HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association · 2022
Systematic review and meta-analysis of early vs late interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kourounis Georgios, Rooke Zoë C, McGuigan Mark, Georgiades Fanourios
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: High risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis are commonly treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PTC) drainage. The optimal timing of subsequent interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains unclear.
METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched to identify studies published between 01/01/2000 and 31/12/2020, reporting on interval LC outcomes in patients initially treated by PTC. Early and late interval LC were defined as <30 and ≥ 30 days respectively. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used for quality assessment. Meta-analysis of proportions was conducted using a random-effects model.
RESULTS: A total of 512 studies were screened, 41 met the inclusion criteria. There were 22 studies in both early and late interval LC groups, with 3 included studies reporting both early and late groups. Following quality assessment, 29 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between early and late interval LC in terms of conversion rates (7.2% vs 8.3%, p = 0.854), 90-day morbidity (12.8% vs 15.9%, p = 0.496), and 90-day mortality (0.25% vs 0.32%, p = 0.704). Heterogeneity was significant (I2>50%) in all groups.
CONCLUSION: Current evidence of interval LC within or beyond 30 days demonstrates no significant impact on outcomes. Patient factors, clinical experience, and hospital facilities may prove more important predictors.
METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched to identify studies published between 01/01/2000 and 31/12/2020, reporting on interval LC outcomes in patients initially treated by PTC. Early and late interval LC were defined as <30 and ≥ 30 days respectively. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used for quality assessment. Meta-analysis of proportions was conducted using a random-effects model.
RESULTS: A total of 512 studies were screened, 41 met the inclusion criteria. There were 22 studies in both early and late interval LC groups, with 3 included studies reporting both early and late groups. Following quality assessment, 29 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between early and late interval LC in terms of conversion rates (7.2% vs 8.3%, p = 0.854), 90-day morbidity (12.8% vs 15.9%, p = 0.496), and 90-day mortality (0.25% vs 0.32%, p = 0.704). Heterogeneity was significant (I2>50%) in all groups.
CONCLUSION: Current evidence of interval LC within or beyond 30 days demonstrates no significant impact on outcomes. Patient factors, clinical experience, and hospital facilities may prove more important predictors.