An Analysis of Outcomes and Management Strategies for Patients With Cholecystostomy Tubes.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous cholecystostomy tube (PCT) drainage is an effective management strategy for acute cholecystitis in patients medically unfit for surgery. However, little is known about the fate of patients managed by PCT. We conducted this study to determine tube management outcomes for patients with acute cholecystitis managed by PCT. METHODS: The electronic record was queried to identify patients with acute cholecystitis managed by PCT from 2012-2020. Patients were divided into three groups for analysis: 1) ultimately managed by cholecystectomy, 2) eventual confirmation of distal flow of bile from the gallbladder and tube removal, and 3) tubes left in place without further management. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients with acute cholecystitis treated by PCT were included. Sixty-six patients never fully recovered from the medical insult associated with their diagnosis of acute cholecystitis and had their tubes left in situ. Sixty-four of these 66 patients (97%) died during follow-up. The remaining 113 patients recovered from their illness and presented to clinic for evaluation for tube removal and/or cholecystectomy. When distal biliary flow was confirmed, tube removal was favored (n = 70). When cystic duct outflow occlusion persisted, cholecystectomy was planned for patients who became acceptable surgical candidates (n = 43). For patients managed by cholecystectomy, 8 were approached open and 35 laparoscopically, with 12 of 35 (34.3%) converted to open and 23 (65.7%) completed laparoscopically. CONCLUSION: Our study favors PCT removal for patients who recover from their acute illness when distal bile flow from the gallbladder is confirmed. We reserve cholecystectomy for patients who recover from their illness and demonstrate persistent cystic duct outflow obstruction.

An Analysis of Factors that Predict Hospital Readmission after Surgery for Perforated Appendicitis.

We performed this study to develop an understanding of why patients were readmitted after appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. Patients who required surgery for perforated appendicitis during a recent five-year period were identified. We recorded the demographic data, length of symptoms, length of stay, vital signs, laboratory findings, surgical approach, length of surgery, time to readmission, length of readmission, and intervention required after readmission. We divided the cohort into two groups depending on whether the patient was readmitted. We used chi-squared analysis and t test to determine differences between the two groups. We identified 86 patients, with 14 (16.3%) requiring readmission. The only factors that predicted readmission were longer appendectomy surgery (P = 0.03) and open surgery (P = 0.04). After readmission, one patient required reoperation, and two required percutaneous abscess drainage. The remaining 11 patients were readmitted for a median of two days, received intravenous fluids, and required no additional clinically significant management. Patients requiring longer and open surgery are at an increased risk for hospital readmission after resection of a perforated appendix. Efforts to reduce readmission will likely be most successful if hydration and brief periods of clinical observation can be arranged when necessary for patients after discharge from surgery.