Timing of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute calculous cholecystitis revised: Protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of results.


Journal

World journal of emergency surgery : WJES
ISSN: 1749-7922
Titre abrégé: World J Emerg Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101266603

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2020
Historique:
received: 25 10 2019
accepted: 20 12 2019
entrez: 9 1 2020
pubmed: 9 1 2020
medline: 20 3 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been adopted as the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis due to a shorter hospital length of stay and no increased morbidity when compared to delayed cholecystectomy. However, randomised studies and meta-analysis report a wide array of timings of early cholecystectomy, most of them set at 72 h following admission. Setting early cholecystectomy at 72 h or even later may influence analysis due to a shift towards a more balanced comparison. At this time, the rate of resolving acute cholecystitis and the rate of ongoing acute process because of failed conservative treatment could be not so different when compared to those operated with a delayed timing of 6-12 weeks. As a result, randomised comparison with such timing for early cholecystectomy and meta-analysis including such studies may have missed a possible advantage of an early cholecystectomy performed within 24 h of the admission, when conservative treatment failure has less potential effects on morbidity. This review will explore pooled data focused on randomised studies with a set timing of early cholecystectomy as a maximum of 24 h following admission, with the aim of verifying the hypothesis that cholecystectomy within 24 h may report a lower post-operative complication rate compared to a delayed intervention. A systematic review of the literature will identify randomised clinical studies that compared early and delayed cholecystectomy. Pooled data from studies that settled the early intervention within 24 h from admission will be explored and compared in a sub-group analysis with pooled data of studies that settled early intervention as more than 24 h. This paper will not provide evidence strong enough to change the clinical practice, but in case the hypothesis is verified, it will invite to re-consider the timing of early cholecystectomy and might promote future clinical research focusing on an accurate definition of timing for early cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

Sections du résumé

Background
Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been adopted as the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis due to a shorter hospital length of stay and no increased morbidity when compared to delayed cholecystectomy. However, randomised studies and meta-analysis report a wide array of timings of early cholecystectomy, most of them set at 72 h following admission. Setting early cholecystectomy at 72 h or even later may influence analysis due to a shift towards a more balanced comparison. At this time, the rate of resolving acute cholecystitis and the rate of ongoing acute process because of failed conservative treatment could be not so different when compared to those operated with a delayed timing of 6-12 weeks. As a result, randomised comparison with such timing for early cholecystectomy and meta-analysis including such studies may have missed a possible advantage of an early cholecystectomy performed within 24 h of the admission, when conservative treatment failure has less potential effects on morbidity. This review will explore pooled data focused on randomised studies with a set timing of early cholecystectomy as a maximum of 24 h following admission, with the aim of verifying the hypothesis that cholecystectomy within 24 h may report a lower post-operative complication rate compared to a delayed intervention.
Methods
A systematic review of the literature will identify randomised clinical studies that compared early and delayed cholecystectomy. Pooled data from studies that settled the early intervention within 24 h from admission will be explored and compared in a sub-group analysis with pooled data of studies that settled early intervention as more than 24 h.
Discussion
This paper will not provide evidence strong enough to change the clinical practice, but in case the hypothesis is verified, it will invite to re-consider the timing of early cholecystectomy and might promote future clinical research focusing on an accurate definition of timing for early cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31911813
doi: 10.1186/s13017-019-0285-7
pii: 285
pmc: PMC6942279
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s). 2020.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Competing interestsThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Références

Control Clin Trials. 1986 Sep;7(3):177-88
pubmed: 3802833
Stat Med. 1987 Apr-May;6(3):341-50
pubmed: 3616287
Am J Surg. 2008 Jan;195(1):40-7
pubmed: 18070735
Stat Med. 2001 Feb 28;20(4):641-54
pubmed: 11223905
Br J Surg. 1998 Jun;85(6):764-7
pubmed: 9667702
BMJ. 1997 Sep 13;315(7109):629-34
pubmed: 9310563
Br J Surg. 2015 Oct;102(11):1302-13
pubmed: 26265548
Am J Gastroenterol. 2004 Jan;99(1):147-55
pubmed: 14687156
Br J Surg. 2009 Sep;96(9):1031-40
pubmed: 19672930
Minim Invasive Surg. 2014;2014:162643
pubmed: 25197568
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Jun;95(23):e3835
pubmed: 27281088
ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:274516
pubmed: 25133217
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58
pubmed: 12111919
J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 May;19(5):848-57
pubmed: 25749854
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2019 Aug;25(5):440-446
pubmed: 31475320
BMJ. 2009 Jul 21;339:b2700
pubmed: 19622552
Surg Endosc. 2018 Dec;32(12):4728-4741
pubmed: 30167953
J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2018 Jan;25(1):55-72
pubmed: 29045062
HPB (Oxford). 2015 Oct;17(10):857-62
pubmed: 26218858
World J Emerg Surg. 2016 Jun 14;11:25
pubmed: 27307785
Surg Endosc. 2004 Sep;18(9):1323-7
pubmed: 15803229
Am Surg. 2000 Sep;66(9):896-900
pubmed: 10993625
Ann Surg. 1998 Apr;227(4):461-7
pubmed: 9563529
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 30;(6):CD005440
pubmed: 23813477
J Gastrointest Surg. 2003 Jul-Aug;7(5):642-5
pubmed: 12850677
Ann Surg. 2013 Sep;258(3):385-93
pubmed: 24022431
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60
pubmed: 12958120

Auteurs

Giuseppe Borzellino (G)

1Department of General Surgery, University Hospital of Verona Italy, Piazzale A. STEFANI 1, 37128 Verona, Italy.

Safi Khuri (S)

2Department of General Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.

Michele Pisano (M)

1st Surgical Unit, Department of Emergency, Papa Giovanni Hospital XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.

Subhi Mansour (S)

2Department of General Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.

Niccolò Allievi (N)

1st Surgical Unit, Department of Emergency, Papa Giovanni Hospital XXIII, Bergamo, Italy.

Luca Ansaloni (L)

4Department of Emergency and Trauma Surgery, Bufalini Hospital, Cesena, Italy.

Yoram Kluger (Y)

2Department of General Surgery, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH