• Didier Roulin, Alend Saadi, Luca Di Mare, Nicolas Demartines, and Nermin Halkic.
• Department of Visceral Surgery, University Hospital CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland.
• Ann. Surg. 2016 Nov 1; 264 (5): 717-722.

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) in acute cholecystitis with more than 72 hours of symptoms.BackgroundLC is the treatment of acute cholecystitis, with consensus recommendation that patients should be operated within 72 hours of evolution. Data however remain weak with no prospective study focusing on patients beyond 72 hours of symptoms.MethodsPatients with acute cholecystitis and more than 72 hours of symptoms were randomly assigned to early LC (ELC) or delayed LC (DLC). ELC was performed following hospital admission. DLC was planned at least 6 weeks after initial antibiotic treatment. Primary outcome was overall morbidity following initial diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were total length of stay, duration of antibiotic therapy, hospital costs, and surgical outcome.ResultsEighty-six patients were randomized (42 in ELC and 44 in DLC group). Overall morbidity was lower in ELC [6 (14%) vs 17 (39%) patients, P = 0.015]. Median total length of stay (4 vs 7 days, P < 0.001) and duration of antibiotic therapy (2 vs 10 days, P < 0.001) were shorter in the ELC group. Total hospital costs were lower in ELC (9349&OV0556; vs 12,361 &OV0556;, P = 0.018). Operative time and postoperative complications were similar (91 vs 88 min; P = 0.910) and (15% vs 17%; P = 1.000), respectively.ConclusionsELC for acute cholecystitis even beyond 72 hours of symptoms is safe and associated with less overall morbidity, shorter total hospital stay, and duration of antibiotic therapy, as well as reduced cost compared with delayed cholecystectomy (NCT01548339).

35 keywords...

hide…