Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical management of empyematous cholecystitis: a register study of over 12,000 cases from a regional quality control database in Germany

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Acute cholecystitis is a common indication for surgery. Surgical outcomes depend among other factors on the extent of gallbladder inflammation. Data on the outcomes of patients undergoing cholecystectomy due to acute empyematous cholecystitis are rare.

Methods

Data from a prospectively maintained quality control database in Germany were analyzed. Cases with empyematous cholecystitis were compared to cases without gallbladder empyema with regard to baseline features, clinical parameters and surgical outcomes.

Results

A total of 12,069 patients with empyematous cholecystitis (EC) were compared to 33,296 patients without empyema. The male gender, advanced age, ASA score >2, elevated white blood count and fever were confirmed as risk factors for EC. The EC group differed significantly from the control group with regard to fever (28.0 vs. 9.5 %), elevated WBC (82.5 vs. 62.3 %) and positive findings from ultrasound sonography (87.4 vs. 76.9 %), p < 0001. Surgery lasted significantly longer in the EC group (86.1 ± 38.5 vs. 72.2 ± 33.6, p < 0.001). The rates of conversion (15.2 vs. 5.8 %), bile duct injury (0.8 vs. 0.4 %), re-intervention (5.5 vs. 2.6 %) and mortality (2.8 vs. 1.2 %) were significantly higher in the EC group, p < 0.001. Similarly, the length of stay (11.9 ± 10.5 vs. 8.8 ± 8.3, p < 0.001) was significantly longer in the EC group.

Conclusion

Empyematous cholecystitis is a severe form of acute cholecystitis with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Even the experienced laparoscopic surgeon should expect dissection difficulties, therefore the threshold for conversion in order to prevent bile duct injury should be low.

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. Ambe P, Weber SA, Christ H, Wassenberg D (2014) Cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. How time-critical are the so called “golden 72 hours”? Or better “golden 24 hours” and “silver 25–72 hour”? A case control study. World J Emerg Surg 9(1):60

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Ambe PC, Kohler L (2015) Is the male gender an independent risk factor for complication in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis? Int Surg 100(5):854–859

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Kiriyama S, Takada T, Strasberg SM, Solomkin JS, Mayumi T, Pitt HA, Gouma DJ, Garden OJ, Buchler MW, Yokoe M et al (2013) TG13 guidelines for diagnosis and severity grading of acute cholangitis (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 20(1):24–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sekimoto M, Takada T, Kawarada Y, Nimura Y, Yoshida M, Mayumi T, Miura F, Wada K, Hirota M, Yamashita Y et al (2007) Need for criteria for the diagnosis and severity assessment of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 14(1):11–14

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Eldar S, Sabo E, Nash E, Abrahamson J, Matter I (1997) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: prospective trial. World J Surg 21(5):540–545

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gurusamy KS, Davidson C, Gluud C, Davidson BR (2013) Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for people with acute cholecystitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD005440

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gutt CN, Encke J, Koninger J, Harnoss JC, Weigand K, Kipfmuller K, Schunter O, Gotze T, Golling MT, Menges M et al (2013) Acute cholecystitis: early versus delayed cholecystectomy, a multicenter randomized trial (ACDC study, NCT00447304). Ann Surg 258(3):385–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ambe P, Esfahani BJ, Tasci I, Christ H, Kohler L (2011) Is laparoscopic cholecystectomy more challenging in male patients? Surg Endosc 25(7):2236–2240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ambe PC, Weber SA, Christ H, Wassenberg D (2015) Primary cholecystectomy is feasible in elderly patients with acute cholecystitis. Aging Clin Exp Res 27(6):921–926

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Baron TH, Grimm IS, Swanstrom LL (2015) Interventional approaches to gallbladder disease. N Engl J Med 373(4):357–365

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dubecz A, Langer M, Stadlhuber RJ, Schweigert M, Solymosi N, Feith M, Stein HJ (2012) Cholecystectomy in the very elderly—is 90 the new 70? J Gastrointest Surg 16(2):282–285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Morse BC, Smith JB, Lawdahl RB, Roettger RH (2010) Management of acute cholecystitis in critically ill patients: contemporary role for cholecystostomy and subsequent cholecystectomy. Am Surg 76(7):708–712

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ambe PC, Weber SA, Wassenberg D (2015) Is gallbladder inflammation more severe in male patients presenting with acute cholecystitis? BMC Surg 15:48

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Papadakis M, Ambe PC, Zirngibl H (2015) Critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis are at increased risk for extensive gallbladder inflammation. World J Emerg Surg 10:59

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Ambe PC, Papadakis M, Zirngibl H (2016) A proposal for a preoperative clinical scoring system for acute cholecystitis. J Surg Res 200(2):473–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Aydin C, Altaca G, Berber I, Tekin K, Kara M, Titiz I (2006) Prognostic parameters for the prediction of acute gangrenous cholecystitis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 13(2):155–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hunt DR, Chu FC (2000) Gangrenous cholecystitis in the laparoscopic era. Aust N Z J Surg 70(6):428–430

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Merriam LT, Kanaan SA, Dawes LG, Angelos P, Prystowsky JB, Rege RV, Joehl RJ (1999) Gangrenous cholecystitis: analysis of risk factors and experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 126(4):680–685 (discussion 685–686)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Borzellino G, Sauerland S, Minicozzi AM, Verlato G, Di Pietrantonj C, de Manzoni G, Cordiano C (2008) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for severe acute cholecystitis. A meta-analysis of results. Surg Endosc 22(1):8–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kwon YJ, Ahn BK, Park HK, Lee KS, Lee KG (2013) What is the optimal time for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in gallbladder empyema? Surg Endosc 27(10):3776–3780

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Nikfarjam M, Niumsawatt V, Sethu A, Fink MA, Muralidharan V, Starkey G, Jones RM, Christophi C (2011) Outcomes of contemporary management of gangrenous and non-gangrenous acute cholecystitis. HPB (Oxford) 13(8):551–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Gurusamy K, Samraj K, Gluud C, Wilson E, Davidson BR (2010) Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 97(2):141–150

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kanakala V, Borowski DW, Pellen MG, Dronamraju SS, Woodcock SA, Seymour K, Attwood SE, Horgan LF (2011) Risk factors in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a multivariate analysis. Int J Surg 9(4):318–323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Simopoulos C, Botaitis S, Polychronidis A, Trypsianis G, Perente S, Pitiakoudis M (2009) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with empyematous cholecystitis: an outcome analysis. Indian J Surg 71(5):258–264

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Flum DR, Dellinger EP, Cheadle A, Chan L, Koepsell T (2003) Intraoperative cholangiography and risk of common bile duct injury during cholecystectomy. JAMA 289(13):1639–1644

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Thornton JR, Heaton KW, Espiner HJ, Eltringham WK (1983) Empyema of the gall bladder—reappraisal of a neglected disease. Gut 24(12):1183–1185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Al-Jundi W, Cannon T, Antakia R, Anoop U, Balamurugan R, Everitt N, Ravi K (2012) Percutaneous cholecystostomy as an alternative to cholecystectomy in high risk patients with biliary sepsis: a district general hospital experience. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 94(2):99–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Ambe PC, Zirngibl H (2016) The fate of patients managed with percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis. Surgery 159(5):1479–1480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Nikfarjam M, Shen L, Fink MA, Muralidharan V, Starkey G, Jones RM, Christophi C (2013) Percutaneous cholecystostomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis in the era of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 23(5):474–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Smith TJ, Manske JG, Mathiason MA, Kallies KJ, Kothari SN (2013) Changing trends and outcomes in the use of percutaneous cholecystostomy tubes for acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 257(6):1112–1115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Gurusamy KS, Rossi M, Davidson BR (2013) Percutaneous cholecystostomy for high-risk surgical patients with acute calculous cholecystitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8:CD007088

    Google Scholar 

  33. Anderson JE, Inui T, Talamini MA, Chang DC (2014) Cholecystostomy offers no survival benefit in patients with acute acalculous cholecystitis and severe sepsis and shock. J Surg Res 190(2):517–521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery II, Helios Universitätsklinikum Wuppertal, Witten – Herdecke University, Heusnerstr. 40, 42283, Wuppertal, Germany

    Peter C. Ambe, Stefan Jansen & Hubert Zirngibl

  2. Institute of Quality Control in Health Care, Medical Association Nordrhein Westphalia, Tersteegenstr. 9, 40474, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Susanne Macher-Heidrich

Authors
  1. Peter C. Ambe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefan Jansen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Susanne Macher-Heidrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hubert Zirngibl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter C. Ambe.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Dr. Peter C. Ambe, Mr. Stefan Jansen, Dr. Susanne Macher-Heidrich and Prof. Hubert Zirngibl have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Oral presentation at the 133rd Congress of the German Surgical Society in Berlin.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 268 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ambe, P.C., Jansen, S., Macher-Heidrich, S. et al. Surgical management of empyematous cholecystitis: a register study of over 12,000 cases from a regional quality control database in Germany. Surg Endosc 30, 5319–5324 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4882-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4882-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation