We have located links that may give you full text access.
Gallstone formation and subsequent cholecystectomy after oncological gastric and esophageal resection.
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery 2024 Februrary 11
PURPOSE: Gallstone formation is increased after gastric (GR) or esophageal resection (ER); however, the exact pathophysiology is not fully understood yet. Symptomatic cholecystolithiasis and the need for subsequent cholecystectomy after upper gastrointestinal resection can alter the outcome in oncological patients. There is an ongoing discussion if these patients benefit from a simultaneous prophylactic cholecystectomy. This study aims to analyze the risk of gallstone formation after GR or ER and the perioperative course of a subsequent cholecystectomy.
METHODS: In this study, all patients were included, who underwent an oncological gastric or esophageal resection at the Medical University of Innsbruck, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery in the years 2003-2021.
RESULTS: A simultaneous cholecystectomy was performed in 29.8% with GR and in 2.1% with ER (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in complications or length-of-stay between patients with simultaneous vs. no simultaneous cholecystectomy. Newly developed gallstones tended to be more common after GR (16% vs. 10% ER), after reconstruction without preservation of the duodenal passage (17% vs. 11% with) and after GR with lymph node dissection (19% vs. 5% without). After ER, subsequent cholecystectomy was significant less frequently (11.4% vs. 2.9% OR) (p = 0.005). The subsequent cholecystectomy was performed openly in 57.1% with major complications classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a in 14.3%.
CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of our study, we do not recommend simultaneous cholecystectomy routinely in oncological gastric or esophageal resections. An individualized approach depending on risk factors like extensive lymphadenectomy or duodenal passage can be discussed.
METHODS: In this study, all patients were included, who underwent an oncological gastric or esophageal resection at the Medical University of Innsbruck, Department of Visceral, Transplant and Thoracic Surgery in the years 2003-2021.
RESULTS: A simultaneous cholecystectomy was performed in 29.8% with GR and in 2.1% with ER (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in complications or length-of-stay between patients with simultaneous vs. no simultaneous cholecystectomy. Newly developed gallstones tended to be more common after GR (16% vs. 10% ER), after reconstruction without preservation of the duodenal passage (17% vs. 11% with) and after GR with lymph node dissection (19% vs. 5% without). After ER, subsequent cholecystectomy was significant less frequently (11.4% vs. 2.9% OR) (p = 0.005). The subsequent cholecystectomy was performed openly in 57.1% with major complications classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a in 14.3%.
CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of our study, we do not recommend simultaneous cholecystectomy routinely in oncological gastric or esophageal resections. An individualized approach depending on risk factors like extensive lymphadenectomy or duodenal passage can be discussed.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Executive Summary: State-of-the-Art Review: Unintended Consequences: Risk of Opportunistic Infections Associated with Long-term Glucocorticoid Therapies in Adults.Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 April 11
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Finerenone: From the Mechanism of Action to Clinical Use in Kidney Disease.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app