Role of Ursodeoxycholic Acid in the Prevention of Gallstones Formation in Bariatric Patients-a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess whether treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in patients who have undergone bariatric surgery reduces gallstone formation. A systematic literature search was performed using electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, PROSPERO, Google Scholar and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry platform). RCTs without restrictions on study language, year, status of publication and patient's age were used. Pooled risk ratios were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses for drug dose, duration and procedure types were performed. Sensitivity analyses and a summary of findings table were generated to assess the robustness and the level of evidence provided, respectively. Fourteen trials were included (3619 patients, 2292 in UDCA vs 1327 in control group). Procedures included SG, RYGB, OAGB, AGB and Gastroplasty. UDCA dose ranged from 300 to 1200 mg per day. Gallstone formation occurred in 19.3% (8.3% in UDCA vs 38.1% in the control group). UDCA significantly reduced the risk of gallstone formation (14 trials, 3619 patients; RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.18-0.41; P < 0.001). UDCA significantly reduced the risk of symptomatic gallstone disease (6 trials, 2458 patients; RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21-0.43; P < 0.001). No subgroup difference was found for different doses, duration and type of procedure performed. Oral UDCA treatment significantly reduces the risks of developing gallstones in postoperative bariatric patients from 38 to 8%. The use of 500 to 600 mg UDCA for 6 months is effective and should be implemented in all patients post-bariatric surgery.

Assessment of cosmetic outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy among women 4 years after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: is there a problem?

BACKGROUND: Advocates of single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SPLC) claim that improved cosmetic outcome is one of its main benefits over conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CLC). However, the published data quantifying the cosmetic outcome after CLC is sparse. This study aimed to determine the cosmetic outcome after CLC using a validated scar assessment tool. METHODS: The patient scar assessment questionnaire was sent to all women ages 20-50 years who had undergone CLC at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital (Norwich), the Homerton Hospital (London), and the Musgrove Park Hospital (Taunton) in 2005 (n = 380). In all cases, the operation had been performed using a four-port technique. The patients were asked to give scores related to the appearance and symptoms associated with the scars at the time the questionnaire was completed. RESULTS: Of the 380 patients, 195 responded to the questionnaire, giving a response rate of 51%. The median age of the responders was 39 years, and 63 (32%) of them had undergone previous surgery. The mean score for each section was low, indicating a favorable cosmetic outcome. This correlated with the global question answered with "excellent" for 4 of 5 categories and "good" for the remaining category. Nine patients highlighted dissatisfaction with the umbilical incision. CONCLUSIONS: Patients perceive the cosmetic results after CLC as excellent. Therefore, SPLC seems to have a limited role in terms of improving cosmesis for patients undergoing cholecystectomy. Anecdotal evidence from the questionnaire suggests that the umbilical port may be the site of problems for some patients. Further investigation is needed to determine whether this is significant, especially because it may be exaggerated after SPLC.