Timing of cholecystectomy following cholecystostomy tube placement for acute cholecystitis: a retrospective study aiming to identify the optimal timing between a percutaneous cholecystostomy and cholecystectomy to reduce the number of poor surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to identify the optimal timing between a percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) and cholecystectomy to reduce the number of poor surgical outcomes. BACKGROUND: Biliary disease is a common surgical disease and laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred strategy for the management of acute cholecystitis. However, in high-risk surgical patients, a PC tube may be placed instead. In the 2018 Tokyo Guidelines, the optimal timing of cholecystectomy following a PC has been identified as an important future research question. METHODS: This is a retrospective study that focuses on identifying the ideal timing of cholecystectomy after PC tube placement to minimize complications. Poor surgical outcomes were measured as 90-day reoperations, 30-day readmissions, 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, length of stay (LOS), and discharge destination. Patients were selected from the New York SPARCS database from 2005 to September 30, 2015. RESULTS: 1213 records that consisted of both PC and cholecystectomy were collected. No significant differences in 30-day readmissions, 90-day reoperations, and 30-day ED visits in relation to timing between PC and cholecystectomy were found. Additionally, the decision to replace or not replace dislodged PC tubes was not associated with 90-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day ED visit, LOS, or discharge destination. However, discharge destination and LOS were significantly different between early intervention of 3 days or less between PC and cholecystectomy and late intervention of more than 14 days with late intervention being associated with shorter LOS and more home discharges. CONCLUSION: Performing a cholecystectomy more than 14 days after a PC is associated with better surgical outcomes.

The Effect of an Enhanced Recovery Program on Elective Right Hemicolectomies for Crohn's Disease vs. Colon Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are widely employed in colorectal surgery, successful in reducing postoperative morbidities and hospital length of stay (LOS). However, ERAS effects on the inflammatory bowel disease population remain unclear. This study examines the postoperative course of both Crohn's disease (CD) and colon cancer (CC) patients after elective right hemicolectomies and compares the effectiveness of ERAS protocol. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with CD and CC undergoing elective right hemicolectomies and ileocecectomies from January 2014 through June 2016 (pre-ERAS) and January 2017 through April 2019 (post-ERAS) from a single tertiary care center. Patient demographics and perioperative variables were examined, including prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), hospital LOS, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: 98 CC patients and 91 CD patients met the inclusion criteria. The pre-ERAS CC and post-ERAS CC cohorts were significantly different: post-ERAS had fewer patients with congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and had higher albumin levels. The pre-ERAS CC cohort had significantly longer operative durations and higher rates of concomitant procedures than the post-ERAS CC cohort. Both patients with CC and CD had a reduction in LOS with implementation of ERAS, decreasing by 2.24 days (P = .002) and 1.21 days (P = .038), respectively. There was a reduction in rates of organ space infections with CD (pre .132, post .00, P = .007). There was a trend towards an increased rate of PPOI with CD (Pre .079, Post .226, P = .062). DISCUSSION: The ERAS protocol significantly reduced LOS for both groups, without increasing 30-day readmission rates or other morbidities.