC is preferable to ILC for acute cholecystitis with added benefit of shorter hospital stay. Further large randomized trials would be valuable to make recommendations for future management. Keywords: acute cholecystitis; laparoscopic cholecystectomy; hospital stay; conversion rate
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
喀拉拉邦一家教学医院急性胆囊炎早期和间歇腹腔镜胆囊切除术的疗效:一项前瞻性观察性比较研究
腹腔镜胆囊切除术是一种广泛应用于急性胆囊炎的治疗方式,其时间安排仍有争议。这项前瞻性观察性比较研究调查了2018年12月至2020年6月期间入住喀拉拉邦Thrissur三级护理中心普通外科的急性胆囊炎患者早期(ELC)和间隔期腹腔镜胆囊切除术(ILC)的患者结果。在67名患者中,34名患者被分配到ELC组,33名被分配到ILC组,并在术后随访2周。将患者特征、临床特征、调查、术中细节和术后结果制成表格。使用学生t检验、Fisher精确检验/卡方检验的人口统计和发病率数据以及Mann-Whitney U检验的住院时间进行年龄比较的统计分析。ILC组的平均年龄明显较高。66%的研究参与者是女性,ILC组中观察到的女性比例更高。与ILC组相比,ELC组的术后并发症并不显著增加。ILC组的总住院时间明显长于ELC组(10.2±4.5 vs.7.1±3.0)天,p值:0.001)。单独进行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的住院时间相对较长,ELC组为7±3.01 vs.4±-2.38(p值:<0.001)。无死亡率。在本研究中观察到,对于急性胆囊炎,ELC比ILC更可取,而且住院时间更短。进一步的大型随机试验将有助于为未来的管理提出建议。关键词:急性胆囊炎;腹腔镜胆囊切除术;住院;转化率
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
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of beliefs and attitude towards blood donation among the population of Tumkur district: A cross sectional study A cross sectional study on seroprevalence of transfusion-transmitted infections among blood donors at tertiary care hospital Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with and without concomitant meniscal repair: A prospective comparative study Demystifying the three different types of COVID-19 associated multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: Experience from a tertiary care hospital An observational study of gastrointestinal stromal tumors by histopathology and immunohistochemistry
×
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