Original Article

Same-Admission Cholecystectomy Compared with Delayed Cholecystectomy in Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis: Outcomes and Predictors in a Safety Net Hospital Cohort

Authors: Stephen Berger, MD, Cesar A. Taborda Vidarte, MD, Shani Woolard, MD, Bryan Morse, MD, Saurabh Chawla, MD
diagnostic:315562

Abstract

Objectives: Recent studies have shown a decrease in gallstone-related complications if same-admission cholecystectomy (SAC) is performed in mild gallstone pancreatitis (GSP); however, SAC often is not performed in resource-limited settings such as safety net hospitals. The aims of this study were to evaluate the rate of SAC and compare a composite endpoint of recurrent biliary events in patients undergoing SAC with patients in the delayed cholecystectomy (DC) group. Secondary aims included evaluating the rate of recurrent pancreatitis in patients in the DC group, identifying the predictors for DC and the reasons for not undergoing SAC.

Methods: We reviewed 310 patients admitted in the past 5 years with the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. Eighty patients were admitted for gallstone pancreatitis; 75% were African American, 18% were white, and the average age was 44 years with a mean body mass index of 30. Forty patients did not receive cholecystectomy before discharge. The DC and SAC groups were similar in body mass index, ethnicity, severity of pancreatitis, and complications.

Results: The DC group was significantly more likely to be older and with higher comorbidity indexes compared with the SAC group. Bedside Index of Severity in Acute Pancreatitis scores and revised Atlanta classification definitions were used to define severe acute pancreatitis; 10% (4) of patients had organ failure at 48 hours, whereas 17.5% (7) had a Bedside Index of Severity in Acute Pancreatitis scores ≥3. A total of 14 recurrent biliary events occurred in the DC group (14 of 40), which was 35% compared with 2 of 40 (5%) in the SAC group (P < 0.001). Of the 9 patients who developed recurrent pancreatitis, 8 were in the DC group (8 of 40, 20%, P = 0.02). Of the 40 patients in the DC group, only 14 patients eventually received a cholecystectomy documented in our hospital, with median-length postdischarge follow-up of approximately 6.5 months. On regression analysis, a Charlson Comorbidity Index >2 was the only significant predictor of DC. The most common reason for DC was no surgical consultation during the inpatient stay (22%).

Conclusions: Our findings support existing evidence that DC is associated with a significantly increased risk of recurrent biliary events and pancreatitis. Furthermore, we report a 56% adherence to the current guidelines for SAC and report that the most common reason for not undergoing SAC was the absence of surgical consultation. We conclude that ensuring SAC in eligible patients should be a priority for safety net hospitals because it may help decrease hospital costs in the long term, and active efforts should be made to identify patients who may be less likely to receive SAC.
Posted in: Pancreatic Disease1

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first.

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view your purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($15)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Peery AF, Crockett SD, Barritt AS, et al. Burden of gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreatic diseases in the United States. Gastroenterology 2015;149:1731-1741.e3.
2. Forsmark CE, Vege SS, Wilcox CM. Acute pancreatitis. N Engl J Med 2016;375:1972-1981.
3. Uhl W, Warshaw A, Imrie C, et al. IAP guidelines for the surgical management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology 2002;2:565-573.
4. Torgerson JS, Lindroos AK, Naslund I, et al. Gallstones, gallbladder disease, and pancreatitis: cross-sectional and 2-year data from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) and SOS reference studies. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:1032-1041.
5. van Baal MC, Besselink MG, Bakker OJ, et al. Timing of cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis: a systematic review. Ann Surg 2012;255:860-866.
6. Cuschieri A. Approach to the treatment of acute cholecystitis: open surgical, laparoscopic or endoscopic? Endoscopy 1993;25:397-398.
7. Monkhouse SJ, Court EL, Dash I, et al. Two-week target for laparoscopic cholecystectomy following gallstone pancreatitis is achievable and cost neutral. Br J Surg 2009;96:751-755.
8. Nguyen GC, Boudreau H, Jagannath SB. Hospital volume as a predictor for undergoing cholecystectomy after admission for acute biliary pancreatitis. Pancreas 2010;39:e42-e47.
9. da Costa DW, Bouwense SA, Schepers NJ, et al. Same-admission versus interval cholecystectomy for mild gallstone pancreatitis (PONCHO): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015;386:1261-1268.
10. Working Group IAP/APA Acute Pancreatitis Guidelines. IAP/APA evidence-based guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology 2013;13:e1-e15.
11. Tenner S, Baillie J, DeWitt J, et al. American College of Gastroenterology guideline: management of acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:1400-1415.
12. Kwong WT, Vege SS. Unrecognized necrosis at same admission cholecystectomy for pancreatitis increases organ failure and infected necrosis. Pancreatology 2017;17:41-44.
13. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987;40:373-383.
14. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)-a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42:377-381.
15. Bakker OJ, van Santvoort HC, Hagenaars JC, et al. Timing of cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis. Br J Surg 2011;98:1446-1454.
16. El-Dhuwaib Y, Deakin M, David GG, et al. Definitive management of gallstone pancreatitis in England. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2012;94:402-406.
17. Lankisch PG, Weber-Dany B, Lerch MM. Clinical perspectives in pancreatology: compliance with acute pancreatitis guidelines in Germany. Pancreatology 2005;5:591-593.
18. Pezzilli R, Uomo G, Gabbrielli A, et al. A prospective multicentre survey on the treatment of acute pancreatitis in Italy. Dig Liver Dis 2007;39:838-846.
19. Sandzén B, Haapamäki MM, Nilsson E, et al. Cholecystectomy and sphincterotomy in patients with mild acute biliary pancreatitis in Sweden 1988-2003: a nationwide register study. BMC Gastroenterol 2009;9:80.
20. Hwang SS, Li BH, Haigh PI. Gallstone pancreatitis without cholecystectomy. JAMA Surg 2013;148:867-872.
21. Johnstone M, Marriott P, Royle TJ, et al. The impact of timing of cholecystectomy following gallstone pancreatitis. Surgeon 2014;12:134-140.
22. Fox BC, Siegel ML, Weinstein RA. "Curbside" consultation and informal communication in medical practice: a medicolegal perspective. Clin Infect Dis 1996;23:616-622.
23. Kulvatunyou N, Watt J, Friese RS, et al. Management of acute mild gallstone pancreatitis under acute care surgery: should patients be admitted to the surgery or medicine service? Am J Surg 2014;208:981-987.
24. Davidson BR, Neoptolemos JP, Carr-Locke DL. Endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct calculi in patients with gall bladder in situ considered unfit for surgery. Gut 1988;29:114-120.