American journal of surgery · 2020
Early versus delayed cholecystectomy for cholecystitis at high risk of operative difficulties: A propensity score-matching analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Bourgouin Stéphane, Monchal Tristan, Julien Clément, d'Argouges Florent, Balandraud Paul
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have demonstrated the superiority of early (EC) over delayed (DC) cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis (AC). However, none have assessed the effect of operative difficulty when reporting on treatment outcomes.
METHODS: Outcomes of patients who underwent EC or DC between 2010 and 2019 were compared taking into account the operative difficulty evaluated by the Difficult Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy score (DiLC). For each patient, the DiLC score was retrospectively calculated and corresponded to the foreseeable operative difficulty measured on admission for AC. A propensity score was used to account for confounders. Primary endpoints were the length of stay (LOS) and the occurrence of a serious operative/post-operative event (SOE).
RESULTS: DC in patients with DiLC≥10 reduced the risk of SOE without increasing the LOS. Conversely, DC in patients with DiLC<10 increased the LOS without improving outcomes. Multivariate analysis found EC in patients with DiLC≥10 as the main independent predictor of SOE.
CONCLUSIONS: Provided prospective validation, DC for AC in patients with DiLC≥10 seems safer than EC and is not hospital-stay consuming.
METHODS: Outcomes of patients who underwent EC or DC between 2010 and 2019 were compared taking into account the operative difficulty evaluated by the Difficult Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy score (DiLC). For each patient, the DiLC score was retrospectively calculated and corresponded to the foreseeable operative difficulty measured on admission for AC. A propensity score was used to account for confounders. Primary endpoints were the length of stay (LOS) and the occurrence of a serious operative/post-operative event (SOE).
RESULTS: DC in patients with DiLC≥10 reduced the risk of SOE without increasing the LOS. Conversely, DC in patients with DiLC<10 increased the LOS without improving outcomes. Multivariate analysis found EC in patients with DiLC≥10 as the main independent predictor of SOE.
CONCLUSIONS: Provided prospective validation, DC for AC in patients with DiLC≥10 seems safer than EC and is not hospital-stay consuming.