Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy after a quarter century: why do we still convert?

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the gold standard procedure for gallbladder removal. However, conversion to open surgery is sometimes needed. The factors underlying a surgeon’s decision to convert a laparoscopic case to an open case are complex and poorly understood. With decreasing experience in open cholecystectomy, this procedure is however no longer the “safe” alternative it once was. With such an impending paradigm shift, this study aimed to identify the main reasons for conversion and ultimately to develop guidelines to help reduce the conversion rates.

Methods

Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database and financial records, the authors retrospectively reviewed 1,193 cholecystectomies performed at their institution from 2002 to 2009 and identified 70 conversions. Two independent surgeons reviewed the operative notes and determined the reasons for conversion. The number of ports at the time and the extent of dissection before conversion were assessed and used to create new conversion categories. Hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-day complications, operative times and charges, and hospital charges were compared between the new groups.

Results

In 91% of conversion cases, the conversion was elective. In 49% of these conversions, the number of ports was fewer than four. According to the new conversion categories, most conversions were performed after minimal or no attempt at dissection. There were no differences in LOS, complications, operating room charges, or hospital charges between categories. Of the six emergent conversions (9%), bleeding and concern about common bile duct (CBD) injury were the main reasons. One CBD injury occurred.

Conclusions

In 49% of the cases, conversion was performed without a genuine attempt at laparoscopic dissection. Considering this new insight into the circumstances of conversion, the authors recommend that surgeons make a genuine effort at a laparoscopic approach, as reflected by placing four ports and trying to elevate the gallbladder before converting a case to an open approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Begos DG, Modlin IM (1994) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: from gimmick to gold standard. J Clin Gastroenterol 19:325–330

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sain AH (1996) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the current “gold standard” for the treatment of gallstone disease. Ann Surg 224:689–690

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Livingston EH, Rege RV (2004) A nationwide study of conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 188:205–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kaafarani HM, Smith TS, Neumayer L, Berger DH, Depalma RG, Itani KM (2010) Trends, outcomes, and predictors of open and conversion to open cholecystectomy in Veterans Health Administration hospitals. Am J Surg 200:32–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lichten JB, Reid JJ, Zahalsky MP, Friedman RL (2001) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the new millennium. Surg Endosc 15:867–872

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Low SW, Iyer SG, Chang SK, Mak KS, Lee VT, Madhavan K (2009) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: safe implementation of successful strategies to reduce conversion rates. Surg Endosc 23:2424–2429

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tang B, Cuschieri A (2006) Conversions during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: risk factors and effects on patient outcome. J Gastrointest Surg 10:1081–1091

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ballal M, David G, Willmott S, Corless DJ, Deakin M, Slavin JP (2009) Conversion after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in England. Surg Endosc 23:2338–2344

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wolf AS, Nijsse BA, Sokal SM, Chang Y, Berger DL (2009) Surgical outcomes of open cholecystectomy in the laparoscopic era. Am J Surg 197:781–784

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wiseman JT, Sharuk MN, Singla A, Cahan M, Litwin DE, Tseng JF, Shah SA (2011) Surgical management of acute cholecystitis at a tertiary care center in the modern era. Arch Surg 145:439–444

    Google Scholar 

  11. Harboe KM, Bardram L (2011) The quality of cholecystectomy in Denmark: outcome and risk factors for 20,307 patients from the national database. Surg Endosc 25:1630–1641

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lengyel B, Panizales MT, Steinberg J, Ashley SW, Tavakkolizadeh A (2011) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: what is the price of conversion? Surgery (in press)

  13. Low A, Decker D, Kania U, Hirner A (1997) Forensic aspects of complicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Chirurg 68:395–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang WJ, Li JM, Wu GZ, Luo KL, Dong ZT (2008) Risk factors affecting conversion in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ANZ J Surg 78:973–976

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Jenkins PJ, Paterson HM, Parks RW, Garden OJ (2007) Open cholecystectomy in the laparoscopic era. Br J Surg 94:1382–1385

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Johansson M, Thune A, Nelvin L, Stiernstam M, Westman B, Lundell L (2005) Randomized clinical trial of open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 92:44–49

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Alponat A, Kum CK, Koh BC, Rajnakova A, Goh PM (1997) Predictive factors for conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg 21:629–633

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lo CM, Fan ST, Liu CL, Lai EC, Wong J (1997) Early decision for conversion of laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Am J Surg 173:513–517

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chung RS, Ahmed N (2010) The impact of minimally invasive surgery on residents’ open operative experience: analysis of two decades of national data. Ann Surg 251:205–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chung R, Pham Q, Wojtasik L, Chari V, Chen P (2003) The laparoscopic experience of surgical graduates in the United States. Surg Endosc 17:1792–1795

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Schulman CI, Levi J, Sleeman D, Dunkin B, Irvin G, Levi D, Spector S, Franceschi D, Livingstone A (2007) Are we training our residents to perform open gallbladder and common bile duct operations? J Surg Res 142:246–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

Balazs Lengyel was supported by NIH grant R25 CA089017.

Disclosures

A. Tavakkolizadeh has been a consultant for GlaxoSmith Klein and Novartis Pharmaceutical, as well as for Ethicon Inc. He is on the scientific advisory board of Avaxia Biologics, Inc. B. Lengyel, D. Azagury, O. Varban, T. Panizales, J. Steinberg, D. Brooks, and S. Ashley have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Balazs I. Lengyel, Dan Azagury, Oliver Varban, Maria T. Panizales, Jill Steinberg, David C. Brooks, Stanley W. Ashley & Ali Tavakkolizadeh

  2. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Balazs I. Lengyel

Authors
  1. Balazs I. Lengyel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dan Azagury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oliver Varban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria T. Panizales
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jill Steinberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. David C. Brooks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Stanley W. Ashley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Ali Tavakkolizadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ali Tavakkolizadeh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lengyel, B.I., Azagury, D., Varban, O. et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy after a quarter century: why do we still convert?. Surg Endosc 26, 508–513 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1909-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1909-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation