Journal Article10.1016/J.AMJSURG.2004.06.013
A nationwide study of conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy.
406
TL;DR: Three quarters of all cholecystectomies are performed laparoscopic, and the national conversion rate is 5% to 10%.
read more
Abstract: Purpose To determine the national incidence and risk factors for conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy. Background Most series reporting the rates at which laparoscopic cholecystectomies are performed, relative to the open procedure, have come from centers specializing in laparoscopic surgery. The rates at which conversions occur from these centers may not reflect those in community practice. We sought to determine the actual, and therefore acceptable, conversion rate by examining nationally representative discharge data. Methods The National Hospital Discharge database for 1998 to 2001 was acquired from the Centers for Disease Control. All gallbladder disease related admissions were extracted, and the cholecystectomies (ICD-9-CM codes 51.2X) were analyzed using the SAS package. Stepwise logistic regression was used to determine what factors were associated with the risk of conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy. Results Approximately 25% of all cholecystectomies are performed by the open technique. Of the remaining 75%, there is an approximately 5% to 10% conversion rate. The major risk factors for conversion included male sex, obesity, and cholecystitis. Concurrent choledocholithiasis, cholelithiasis, and cholecystitis were associated with a conversion rate of 25%. Length of stay (LOS) was reduced for laparoscopic operations and although conversion added 2 to 3 days to the LOS, for most cases the LOS was still less than for primary open operations. Conclusions Three quarters of all cholecystectomies are performed laparoscopically, and the national conversion rate is 5% to 10%. Cholecystitis, choledocholithiasis, male sex, and obesity are major predictors for conversion. The data presented in terms of conversion rates and LOS were derived from population-adjusted hospital discharge data and represent the current U.S. experience for cholecystectomy. From these data the community experience for conversion rates, risk factors, and LOS can be derived.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
Acute cholecystitis: early versus delayed cholecystectomy, a multicenter randomized trial (ACDC study, NCT00447304).
Carsten N. Gutt,Jens Encke,Jörg Köninger,Julian-Camill Harnoss,Kilian Weigand,Karl Kipfmüller,Oliver Schunter,Thorsten O Götze,Markus Golling,Markus Menges,Ernst Klar,Katharina Feilhauer,Wolfram G. Zoller,Karsten Ridwelski,Sven Ackmann,Alexandra Baron,Michael R. Schön,Helmut K. Seitz,Dietmar Daniel,Wolfgang Stremmel,Markus W. Büchler +20 more
TL;DR: In this large, randomized trial, laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 24 hours of hospital admission was shown to be superior to the conservative approach concerning morbidity and costs, and it is believed that immediate lapar surgical surgery should become therapy of choice for acute choleCystitis in operable patients.
431
Meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials on the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis
Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy,Kumarakrishnan Samraj,Christian Gluud,Edward C. F. Wilson,Brian R. Davidson +4 more
TL;DR: In many countries laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute choleCystitis is mainly performed after the acute episode has settled because of the anticipated increased risk of morbidity and higher conversion rate from Laparoscopic to open chole cystectomy.
408
Open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis. Systematic review and meta-analysis
Federico Coccolini,Fausto Catena,Michele Pisano,Federico Gheza,Stefano Fagiuoli,Salomone Di Saverio,Gioacchino Leandro,Giulia Montori,Marco Ceresoli,Davide Corbella,Massimo Sartelli,Michael Sugrue,Luca Ansaloni +12 more
TL;DR: In acute cholecystitis, post-operative morbidity, mortality and hospital stay were reduced by laparoscopic choleCystectomy, and pneumonia and wound infection rate were reduction by LC.
389
Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for people with acute cholecystitis
TL;DR: A systematic review of all randomised clinical trials comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in participants with acute choleCystitis to compare benefits and harms and found no significant difference between the two groups.
319
Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.
TL;DR: Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy during acute choleCystitis seems safe and shortens the total hospital stay, and the majority of the outcomes occurred rarely; hence, the confidence intervals are wide.
272
References
•Journal Article
Laparoscopic versus open treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis.
TL;DR: The degree of inflammation and its response to conservative treatment, which are determined on the basis of leukocytosis and clinical improvement, are clear indications of the chance of successful delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy within the first week.
53
Treatment of acute cholecystitis. A comparison of open vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
TL;DR: A comparison analysis of the results and cost-effectiveness of the surgical treatment of acute cholecystitis clearly pointed to the advantages of laparoscopic over open choleCystectomy —i.e., better clinical outcome and a more rapid resumption of daily activities.
52
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis.
TL;DR: Laroscopic cholecystectomy for acute choleCystitis can be applied safely to all comers, offering the advantage of a shortened hospital stay, and pericholecystic collection, as observed on ultrasound, is associated with a high risk of conversion to open chole cystectomy.
47
Increased laparoscopic experience does not lead to improved results with acute cholecystitis
Jeffrey S. Bender,Jeffrey S. Bender,Mark D. Duncan,Paul D. Freeswick,John W. Harmon,Thomas H. Magnuson +5 more
TL;DR: In this article, the authors reviewed their experience over a 7 and a half year period and found that there was a trend toward improved results with group II versus group I in mortality (3% versus 4%) and morbidity (14% versus 21%).
33