Critical view of safety approach vs. infundibular technique in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which one is safer? A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:0
作者
Aburayya, Bahaa I. [1 ]
Al-Hayk, Ahmad K. [1 ]
Toubasi, Ahmad A. [2 ]
Ali, Abubaker [3 ]
Shahait, Awni D. [4 ]
机构
[1] Jordan Univ Sci & Technol, Fac Med, Irbid 22110, Jordan
[2] Univ Jordan, Fac Med, Amman 11942, Jordan
[3] Wayne State Univ, Sch Med, Michael & Marian Ilitch Dept Surg, Detroit, MI USA
[4] Southern Illinois Univ, Sch Med, Dept Surg, 305 West Jackson Street, Suite 206, Carbondale, IL 62901 USA
关键词
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Bile duct injury; Common bile duct; Critical view of safety; Infundibular technique; BILE-DUCT INJURY; RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS; DELPHI CONSENSUS; OPERATIVE TIME; RISK-FACTORS; SURGERY; IMPACT; PREVENTION; GUIDELINES; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.1007/s13304-024-02029-5
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains the gold standard procedure for the management of benign gallbladder disease. Recognizing the need to mitigate complications, mainly bile duct injury (BDI), various techniques for ductal identification during LC have emerged, including the "Critical View of Safety" (CVS) and the infundibular technique (IT). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess and compare the outcomes of both techniques, with a primary focus on evaluating their impact on BDIs. A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases. The search focused on the surgical technique, incidences of minor and major BDIs, operative time, conversion rate, and length of stay, among patients undergoing LC for benign gallbladder disease. Our initial search retrieved 264 studies. After screening the unique studies against our predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, only five met our criteria and were included. Additionally, a manual search identified eight more relevant studies, bringing the total number of included studies to 13. The total number of included patients was 4,837. Approximately two-thirds underwent LC using the CVS approach (61.1%), and 66.3% were female, with a mean age of 44.4 +/- 11.2 years. The CVS approach was associated with a significant reduction in overall BDIs (RR = 0.36; 95% CI 0.18-0.71) and major BDIs (RR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.13-0.63). However, there were no significant differences in terms of minor BDIs, operative time, conversion rates, or length of stay. Our study demonstrated the superiority of the CVS approach in terms of reducing the incidence of overall and major BDIs compared to IT. However, our study revealed no other significant differences between the two techniques. Further research, including multicentric randomized controlled trials, will be necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of these techniques.
引用
收藏
页码:33 / 45
页数:13
相关论文
共 56 条
  • [1] Ali AM, 2012, SOHAG MED J, V16
  • [2] The Development of Laparoscopy-A Historical Overview
    Alkatout, Ibrahim
    Mechler, Ulrich
    Mettler, Liselotte
    Pape, Julian
    Maass, Nicolai
    Biebl, Matthias
    Gitas, Georgios
    Lagana, Antonio Simone
    Freytag, Damaris
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2021, 8
  • [3] One Thousand Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies in a Single Surgical Unit Using the "Critical View of Safety" Technique
    Avgerinos, C.
    Kelgiorgi, D.
    Touloumis, Z.
    Baltatzi, L.
    Dervenis, C.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY, 2009, 13 (03) : 498 - 503
  • [4] Bile duct injury and morbidity following cholecystectomy: a need for improvement
    Barrett, Meredith
    Asbun, Horacio J.
    Chien, Hung-Lung
    Brunt, L. Michael
    Telem, Dana A.
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2018, 32 (04): : 1683 - 1688
  • [5] Brunt LM, 2020, SURG ENDOSC, V34, P2827, DOI [10.1097/SLA.0000000000003791, 10.1007/s00464-020-07568-7]
  • [6] Chong Jae Uk, 2016, Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg, V20, P12, DOI 10.14701/kjhbps.2016.20.1.12
  • [7] Does increased experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy yield more complex bile duct injuries?
    Chuang, Kelley I.
    Corley, Douglas
    Postlethwaite, Debbie A.
    Merchant, Maqdooda
    Harris, Hobart W.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2012, 203 (04) : 480 - 487
  • [8] Open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in acute cholecystitis. Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Coccolini, Federico
    Catena, Fausto
    Pisano, Michele
    Gheza, Federico
    Fagiuoli, Stefano
    Di Saverio, Salomone
    Leandro, Gioacchino
    Montori, Giulia
    Ceresoli, Marco
    Corbella, Davide
    Sartelli, Massimo
    Sugrue, Michael
    Ansaloni, Luca
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2015, 18 : 196 - 204
  • [9] IRCAD recommendation on safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy
    Conrad, Claudius
    Wakabayashi, Go
    Asbun, Horacio J.
    Dallemagne, Bernard
    Demartines, Nicolas
    Diana, Michele
    Fuks, David
    Gimenez, Mariano Eduardo
    Goumard, Claire
    Kaneko, Hironori
    Memeo, Riccardo
    Resende, Alexandre
    Scatton, Olivier
    Schneck, Anne-Sophie
    Soubrane, Olivier
    Tanabe, Minoru
    van den Bos, Jacqueline
    Weiss, Helmut
    Yamamoto, Masakazu
    Marescaux, Jacques
    Pessaux, Patrick
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SCIENCES, 2017, 24 (11) : 603 - 615
  • [10] Current practices in biliary surgery: Do we practice what we teach?
    Daly, Shaun C.
    Deziel, Daniel J.
    Li, Xuan
    Thaqi, Milot
    Millikan, Keith W.
    Myers, Jonathan A.
    Bonomo, Steven
    Luu, Minh B.
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2016, 30 (08): : 3345 - 3350