Evaluation of the Ventral Hernia Working Group classification for long-term outcome using English Hospital Episode Statistics: a population study.

PURPOSE: The Ventral Hernia Working Group (VHWG) classification of ventral/incisional hernia (IH) was developed by expert consensus in 2010. Subsequently, Kanters et al. have demonstrated the validity of a modified version of the system for predicting short-term outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the modified system for predicting hernia recurrence. METHODS: Patients undergoing IH surgery (defined by OPCS codes) in the England Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database, from 1997 to 2012, were identified. Baseline demographics at index hernia operation and episodes of further hernia surgery (FHS) were recorded. Risk factors for FHS were identified using cox regression and evaluated against the modified-VHWG grade using receiver-operating characteristics (ROC). RESULTS: The final analysis included 214,082 index IH operations. Of these, 52.6% were female and mean age was 56.59 (SD15.9). An admission for FHS was found in 8.3% cases (17,714 patients). Multi-variate cox regression revealed contaminated hernia (p < 0.0001), pre-existing IBD (p < 0.0001) and hernia comorbidity (p = 0.05) to be significantly related to long-term FHS. Classifying patients using these factors, according to the modified-VHWG classification, revealed that compared to Grade 1, the hazard ratio (HR) of FHS increased in Grade 2 (HR 1.19; p < 0.0001) and further increased in Grade 3 (HR 1.79; p < 0.0001). ROC analysis revealed the area under the curve to be 0.73 (95% CI 0.73-0.74). CONCLUSION: This analysis demonstrates the broad validity of the modified-VHWG classification in discriminating risk for FHS. Inclusion of pre-existing IBD as a factor defining Grade 2 patients would be recommended. This analysis is limited by the absence of certain factors within the HES database, such as BMI.

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic near-total colectomy and ileo-distal sigmoid anastomosis as a modification of total colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis for prophylactic surgery in patients with adenomatous polyposis syndromes: a comparative study.

AIM: Colectomy in patients with adenomatous polyposis (AP) syndromes demands good oncological and surgical outcome. Total colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis (TC-IRA) is one surgical option for these patients. Anastomotic leakage rates of 11% have been reported following TC-IRA. Ileo-distal sigmoid anastomosis (IDSA) is a recent modification of our practice. Our aim was to compare postoperative outcome in patients with AP following near-total colectomy with IDSA (NT-IDSA) and TC-IRA at a single institution. METHOD: A prospectively maintained database was reviewed to identify patients with AP who underwent laparoscopic NT-IDSA and TC-IRA. Patient demographics, early morbidity and mortality and outcome of endoscopic surveillance were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients with AP underwent laparoscopic colectomy between 2006 and 2017, of whom 139 (72.8%) underwent TC-IRA and 52 (27.2%) NT-IDSA. The median age at surgery in the TC-IRA and NT-IDSA groups was 20 years (IQR 17-45) and 27 years (IQR 19-50), respectively. Grade II complications were comparable between the two groups. There were no anastomotic leakages in the NT-IDSA group compared with 15 (10.8%) in the TC-IRA group (P = 0.0125) and no reoperation in the NT-IDSA group compared with 17 (12.2%) in the TC-IRA group (P = 0.008). The frequency of polypectomies per flexible sigmoidoscopy was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that laparoscopic NT-IDSA for polyposis is associated with a significant improvement in anastomotic leakage rates and surgical outcome. It is too soon to tell whether NT-IDSA alters the need for further intervention, either endoscopic polypectomy or further surgery.

The association of age with the clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of colorectal cancer: a UK single-centre retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is uncommon in patients under the age of 40 years and its association with poor histological features and survival is uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate age-related differences in clinicopathological features and prognosis in patients diagnosed with CRC. METHOD: A single-centre retrospective review of all patients diagnosed with CRC between 2004 and 2013 was performed. Patients were stratified into three age groups: (1) 18-40 years, (2) 41-60 years and (3)> 60 years. Clinicopathological characteristics and outcomes were compared between the three groups. RESULTS: A total of 1328 patients were included, of whom 57.2% were men. There were 28 (2.1%) patients in group 1, 287 (21.6%) in group 2 and 1013 (76.3%) in group 3. Group 1 had the highest proportion of rectal tumours (57.1% in group 1, 50.2% in group 2 and 31.9% in group 3; P < 0.001). Tumour histology and disease stage were comparable between the groups. Group 1 had significantly worse disease-free survival (DFS) than the two older groups (44%, 78% and 77%, respectively; P = 0.022). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age was not an independent prognostic factor whereas Stage III disease [hazard ratio (HR) 4.42; 95% CI 2.81-6.94; P < 0.001] and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (HR 1.65; 95% CI 1.06-2.58; P = 0.026) were associated with increased risk of recurrence. CONCLUSION: Patients under the age of 40 are more likely to present with rectal cancer and have comparable histological features than the older groups. Despite higher rates of adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment, the young group were found to have worse DFS.

Incidence and risk factors for esophageal cancer following achalasia treatment: national population-based case-control study.

The objective of this study is to identify the incidence of and risk factors associated with the development of esophageal cancer in treated achalasia patients in a national cohort. Patients with esophageal achalasia diagnosed and receiving a treatment between 2002 and 2012 were identified in England. Patient and treatment factors were compared between individuals who developed esophageal cancer and those that did not using univariate and multivariate analyses. A total of 7487 patients receiving an interventional treatment for esophageal achalasia were included and 101 patients (1.3%) developed esophageal cancer. The incidence of esophageal cancer was 205 cases per 100,000 patient years at risk. Patients who developed esophageal cancer were older and more commonly primarily treated with pneumatic dilation (82.2% vs. 60.3%; P < 0.001). In the esophageal cancer group, there was an increase in the number of patients requiring reinterventions (47.5% vs. 38.0%; P = 0.041) and the average total number of reinterventions per patient (1.2 vs. 0.8; P = 0.026). Multivariate analysis suggested associations between increased reintervention following both surgical myotomy (HR = 5.1; 95%CI 1.12-23.16) and pneumatic dilation (HR = 1.48; 95%CI 0.95-2.29), and esophageal cancer risk. Increasing patient age and reintervention following primary achalasia treatment are important potential risk factors for the development of esophageal cancer. Treated achalasia patients with symptom recurrence should be carefully evaluated for potential development of esophageal cancer prior to considering reintervention, and increased vigilance may help diagnose esophageal cancer in these individuals at an early stage.

Acceptability, effectiveness and safety of a Renew® anal insert in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

INTRODUCTION: Restorative proctocolectomy has gained acceptance in the surgical management of medically refractive ulcerative colitis and cancer prevention in familial adenomatous polyposis. Incontinence following restorative proctocolectomy occurs in up to 25% of patients overnight. The Renew® insert is an inert single-use device which acts as an anal plug. The aim of this study was to assess the acceptability, effectiveness and safety of the Renew® insert in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy. The device has yet to be assessed in patients who have undergone restorative proctocolectomy. METHOD: This was a prospective study exploring the acceptability, effectiveness and safety of the Renew® insert in improving incontinence in patients who had undergone restorative proctocolectomy. A total of 15 patients with incontinence were asked to use the Renew® insert for 14 days following their standard care. The Incontinence Questionnaire-Bowels was used pre- and posttreatment to assess response and patients were asked to report the perceived acceptability, effectiveness and safety of the device at the end of the trial. RESULTS: The device was acceptable to 8/15 (53%) of patients and was effective in 6/15 (40%). Only 2/15 (13%) of patients raised any safety concerns, and these were minor. The device was associated with a significant reduction in night seepage (P = 0.034). CONCLUSION: In a small study, the Renew® insert can be both acceptable and effective and is also associated with few safety concerns. It is also associated with significant reductions in night-time seepage.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in surgery for inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: There is a requirement of an expansive and up to date review of surgical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) that can dovetail with the medical guidelines produced by the British Society of Gastroenterology. METHODS: Surgeons who are members of the ACPGBI with a recognised interest in IBD were invited to contribute various sections of the guidelines. They were directed to produce a procedure based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. An editorial board was convened to ensure consistency of style, presentation and quality. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after 2 votes were included in the guidelines. RESULTS: All aspects of surgical care for IBD have been included along with 157 recommendations for management. CONCLUSION: These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of IBD and will serve as a useful practical text for clinicians performing this type of surgery.

The influence of hospital volume upon clinical management and outcomes of esophageal achalasia: an English national population-based cohort study.

Management of achalasia is potentially complex. Previous studies have identified equivalence between pneumatic dilatation and surgical cardiomyotomy in terms of clinical outcomes. However, previous research has not investigated whether a management strategies and outcomes are different in high-volume achalasia centers. This national population-based cohort study aimed to identify the treatment modalities utilized in centers, which regularly manage achalasia and those which manage it infrequently. This study also assessed rates of re-intervention and complications to establish if a volume-outcome relationship exists for the management of achalasia in England. In this study, the Hospitals Episode Statistics database was used to identify all patients treated for achalasia in England from 2002 to 2012. Primary treatment was defined as surgical cardiomyotomy, sequential pneumatic dilatation, or botulinum toxin therapy. Primary outcome measure was reintervention. Centers were divided into regular achalasia centers (≥5.7 cases per annum) and infrequent achalasia centers (<5.7 cases per annum), and were analyzed according to tertiary cancer center status. In total, there were 7,487 patients treated for achalasia. Out of 1,947 cases (26%) were treated in regular achalasia centers, with 5,540 (74%) treated in infrequent centers. In binary logistic regression modeling regular centers treated a similar proportion of patients with primary surgical cardiomyotomy (OR: 1.11 (95% CI 0.98-1.27)) and had similar rates of re-intervention to infrequent achalasia centers (HR: 1.03 (0.94-1.12)). RA-CUSUM analysis demonstrated no relationship between total hospital volume and reintervention rates. Tertiary cancer centers treated more achalasia patients with primary surgical cardiomyotomy (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.31-1.73)) but there was no significant difference in reintervention rates (OR: 1.05 (95% CI 0.95-1.16)). In conclusion, this analysis failed to demonstrate a volume-outcome relationship in the management of achalasia in England. This study highlights that achalasia is treated infrequently by the majority of centers.

Obesity surgery and risk of cancer.

BACKGROUND: Obesity increases the risk of several types of cancer. Whether bariatric surgery influences the risk of obesity-related cancer is not clear. This study aimed to uncover the risk of hormone-related (breast, endometrial and prostate), colorectal and oesophageal cancers following obesity surgery. METHODS: This national population-based cohort study used data from the Hospital Episode Statistics database in England collected between 1997 and 2012. Propensity matching on sex, age, co-morbidity and duration of follow-up was used to compare cancer risk among obese individuals undergoing bariatric surgery (gastric bypass, gastric banding or sleeve gastrectomy) and obese individuals not undergoing such surgery. Conditional logistic regression provided odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals. RESULTS: In the study period, from a cohort of 716 960 patients diagnosed with obesity, 8794 patients who underwent bariatric surgery were matched exactly with 8794 obese patients who did not have surgery. Compared with the no-surgery group, patients who had bariatric surgery exhibited a decreased risk of hormone-related cancers (OR 0·23, 95 per cent c.i. 0·18 to 0·30). This decrease was consistent for breast (OR 0·25, 0·19 to 0·33), endometrium (OR 0·21, 0·13 to 0·35) and prostate (OR 0·37, 0·17 to 0·76) cancer. Gastric bypass resulted in the largest risk reduction for hormone-related cancers (OR 0·16, 0·11 to 0·24). Gastric bypass, but not gastric banding or sleeve gastrectomy, was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (OR 2·63, 1·17 to 5·95). Longer follow-up after bariatric surgery strengthened these diverging associations. CONCLUSION: Bariatric surgery is associated with decreased risk of hormone-related cancers, whereas gastric bypass might increase the risk of colorectal cancer.

Review of current practice and outcomes following ileoanal pouch surgery: lessons learned from the Ileoanal Pouch Registry and the 2017 Ileoanal Pouch Report.

AIM: The second Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) Ileoanal Pouch Registry (IPR) report was released in July 2017 following a first report in 2012. This article provides a summary of data derived from the most recent IPR report (2017 Ileoanal Pouch Report. https://www.acpgbi.org.uk/content/uploads/2016/07/Ileoanal-Pouch-Report-2017-FINAL.compressed.pdf). METHOD: The IPR is an electronic database of voluntarily submitted data including patient demographics, disease, intra-operative and postoperative factors submitted by consultant surgeons or delegates. Data up to 31 March 2017 have been analysed for this report. RESULTS: A total of 5352 pouch operations were carried out at 76 UK and four European centres by 154 surgeons over four decades. Recorded procedures have increased over time but data submission is voluntary and underestimates actual volume. Significant variation exists in institutional volume; 73 centres entered data on patients undergoing pouch surgery during the past 5 years. Of these, 44 centres have submitted ≤ 10 cases, with 10 centres submitting one patient and nine centres two cases. Since 2013, minimal access surgery has been employed in 54% of cases. Rectal dissection was undertaken in the total mesorectal excision plane in 69%. J-pouch configuration was used in 99% of cases and 90% of pouch-anal anastomoses were performed using a stapled technique. Including all years, the IPR rate of pelvic sepsis was 9.4% and the rate of pouch failure was 4.7%. CONCLUSION: The IPR holds the largest voluntary repository of data on ileoanal pouch surgery. The second report from the IPR records marked refinements in surgical technique over time but also highlights wide variation in institutional caseload and outcome across the UK.

Management of early pouch-related septic complications in ulcerative colitis: a systematic review.

AIM: It is well established that ileo-anal pouch-related septic complications (PRSC) increase the risk of pouch failure. There are a number of publications that describe the management of early PRSC in ulcerative colitis (UC) in small series. This article aims to systematically review and summarize the relevant current data on this subject and provide an algorithm for the management of early PRSC. METHOD: A systematic review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies published between 2000 and 2017 describing the clinical management of PRSC in patients with UC within 30 days of primary ileo-anal pouch surgery were included. A qualitative analysis was undertaken due to the heterogeneity and quality of studies included. RESULTS: A total of 1157 abstracts and 266 full text articles were screened. Twelve studies were included for analysis involving a total of 207 patients. The studies described a range of techniques including image-guided, endoscopic, surgical and endocavitational vacuum methods. Based on the evidence from these studies, an algorithm was created to guide the management of early PRSC. CONCLUSION: The results of this review suggest that although successful salvage of early PRSC is improving there is little information available relating to methods of salvage and outcomes. Novel techniques may offer an increased chance of salvage but comparative studies with longer follow-up are required.

Restorative surgery after colectomy for ulcerative colitis in England and Sweden: observations from a comparison of nationwide cohorts.

AIM: A longstanding disparity exists between the approaches to restorative surgery after colectomy for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) in England and Sweden. This study aims to compare rates of colectomy and restorative surgery in comparable national cohorts. METHOD: The English Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and Swedish National Patient Register (NPR) were interrogated between 2002 and April 2012. Patients with two diagnostic episodes for UC (age ≥ 15 years) were included. Patients were excluded if they had an episode of inflammatory bowel disease or colectomy before 2002. The cumulative incidences of colectomy and restorative surgery were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 98 691 patients were included in the study, 76 129 in England and 22 562 in Sweden. The 5-year cumulative incidence of all restorative surgery after colectomy in England was 33% vs 46% in Sweden (P-value < 0.001). Of the patients undergoing restorative surgery, 92.3% of English patients had a pouch vs 38.8% in Sweden and 7.7% vs 59.1% respectively had an ileorectal anastomosis (IRA). The 5-year cumulative incidence of colectomy in this study cohort was 13% in England and 6% in Sweden (P-value < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Following colectomy for UC only one-third of English patients and half of Swedish patients underwent restorative surgery. In England nearly all these patients underwent pouches, in Sweden a less significant majority underwent IRAs. It is surprising to demonstrate this discrepancy in a comparable cohort of patients from similar healthcare systems. The causes and consequences of this international variation in management are not fully understood and require further investigation.

Population-based cohort study of surgical myotomy and pneumatic dilatation as primary interventions for oesophageal achalasia.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this national population-based cohort study was to compare rates of reintervention after surgical myotomy versus sequential pneumatic dilatation for the primary management of oesophageal achalasia. METHODS: Patients with oesophageal achalasia diagnosed between 2002 and 2012, and without an intervention in the preceding 5 years were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Patients were divided into two groups based on the primary treatment, and propensity score matching was used to compensate for differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Some 14 705 patients were diagnosed with oesophageal achalasia, of whom 7487 (50·9 per cent) received interventional treatment: 1742 (23·3 per cent) surgical myotomy, 4534 (60·6 per cent) pneumatic dilatation and 1211 (16·2 per cent) endoscopic botulinum toxin injection. As age increased, the proportion of patients receiving myotomy decreased and the proportion undergoing dilatation increased. Patients who underwent surgical myotomy were younger (mean age 44·8 years versus 58·5 years among those who had pneumatic dilatation; P < 0·001), a greater proportion had a Charlson co-morbidity index score of 0 (90·1 versus 87·7 per cent; P = 0·003) and they were more commonly men (55·6 versus 51·8 per cent; P = 0·020). Following propensity score matching, the safety of the two initial treatment approaches was equivalent, with no difference in incidence of oesophageal perforation (1·3 and 1·4 per cent after myotomy and dilatation respectively; P = 0·750). However, dilatation was associated with increased need for reintervention (59·6 versus 13·8 per cent; P < 0·001) and frequency of reinterventions (mean 0·34 versus 0·06 per year; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: Surgical myotomy was associated with a lower rate of reintervention and could be offered as primary treatment in patients with oesophageal achalasia who are fit for surgery. For those unfit for surgery, pneumatic dilatation may provide symptomatic relief with approximately 60 per cent of patients requiring reintervention.

Inequalities in Implementation and Different Outcomes During the Growth of Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Surgery in England: A National Population-Based Study from 2002 to 2012.

AIM: Laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery has developed from unproven technique to mainstay of treatment. This study examined the application and relative outcomes of laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer surgery over time, as laparoscopic uptake and experience have grown. METHODS: Adults undergoing elective laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer surgery in the English NHS during 2002-2012 were included. Age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index and Index of Multiple Deprivation were compared over time. Post-operative 30-day mortality, length of stay, failure to rescue reoperation and the associated mortality rate were examined. RESULTS: Laparoscopy rates rose from 1.1 to 50.8%. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery had lower comorbidity by 0.24 points (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.20-0.27) and lower socioeconomic deprivation by 0.16 deciles (95% CI 0.12-0.20) than those having open procedures. Overall mortality fell by 48.0% from 2002-2003 to 2011-2002 and was 37.8% lower after laparoscopic surgery. Length of stay and mortality after surgical re-intervention also fell. However, re-intervention rates were higher after laparoscopic procedures by 7.8% (95% CI 0.9-15.2%). CONCLUSIONS: There was clear and persistent inequality in the application of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery during this study. Further work must explore and remedy inequalities to maximise patient benefit. Higher re-intervention rates after laparoscopy are unexplained and differ from randomized controlled trials. This may reflect differences in surgeons and practice between research and usual care settings and should be further investigated.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing adverse events and functional outcomes of different pouch designs after restorative proctocolectomy.

AIM: There is no consensus as to which ileoanal pouch design provides better outcomes after restorative proctocolectomy. This study compares different pouch designs. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature was performed. A random effects meta-analytical model was used to compare adverse events and functional outcome. RESULTS: Thirty comparative studies comparing J, W, S and K pouch designs were included. No significant differences were identified between the different pouch designs with regard to anastomotic dehiscence, anastomotic stricture, pelvic sepsis, wound infection, pouch fistula, pouch ischaemia, perioperative haemorrhage, small bowel obstruction, pouchitis and sexual dysfunction. The W and K designs resulted in fewer cases of pouch failure compared with the J and S designs. J pouch construction resulted in a smaller maximum pouch volume compared with W and K pouches. Stool frequency per 24 h and during daytime was higher following a J pouch than W, S or K constructions. The J design resulted in increased faecal urgency and seepage during daytime compared with the K design. The use of protective pads during daytime and night-time was greater with a J pouch compared to S or K. The use of antidiarrhoeal medication was greater after a J reservoir than a W reservoir. Difficulty in pouch evacuation requiring intubation was higher with an S pouch than with W or J pouches. CONCLUSION: Despite its ease of construction and comparable complication rates, the J pouch is associated with higher pouch failure rates and worse function. Patient characteristics, technical factors and surgical expertise should be considered when choosing pouch design.

Variation in practice of pouch surgery in England - using SWORD data to cut to the chase and justify centralization.

AIM: Increasing scrutiny on both individual and unit outcomes after surgical procedures is now expected. In the field of inflammatory bowel disease, this is particularly pertinent for outcomes after ileoanal pouch surgery. METHOD: The Surgical Workload and Outcomes Research Database (SWORD) relies on administrative data derived from Hospital Episode Statistics collected in England. The platform was interrogated for pouch procedures undertaken in England between April 2009 and December 2016 to assess national caseload and, between April 2012 and December 2016, to assess variation in caseload and outcomes after pouch surgery. RESULTS: In England there is a suggestion that numbers of pouch procedures may be decreasing. Over 80% of Trusts offering pouch surgery do so at very low volume with less than five procedures per year. There is also a clear phenomenon of the occasional pouch surgeon with 126 surgeons undertaking just one pouch operation during the study period of almost 5 years. Laparoscopic practice varies but 60% of pouches overall were done via an open approach. Mean length of stay was 10.1 days and average 30-day readmission rates were 27.4%. Outside London there appears to be an increasing trend for higher volume units to do more adult pouch procedures and lower volume units to do fewer. CONCLUSION: Low volume units and occasional pouch surgeons present a strong argument for centralization of pouch surgery. Data from England outside London suggest that this may already be happening.

An observational study of the timing of surgery, use of laparoscopy and outcomes for acute cholecystitis in the USA and UK.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supports early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Differences in treatment patterns between the USA and UK, associated outcomes and resource utilization are not well understood. METHODS: In this retrospective, observational study using national administrative data, emergency patients admitted with acute cholecystitis were identified in England (Hospital Episode Statistics 1998-2012) and USA (National Inpatient Sample 1998-2011). Proportions of patients who underwent emergency cholecystectomy, utilization of laparoscopy and associated outcomes including length of stay (LOS) and complications were compared. The effect of delayed treatment on subsequent readmissions was evaluated for England. RESULTS: Patients with a diagnosis of acute cholecystitis totaled 1,191,331 in the USA vs. 288 907 in England. Emergency cholecystectomy was performed in 628,395 (52.7% USA) and 45,299 (15.7% England) over the time period. Laparoscopy was more common in the USA (82.8 vs. 37.9%; p < 0.001). Pre-treatment (1 vs. 2 days; p < 0.001) and total ( 4 vs. 7 days; p < 0.001) LOS was lower in the USA. Overall incidence of bile duct injury was higher in England than the USA (0.83 vs. 0.43%; p < 0.001), but was no different following laparoscopic surgery (0.1%). In England, 40.5% of patients without an immediate cholecystectomy were subsequently readmitted with cholecystitis. An additional 14.5% were admitted for other biliary complications, amounting to 2.7 readmissions per patient in the year following primary admission. CONCLUSION: This study highlights management practices for acute cholecystitis in the USA and England. Despite best evidence, index admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed less in England, which significantly impacts subsequent healthcare utilization.