Emergency Surgery Unit, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, 20122 Milan, Italy.
Emergency Surgery and Trauma Section, Department of Surgery, IRCCS-Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano, Italy.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Nov 14;58(11):1647. doi: 10.3390/medicina58111647.
Background and Objectives: Acute cholecystitis is a frequent cause of admission to the emergency department, especially in old and frail patients. Percutaneous drainage (PT-GBD) and endosonographic guided drainage (EUS-GBD) could be an alternative option for relieving symptoms or act as a definitive treatment instead of a laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy (LC, OC). The aim of the present study was to compare different treatment groups. Materials and Methods: This is a five-year monocentric retrospective study including patients ≥65 years old who underwent an urgent operative procedure. A descriptive analysis was conducted comparing all treatment groups. A propensity score was estimated based on the ACS score, incorporated into a predictive model, and tested by recursive partitioning analysis. Results: 163 patients were included: 106 underwent a cholecystectomy (81 laparoscopic (LC) and 25 Open (OC)), 33 a PT-GBD and 21 EUS-GBD. The sample was categorized into three prognostic groups according to the adverse event occurrence rate. All patients treated with EUS-GBD or LC resulted in the low risk group, and the adverse event rate (AE) was 10/96 (10.4%). The AE was 4/28 (14.2%) and 21/36 (58.3%) in the middle- and high-risk groups respectively (p < 0.001). These groups included all the patients who underwent an OC or a PT-GBD. The PT-GBD group had a lower clinical success rate (55.5%) and higher RR (16,6%) when compared with other groups. Conclusions: Surgery still represents the gold standard for AC treatment. Nevertheless, EUS-GBD is a good alternative to PT-GBD in terms of clinical success, RR and AEs in all kinds of patients.
急性胆囊炎是急诊科常见的住院原因,尤其是在老年和虚弱的患者中。经皮引流(PT-GBD)和超声内镜引导下引流(EUS-GBD)可以作为缓解症状的替代方法,也可以作为腹腔镜或开腹胆囊切除术(LC、OC)的替代方法。本研究旨在比较不同的治疗组。
这是一项为期五年的单中心回顾性研究,包括年龄≥65 岁接受紧急手术的患者。对所有治疗组进行描述性分析。根据 ACS 评分估计倾向评分,将其纳入预测模型,并通过递归分割分析进行测试。
共纳入 163 例患者:106 例行胆囊切除术(81 例腹腔镜(LC)和 25 例开腹(OC)),33 例行 PT-GBD,21 例行 EUS-GBD。根据不良事件发生率,将样本分为三个预后组。所有接受 EUS-GBD 或 LC 治疗的患者均属于低风险组,不良事件发生率(AE)为 10/96(10.4%)。中危组和高危组的 AE 分别为 4/28(14.2%)和 21/36(58.3%)(p<0.001)。这些组包括所有接受 OC 或 PT-GBD 治疗的患者。与其他组相比,PT-GBD 组的临床成功率(55.5%)较低,RR(16.6%)较高。
手术仍然是 AC 治疗的金标准。然而,在各种患者中,EUS-GBD 在临床成功率、RR 和 AE 方面是 PT-GBD 的良好替代方法。