Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy with and without percutaneous drainage for complicated acute calculous cholecystitis: A prospective randomized study

M. Kassem
{"title":"Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy with and without percutaneous drainage for complicated acute calculous cholecystitis: A prospective randomized study","authors":"M. Kassem","doi":"10.5455/aces.20170503081122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The purpose of this research was to compare surgical consequences of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for complicated acute calculous cholecystitis. Patients and Methods: This prospective randomized work was conducted on 150 patients complaining of complicated acute calculous cholecystitis; presented to the Emergency Department, Alexandria Main University Hospital, Egypt, be tween January 2011 and January 2017. They were distributed randomly into two groups (75 patients each): Group (A) for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy and Group (B) for delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Results: There were 42 men and 108 women. Their mean age at diagnosis was 39.6±10.27 years. The timing of surgery since onset of patients’ complains was ranged from 1.0 to 7.0 days in Group A and from 6 to 10 weeks in Group B. Acute abdominal pain was present in both groups patients. Preoperative CT scan was done for 60 patients (40%) to verify the presence of complications. The mean operative time in Group A and Group B patients were 71.0±26.93 and 38.0±26.25 minutes respectively and there was a statistically significant difference (p>0.054). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was con verted to open procedure in ten patients. The mean hospital stay in patients of Group A was 1.76±1.05 while in patients of Group B was 3.87±2.43 in the first admission and 2.72±1.41 in second admission. There was no major bile duct injury or post-operative obstructive jaundice in either group. In six patients (2 in Group A and 4 in Group B) bile leak was noted from the drain and port sites’ infections were found in eight patients. Conclusion: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy one week from start of symptoms of complicated acute calculous chol -ecystitis; was safe, feasible, and considered an acceptable indication.","PeriodicalId":30641,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical and Experimental Surgery","volume":"1 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical and Experimental Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5455/aces.20170503081122","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

Objective: The purpose of this research was to compare surgical consequences of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for complicated acute calculous cholecystitis. Patients and Methods: This prospective randomized work was conducted on 150 patients complaining of complicated acute calculous cholecystitis; presented to the Emergency Department, Alexandria Main University Hospital, Egypt, be tween January 2011 and January 2017. They were distributed randomly into two groups (75 patients each): Group (A) for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy and Group (B) for delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Results: There were 42 men and 108 women. Their mean age at diagnosis was 39.6±10.27 years. The timing of surgery since onset of patients’ complains was ranged from 1.0 to 7.0 days in Group A and from 6 to 10 weeks in Group B. Acute abdominal pain was present in both groups patients. Preoperative CT scan was done for 60 patients (40%) to verify the presence of complications. The mean operative time in Group A and Group B patients were 71.0±26.93 and 38.0±26.25 minutes respectively and there was a statistically significant difference (p>0.054). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was con verted to open procedure in ten patients. The mean hospital stay in patients of Group A was 1.76±1.05 while in patients of Group B was 3.87±2.43 in the first admission and 2.72±1.41 in second admission. There was no major bile duct injury or post-operative obstructive jaundice in either group. In six patients (2 in Group A and 4 in Group B) bile leak was noted from the drain and port sites’ infections were found in eight patients. Conclusion: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy one week from start of symptoms of complicated acute calculous chol -ecystitis; was safe, feasible, and considered an acceptable indication.
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
早期与延迟腹腔镜胆囊切除术合并和不经皮引流治疗复杂急性结石性胆囊炎:一项前瞻性随机研究
目的:本研究的目的是比较早期和延迟腹腔镜胆囊切除术治疗复杂急性结石性胆囊炎的手术效果。患者和方法:本前瞻性随机研究纳入150例合并急性结石性胆囊炎患者;于2011年1月至2017年1月在埃及亚历山大大学医院急诊科就诊。随机分为早期腹腔镜胆囊切除术组(A组)和延迟腹腔镜胆囊切除术组(B组),每组75例。结果:男性42例,女性108例。确诊时平均年龄39.6±10.27岁。A组患者自主诉开始手术时间为1.0 ~ 7.0天,b组为6 ~ 10周。两组患者均出现急性腹痛。术前CT扫描60例(40%),以确认是否存在并发症。A组和B组患者平均手术时间分别为71.0±26.93分钟和38.0±26.25分钟,差异有统计学意义(p < 0.054)。10例患者将腹腔镜胆囊切除术转为开腹手术。A组患者平均住院时间为1.76±1.05,B组患者首次住院时间为3.87±2.43,第二次住院时间为2.72±1.41。两组患者均无胆管损伤及术后梗阻性黄疸。6例患者(A组2例,B组4例)出现胆漏,8例患者出现胆管部位感染。结论:复杂急性结石性胆囊炎症状开始1周早期腹腔镜胆囊切除术;是安全、可行、可接受的指征。
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
Lisfranc injury in a 14-year-old patient. A case report and literature review A comparative study of upper body strength training exercise vs. treadmill walking on patients with intermittent claudication Using walnut shell in the microdrilling training model Case report: Preoperative progressive pneumoperitoneum in giant inguinoscrotal hernia - Post-radiation pelvic sarcomas after radiotherapy treatment of prostate adenocarcinoma -
×
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