Gallbladder perforation with fistulous communication
The management of gallbladder perforation (GBP) with fistulous communication (Neimeier type I) is controversial. To recommend management options for GBP with fistulous communication. A systematic review of studies describing the management of Neimeier type I GBP was performed according to the PRISMA...
Saved in:
Published in: | World journal of gastrointestinal surgery Vol. 15; no. 6; pp. 1191 - 1201 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
United States
Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
27-06-2023
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | The management of gallbladder perforation (GBP) with fistulous communication (Neimeier type I) is controversial.
To recommend management options for GBP with fistulous communication.
A systematic review of studies describing the management of Neimeier type I GBP was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The search strategy was conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and EMBASE (May 2022). Data extraction was obtained for patient characteristics, type of intervention, days of hospitalization (DoH), complications, and site of fistulous communication.
A total of 54 patients (61% female) from case reports, series, and cohorts were included. The most frequent fistulous communication occurred in the abdominal wall. Patients from case reports/series had a similar proportion of complications between open cholecystectomy (OC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) (28.6
12.5;
= 0.569). Mortality was higher in OC (14.3
0.0;
= 0.467) but this proportion was given by only one patient. DoH were higher in OC (mean 26.3 d
6.6 d). There was no clear association between higher rates of complications of a given intervention in cohorts, and no mortality was observed.
Surgeons must evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the therapeutic options. OC and LC are adequate options for the surgical management of GBP, with no significant differences. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 Author contributions: Quiroga-Garza A and Alvarez-Villalobos NA contributed equally to this work and should be considered as co-first authors; Quiroga-Garza A, Alvarez-Villalobos NA, Angeles-Mar HJ, Garcia-Campac M, Muñoz-Leija MA, Jacobo-Baca G, Elizondo-Omaña RE, and Guzmán-López S contributed to study conception and design, and drafting and critical revision of the manuscrip; Quiroga-Garza A, Alvarez-Villalobos NA, Angeles-Mar HJ, Garcia-Campac M, and Muñoz-Leija MA contributed to acquisition of the data; Quiroga-Garza A, Alvarez-Villalobos NA, Angeles-Mar HJ, Garcia-Campac M, Muñoz-Leija MA, and Guzmán-López S contributed to analysis and interpretation of the data. Corresponding author: Rodrigo Enrique Elizondo-Omana, MD, PhD, Professor, Research Fellow, Research Scientist, Human Anatomy Department, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital “Dr. José Eleuterio González”, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León (U.A.N.L.), Avenida Francisco I. Madero y Gonzalitos s/n Colonia Mitras Centro, Monterrey 64460, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. rod_omana@yahoo.com |
ISSN: | 1948-9366 1948-9366 |
DOI: | 10.4240/wjgs.v15.i6.1191 |