Acute cholecystitis in elderly and high-risk surgical patients: is percutaneous cholecystostomy preferable to emergency cholecystectomy?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) for the treatment of acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) has better results than emergency cholecystectomy (EC) in elderly and high-risk surgical patients. METHODS: Patients ≥ 70 years and/or ≥ ASA-PS 3 with ACC treated with PC or EC between 2005 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Both techniques were compared regarding morbi-mortality, hospital stay, complications and readmissions. A subgroup analysis in higher risk patients (≥ 70 years plus ≥ ASA-PS 3) was also performed. A binary logistic regression analysis for outcome variables to calculate the OR was carried out. RESULTS: A total of 461 patients were included in the study. The results of PC were worse compared to EC: 30-day mortality (8.6 vs. 1.7%, OR 18.4), 90-day mortality (10.4 vs. 2.1%, OR 10.3), length of stay (days) (13.21 ± 8.2 vs. 7.48 ± 7.67, OR 8.7) and readmission rate (35.1 vs. 12.6%, OR 4.7). Complications were lower for PC (14 vs. 22.6%, OR 0.41), but there were no significant differences in the number of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III). Higher-risk subgroup analysis (n = 193; PC = 128, EC = 65) showed similar results to the whole series. Patients with ACC for more than 3 days had more risk of severe complications in both groups (OR 2.26; OR 2.76). CONCLUSION: PC was associated with an increased risk of mortality at 30 and 90 days, more readmissions and longer hospital stay. Although PC presents a lower risk of complications, the percentage of severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) does not show significant differences.

Low rectal cancer: abdominoperineal resection or low Hartmann resection? A postoperative outcome analysis.

BACKGROUND: In distal rectum cancers, when the sphincters are not affected and it is not possible to perform a coloanal anastomosis because of the presence of comorbidities or the advanced age of the patient, a low Hartmann resection with total mesorectal excision can be performed. Low Hartmann resection is usually considered to be a shorter procedure and to have an inferior morbidity compared with abdominoperineal resection of the rectum. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the postoperative outcome of a series of patients with low rectal cancer who have undergone either low Hartmann resection or abdominoperineal resection. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of data collected in a prospective database. SETTINGS: This study was conducted in a specialized Colorectal Unit, Department of Surgery, of a tertiary teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent low Hartmann or abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer between 1996 and 2009 at our specialized Colorectal Unit were considered. INTERVENTIONS: The main interventions were low Hartmann resection vs abdominoperineal resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were 60-day morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The pelvic abscess rate was 12.2% in patients who underwent low Hartmann resection and 3.0% in those who underwent abdominoperineal resection (P = .02). The reoperation rate was 14.6% in the Hartmann group and 3.8% in the abdominoperineal group (P = .013). The rehospitalization rates in the Hartmann and abdominoperineal groups were 7.3% and 0.7% (P = .015). No differences were found in the other variables analyzed. At multivariate analysis, the surgical technique performed was the only independent risk factor for pelvic abscess development, readmission, and reoperation. LIMITATIONS: : This study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSION: In our series, low Hartmann resection was associated with higher pelvic abscess, reoperation, and readmission rates. These findings suggest that in patients with rectal cancer without sphincter infiltration and who are unsuitable for coloanal anastomosis, abdominoperineal resection should be a valid alternative to low Hartmann resection.