Yıl: 2016 Cilt: 32 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 185 - 190 Metin Dili: İngilizce İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies"

Öz:
Objective: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the ''gold standard'' for benign gallbladder diseases due to its advantages. In the presence of inflammation or fibrosis, the risk of bleeding and bile duct injury is increased during dissection. Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy (LPC) is a feasible and safe method to prevent bile duct injuries and decrease the conversion (to open cholecystectomy) rates in difficult cholecystectomies where anatomical structures could not be demonstrated clearly. Material and Methods: The feasibility, efficiency, and safety of LPC were investigated. The data of 80 patients with cholelithiasis who underwent LPC (n=40) and conversion cholecystectomy (CC) (n=40) were retrospectively examined. Demographic characteristics, ASA scores, operating time, drain usage, requirement for intensive care, postoperative length of hospital stay, surgical site infection, antibiotic requirement and complication rates were compared. Results: The median ASA value was 1 in the CC group and 2 in the LPC group. Mean operation time was 123 minutes in the CC group, and 87.50 minutes in the LPC group. Surgical drains were used in 16 CC patients and 4 LPC patients. There was no significant difference between groups in postoperative length of intensive care unit stay (p=0.241). When surgical site infections were compared, the difference was at the limit of statistical significance (p=0.055). Early complication rates were not different (p=0.608) but none of the patients in the LPC group suffered from late complications. Conclusion: LPC is an efficient and safe way to decrease the conversion rate. LPC seems to be an alternative procedure to CC with advantages of shorter operating time, lower rates of surgical site infection, shorter postoperative hospitalization and fewer complications in high-risk patients.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Cerrahi
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Tian Y, Wu SD, Su Y, Kong J, Yu H, Fan Y La. Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy as an alternative procedure designed to pre- vent bile duct injury: Experience of a hospital in Northern China. Surg Today 2009; 39: 510-513. [CrossRef]
  • Jatzko GR, Lisborg PH, Perti AM, Stettner HM. Multivariate com- parison of complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy and open cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 1995; 221: 381-386. [CrossRef]
  • Velpen V, Shimi SM, Cuschieri A. Outcome after cholecystecto- my for symptomatic gallstone disease and effect of surgical ac- cess: laparoscopic vs open approach. Gut 1993; 34: 1448-1451. [CrossRef]
  • Cleary R, Venables CW, Watson J, Goodfellow J, Wright PD. Com- parison of short term outcomes of open and laparoscopic chole- cystectomy. Qual Health Care 1995; 4: 13-17. [CrossRef]
  • Philips JAE, Lawes DA, Cook AJ, Arulampalam TH, Zaborsky A, Menzies D, et al. The use of laparoscopic subtotal cholecystec- tomy for complicated cholelithiasis. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 1697- 1700. [CrossRef]
  • Ersöz F, Arıkan S, Bektaş H, Özcan Ö, Sarı S. Zor laparoskopik kolesistektomi ameliyatlarında laparoskopik subtotal kolesistek- tominin yeri. Ulus Cerrahi Derg 2009; 25: 105-108.
  • Ji W, Li LT, Li JS. Role of laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy in treatment of complicated cholecystitis. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2006; 5: 584-589.
  • Katsohis C, Prousalidis J, Tzardinoglu E, Michalopoulos A, Fahan- didis E, Apostolidis S, et al. Subtotal cholecystectomy. HPB Sur- gery 1996; 9: 133-136. [CrossRef]
  • Beldi G, Glattli A. Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy for se- vere cholecystitis. Surg Endosc 2003; 17: 1437-1439. [CrossRef]
  • Horiuchi A, Watanabe Y, Doi T, Sato K, Yukumi S, Yoshida M, et al. Delayed laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy in acute cho- lecystitis with severe fibrotic adhesions. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 2720-2723. [CrossRef]
  • Li C, Si-feng T, Yuan X, Fu F, Shu-you P. Patients' quality of life af- ter laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2005; 6: 678-681.
  • Kuwabara K, Matsuda S, Ishikawa KB, Horiguchi H, Fujimori K. Comparative quality of laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy in the elderly using propensity score matching analysis. Gastro- enterol Res Pract 2010; 2010: 490147. [CrossRef]
  • Neri V, Ambrosi A, Lauro GD, Fersini A, Valentino TP. Difficult cho- lecystectomies: Validity of laparoscopic approach. JSLS 2003; 7: 329-333.
  • Reynolds W Jr. The first laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JSLS 2001; 5: 89-94.
  • Richards C, Edwards J, Culver D, Emori G, Tolson J, Gaynes R. Does using a laparoscopic approach to cholecystectomy decrease the risk of surgical site infection? Ann Surg 2003; 237: 358-362. [CrossRef]
  • Amaral PC, Azaro Filho EM, Galvão-Neto MP, Fortes MF, Souza EL, Alcântra RS, et al. Acute cholecystitis: video-laparoscopic versus traditional treatment. JSLS 2001; 5: 159-165.
  • Hussain A. Difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Current evi- dence and strategies of management. Surg Laparosc Endosc Per- cutan Tech 2011; 21: 211-217. [CrossRef]
  • Kırk RM. Genel Cerrahi Ameliyatları. In: Laparoskopik safra cerra- hisi. 5. Baskı. Adana: 2008. 304-316.
  • Sakpal SV, Bindra SS, Chamberlain RS. Laparoscopic cholecystec- tomy conversion rates two decades later. JSLS 2010; 4: 476-483. [CrossRef]
  • Brune IB, Schönleben K, Orman S. Complications after laparo- scopic and conventional cholecystectomy: A comparative study. HPB Surgery 1994; 8: 19-25. [CrossRef]
  • Yetkin G, Uludag M, Oba S, Citgez B, Paksoy I. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elderly patients. JSLS 2009; 13: 587-591. [CrossRef]
  • Chau CH, Tang CN, Sui WT, Ha JPY, Li MKW. Laparoscopic cho- lecystectomy versus open cholecystectomy in elderly patients with acute cholecystitis. Hong Kong Med J 2002; 8: 394-399.
  • Mayol J, Martinez-Sarmiento J, Tamayo FJ, Fernández-Represa JA. Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the ageing patient. Age Ageing 1997; 26: 77-81. [CrossRef]
  • Weber DM. Laparoscopic surgery. An excellent approach in el- derly patients. Arch Surg 2003; 138: 1083-1088. [CrossRef]
  • Bingener J, Richards ML, Schwesinger WH, Strodel WE, Sirinek KR. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for elderly patients. Gold Stan- dard for golden years? Arch Surg 2003; 138: 531-536. [CrossRef]
  • Gholipour C, Fakhree MBA, Shalchi RA, Abbasi M. Prediction of conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open sur- gery with artificial neural networks. BMC Surgery 2009; 9: 1-6. [CrossRef]
  • Genc V, Sulaimanov M, Cipe G, Basceken SI, Erverdi N, Gürel M, et al. What necessitates the conversion to open cholecystectomy? A retrospective analysis of 5164 consecutive laparoscopic opera- tions. CLINICS 2011; 66: 417-420. [CrossRef]
  • Shapiro AJ, Costello C, Harkabus M, North Jr JH. Predicting con- version of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. JSLS 1999; 3: 127-130.
  • Yol S, Kartal A, Vatansev C, Aksoy F, Toy H. Sex as a factor in con- version from laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery. JSLS 2006; 10: 359-363.
  • Brandon JC, Velez MA, Teplick SK, Mueller PR, Rattner DW, Broad- water JR, et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Evolution, early results and impact on nonsurgical gallstone therapies. AJR 1991; 157: 235-239. [CrossRef]
  • Al-Mulhim AA. Male gender is not a risk factor for the outcome of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A single surgeon experience. Saudi J Gastroenterol 2008; 14: 73-79. [CrossRef]
  • Wittgen CM, Andrus JP, Andrus CH, Kaminski DL. Cholecystec- tomy. Which procedure is best for the high-risk patient? Surg En- dosc 1993; 7: 395-399. [CrossRef]
  • Frazee RC, Roberts JW, Okeson GC, Symmonds RE, Snyder SK, Hendricks JC, et al. Open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A comparison of postoperative pulmonary function. Ann Surg 1991; 213: 651-653. [CrossRef]
  • Mimica Z, Biocic M, Bacic A, Banovic I, Tocilj J, Radonic V, et al. Laparoscopic and laparotomic cholecystectomy: A randomized trial comparing postoperative respiratory function. Respiration 2000; 67: 153-158. [CrossRef]
  • Koivusalo AM, Pere P, Valjus M, Scheinin T. Laparoscopic cholecys- tectomy with carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum is safe even for high-risk patients. Surg Endosc 2008; 22: 61-67. [CrossRef]
  • Luo K, Li JS, Li LT, Wang KH, Shun JM. Operative stress response and energy metabolism after laparoscopic cholecystectomy compared to open surgery. World J Gastroenterol 2003; 9: 847- 850. [CrossRef]
  • Tzovaras G, Liakou P, Fafoulakis F, Baloyiannis I, Zacharoulis D, Hatzitheofilou C. Is there a role for drain use in elective laparo- scopic cholecystectomy? A controlled randomized trial. Am J Surg 2009; 197: 759-763. [CrossRef]
  • Monson JR, Guillou PJ, Keane FB, Tanner WA, Brennan TG. Chole- cystectomy is safer without drainage: the results of a prospective randomized clinical trial. Surgery 1991; 109: 740-746.
  • Lewis RT, Goodall RG, Marien B, Park M, Lloyd-Smith W, Wiegand FM. Simple elective cholecystectomy: to drain or not. Am J Surg 1990; 159: 241-245. [CrossRef]
  • Gurusamy KS, Samraj K, Mullerat P, Davidson BR. Routine abdomi- nal drainage for uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Review). The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2009.
  • Sanabria A, Dominguez LC, Valdivieso E, Gomez G. Antibiotic prophylaxis for patients undergoing elective laparoscopic chole- cystectomy (Review). The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2010.
  • Lim KR, İbrahim S, Tan NC, Lim SH, Tay KH. Risk factors for con- version to open surgery in patients with acute cholecystitis un- dergoing interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2007; 36: 631-635.
  • Lujan JA, Parilla P, Robles R, Marin P, Torralba JA, Ayllon JG. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy vs open cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis. Arch Surg 1998; 133: 173-175. [CrossRef]
  • Keus F, Gooszen HG, Van Laarhoven CJHM. Open, small incision, or laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with symptom- atic cholecystolithiasis. An overview of cochrane hepato-biliary group reviews. The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2010. [CrossRef]
  • Ivatury SJ, Louden CL, Schwesinger WH. Contributing factors to postoperative length of stay in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JSLS 2011; 15: 174-178. [CrossRef]
  • Attwood SEA, Mealy K, Hill ADK, Stephens RB. A prospective com- parison of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 1992; 74: 397-400.
  • Keus F, De Jong J, Gooszen HG, Laarhoven CJHM. Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis (Review). The Cochrane Collaboration. Pub- lished by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2009.
  • Henneman D, da Costa DW, Vrouenraets BC, van Wagensveld BA, Lagarde SM. Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy for the diffi- cult gallbladder: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 2013; 27: 351- 358. [CrossRef]
  • Kaplan D, Inaba K, Chouliaras K, Low GM, Benjamin E, Grabo D, et al. Subtotal cholecystectomy and open total cholecystectomy: alternatives in complicated cholecystitis. Am Surg 2014; 80: 953- 955.
APA KULEN F, TİHAN D, DUMAN U, Bayam E, ZAİM G (2016). Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". , 185 - 190.
Chicago KULEN Fatih,TİHAN Deniz,DUMAN Uğur,Bayam Emrah,ZAİM Gökhan Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". (2016): 185 - 190.
MLA KULEN Fatih,TİHAN Deniz,DUMAN Uğur,Bayam Emrah,ZAİM Gökhan Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". , 2016, ss.185 - 190.
AMA KULEN F,TİHAN D,DUMAN U,Bayam E,ZAİM G Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". . 2016; 185 - 190.
Vancouver KULEN F,TİHAN D,DUMAN U,Bayam E,ZAİM G Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". . 2016; 185 - 190.
IEEE KULEN F,TİHAN D,DUMAN U,Bayam E,ZAİM G "Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies"." , ss.185 - 190, 2016.
ISNAD KULEN, Fatih vd. "Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies"". (2016), 185-190.
APA KULEN F, TİHAN D, DUMAN U, Bayam E, ZAİM G (2016). Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi, 32(3), 185 - 190.
Chicago KULEN Fatih,TİHAN Deniz,DUMAN Uğur,Bayam Emrah,ZAİM Gökhan Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi 32, no.3 (2016): 185 - 190.
MLA KULEN Fatih,TİHAN Deniz,DUMAN Uğur,Bayam Emrah,ZAİM Gökhan Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi, vol.32, no.3, 2016, ss.185 - 190.
AMA KULEN F,TİHAN D,DUMAN U,Bayam E,ZAİM G Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi. 2016; 32(3): 185 - 190.
Vancouver KULEN F,TİHAN D,DUMAN U,Bayam E,ZAİM G Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies". Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi. 2016; 32(3): 185 - 190.
IEEE KULEN F,TİHAN D,DUMAN U,Bayam E,ZAİM G "Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies"." Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi, 32, ss.185 - 190, 2016.
ISNAD KULEN, Fatih vd. "Laparoscopic partial cholecystectomy: A safe and effective alternative surgical technique in "difficult cholecystectomies"". Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi 32/3 (2016), 185-190.