1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evidence-based surgery for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is frequently performed for acute cholecystitis and symptomatic cholelithiasis. Considerable variation in the execution of key steps of the operation remains. We conducted a systematic review of evidence regarding best practices for critical intraoperative steps for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

          Methods

          We identified 5 main intraoperative decision points in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: (1) number and position of laparoscopic ports; (2) identification of cystic artery and duct; (3) division of cystic artery and duct; (4) indications for subtotal cholecystectomy; and (5) retrieval of the gallbladder. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were queried for relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews were included for analysis, and evidence quality was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.

          Results

          Fifty-two articles were included. Although all port configurations were comparable from a safety standpoint, fewer ports sometimes resulted in improved cosmesis or decreased pain but longer operative times. The critical view of safety should be obtained for identification of the cystic duct and artery but may be obtained through fundus-first dissection and augmented with cholangiography or ultrasound. Insufficient evidence exists to compare harmonic-shear, clipless ligation against clip ligation of the cystic duct and artery. Stump closure during subtotal cholecystectomy may reduce rates of bile leak and reoperation. Use of retrieval bag for gallbladder extraction results in minimal benefit. Most studies were underpowered to detect differences in incidence of rare complications.

          Conclusion

          Key operative steps of laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be informed by both compiled data and surgeon preference/patient considerations.

          Related collections

          Most cited references77

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Grading strength of recommendations and quality of evidence in clinical guidelines: report from an american college of chest physicians task force.

          While grading the strength of recommendations and the quality of underlying evidence enhances the usefulness of clinical guidelines, the profusion of guideline grading systems undermines the value of the grading exercise. An American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) task force formulated the criteria for a grading system to be utilized in all ACCP guidelines that included simplicity and transparency, explicitness of methodology, and consistency with current methodological approaches to the grading process. The working group examined currently available systems, and ultimately modified an approach formulated by the international GRADE group. The grading scheme classifies recommendations as strong (grade 1) or weak (grade 2), according to the balance among benefits, risks, burdens, and possibly cost, and the degree of confidence in estimates of benefits, risks, and burdens. The system classifies quality of evidence as high (grade A), moderate (grade B), or low (grade C) according to factors that include the study design, the consistency of the results, and the directness of the evidence. For all future ACCP guidelines, The College has adopted a simple, transparent approach to grading recommendations that is consistent with current developments in the field. The trend toward uniformity of approaches to grading will enhance the usefulness of practice guidelines for clinicians.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Epidemiology of Gallbladder Disease: Cholelithiasis and Cancer

            Diseases of the gallbladder are common and costly. The best epidemiological screening method to accurately determine point prevalence of gallstone disease is ultrasonography. Many risk factors for cholesterol gallstone formation are not modifiable such as ethnic background, increasing age, female gender and family history or genetics. Conversely, the modifiable risks for cholesterol gallstones are obesity, rapid weight loss and a sedentary lifestyle. The rising epidemic of obesity and the metabolic syndrome predicts an escalation of cholesterol gallstone frequency. Risk factors for biliary sludge include pregnancy, drugs like ceftiaxone, octreotide and thiazide diuretics, and total parenteral nutrition or fasting. Diseases like cirrhosis, chronic hemolysis and ileal Crohn's disease are risk factors for black pigment stones. Gallstone disease in childhood, once considered rare, has become increasingly recognized with similar risk factors as those in adults, particularly obesity. Gallbladder cancer is uncommon in developed countries. In the U.S., it accounts for only ~ 5,000 cases per year. Elsewhere, high incidence rates occur in North and South American Indians. Other than ethnicity and female gender, additional risk factors for gallbladder cancer include cholelithiasis, advancing age, chronic inflammatory conditions affecting the gallbladder, congenital biliary abnormalities, and diagnostic confusion over gallbladder polyps.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of gallstones.

              (2016)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Surg Open Sci
                Surg Open Sci
                Surgery Open Science
                Elsevier
                2589-8450
                18 August 2022
                October 2022
                18 August 2022
                : 10
                : 116-134
                Affiliations
                [a ]Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
                [b ]University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
                [c ]Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
                [d ]Department of Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA
                [e ]Department of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
                [f ]Lane Medical Library, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author at: 531 Lasuen Mall #19461, Stanford, CA 94305. Tel.: + 1 (925) 354-8844. atfisher@ 123456stanford.edu
                [1]

                Personal twitter: @atfisherMD

                [2]

                Institutional twitter: @stanfordsurgery

                Article
                S2589-8450(22)00053-7
                10.1016/j.sopen.2022.08.003
                9483801
                89175434-454e-42dc-848b-3ec0c950cbfc
                © 2022 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 27 July 2022
                : 15 August 2022
                Categories
                Research Paper

                Comments

                Comment on this article