Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Percutaneous Cholecystostomy Versus Conservative Treatment for Acute Cholecystitis: a Cohort Study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Aims and scope

Abstract

Background

Percutaneous cholecystostomy is frequently used as a treatment option for acute calculous cholecystitis in patients unfit for surgery. There is sparse evidence on the long-term impact of cholecystostomy on gallstone-related morbidity and mortality in patients with acute calculous cholecystitis. This study describes the long-term outcome of acute calculous cholecystitis following percutaneous cholecystostomy compared to conservative treatment.

Methods

This was a cohort study of patients admitted at our institution from 2006 to 2015 with acute calculous cholecystitis without early or delayed cholecystectomy. Endpoints were gallstone-related readmissions, recurrent cholecystitis, and overall mortality.

Results

The investigation included 201 patients of whom 97 (48.2%) underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy. Patients in the cholecystostomy group had significantly higher age, comorbidity level, and inflammatory response at admission. The median duration of catheter placement in the cholecystostomy group was 6 days. The complication rate of cholecystostomy was 3.1% and the mortality during the index admission was 3.5%. The median follow-up was 1.6 years. The rate of gallstone-related readmissions was 38.6%, and 25.3% had recurrence of cholecystitis. Cox regression analyses revealed no significant differences in gallstone-related readmissions, recurrence of acute calculous cholecystitis, and overall mortality in the two groups.

Conclusions

Percutaneous cholecystostomy in the treatment of acute calculous cholecystitis was neither associated with long-term benefits nor complications. Based on the high gallstone-related readmission rates of this study population and todays perioperative improvements, we suggest rethinking the indications for non-operative management including percutaneous cholecystostomy in acute calculous cholecystitis.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Okamoto K, Suzuki K, Takada T, et al. Tokyo Guidelines 2018 flowchart for the management of acute cholecystitis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.516.

  2. Itoi T, Tsuyuguchi T, Takada T, et al. TG13 indications and techniques for biliary drainage in acute cholangitis (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2013; 20: 71–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yamashita Y, Takada T, Kawarada Y, et al. Surgical treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis: Tokyo guidelines. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2007; 14: 91–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Atar E, Bachar GN, Berlin S, et al. Percutaneous cholecystostomy in critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis: Complications and late outcome. Clin Radiol 2014; 69: e247–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Horn T, Christensen SD, Kirkegård J, Larsen LP, Knudsen AR, Mortensen F V. Percutaneous cholecystostomy is an effective treatment option for acute calculous cholecystitis: A 10-year experience. HPB (Oxford) 2015; 17: 326–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Zerem E, Omerović S. Can percutaneous cholecystostomy be a definitive management for acute cholecystitis in high-risk patients?. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutaneous Tech 2014; 24: 187–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Granlund A, Karlson BM, Elvin A, Rasmussen I. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous cholecystostomy in high-risk surgical patients. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 2001; 386: 212–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sanjay P, Mittapalli D, Marioud A, White RD, Ram R, Alijani A. Clinical outcomes of a percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis: A multicentre analysis. Hpb 2013; 15: 511–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith TJ, Manske JG, Mathiason MA, Kallies KJ, Kothari SN. Changing trends and outcomes in the use of percutaneous cholecystostomy tubes for acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 2013; 257: 1112–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hatzidakis AA, Prassopoulos P, Petinarakis I, et al. Acute cholecystitis in high-risk patients: Percutaneous cholecystostomy vs conservative treatment. Eur Radiol 2002; 12: 1778–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yokoe M, Takada T, Strasberg SM, et al. TG13 diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholecystitis (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2013; 20: 35–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mazeh H, Mizrahi I, Dior U, et al. Role of antibiotic therapy in mild acute calculus cholecystitis: A prospective randomized controlled trial. World J Surg 2012;36:1750–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. STROBE statement - Checklist of items that should be included in reports of observational studies (STROBE Initiative). Int J Public Health 2008; 53: 3–4.

  14. Boland GW, Lee MJ, Leung J, Mueller PR. Percutaneous cholecystostomy in critically ill patients: Early response and final outcome in 82 patients. Am J Roentgenol 1994; 163: 339–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. van Overhagen H, Meyers H, Tilanus HW, Jeekel J, Laméris JS. Percutaneous cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis and an increased surgical risk. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 1996; 19: 72–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Winbladh A, Gullstrand P, Svanvik J, Sandström P. Systematic review of cholecystostomy as a treatment option in acute cholecystitis. HPB (Oxford) 2009; 11: 183–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ambe PC, Kaptanis S, Papadakis M, Weber SA, Jansen S, Zirngibl H. The treatment of critically Ill patients with acute cholecystitis. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2016; 113: 545–51.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Loozen CS, Van Ramshorst B, Van Santvoort HC, Boerma D. Early cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis in the elderly population: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig. Surg 2017; 34: 371–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kortram K, van Ramshorst B, Bollen TL, et al. Acute cholecystitis in high risk surgical patients: percutaneous cholecystostomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CHOCOLATE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2012; 13: 7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Paajanen H. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy or conservative treatment in the acute cholecystitis of the elderly patients. November 25, 2016. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02972944?term=paajanen&rank=7. Accessed September 07, 2018

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Digestive Disease Center, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Bispebjerg Bakke 23, DK-2400, Copenhagen, NV, Denmark

    Stine Ydegaard Turiño, Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh, Nethe Malik Eichen, Stine Lundgaard Jørgensen, Lars Tue Sørensen & Lars Nannestad Jørgensen

Authors
  1. Stine Ydegaard Turiño
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nethe Malik Eichen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stine Lundgaard Jørgensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lars Tue Sørensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Lars Nannestad Jørgensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Stine Ydegaard Turiño, Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh, Lars Tue Sørensen, Lars Nannestad Jørgensen: Conception or design of the work.

Stine Ydegaard Turiño, Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh, Nethe Malik Eichen, Stine Lundgaard Jørgensen: Acquisition, analysis of the work.

Stine Ydegaard Turiño, Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh, Lars Nannestad Jørgensen: Interpretation of data for the work.

Stine Ydegaard Turiño, Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh, Nethe Malik Eichen, Stine Lundgaard Jørgensen, Lars Tue Sørensen, Lars Nannestad Jørgensen: Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.

Stine Ydegaard Turiño, Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh, Nethe Malik Eichen, Stine Lundgaard Jørgensen, Lars Tue Sørensen, Lars Nannestad Jørgensen: Final approval of the version to be published.

Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved: Stine Ydegaard Turiño, Daniel Mønsted Shabanzadeh, Nethe Malik Eichen, Stine Lundgaard Jørgensen, Lars Tue Sørensen, Lars Nannestad Jørgensen.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stine Ydegaard Turiño.

Additional information

This study was delivered as an oral presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Danish Surgical Society, 10 November 2017, Copenhagen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Turiño, S.Y., Shabanzadeh, D.M., Eichen, N.M. et al. Percutaneous Cholecystostomy Versus Conservative Treatment for Acute Cholecystitis: a Cohort Study. J Gastrointest Surg 23, 297–303 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-4021-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-4021-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation