Is fundus first laparoscopic cholecystectomy a better option than conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy for difficult cholecystectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

The gallstone disease prevalence is up to 27% in the general adult population. Though most of the patients are asymptomatic, about 1-4% of these patients became symptomatic every year and will require treatment. Fundus first laparoscopic cholecystectomy (FFLC) was first reported by Cooperman in 1990 when he utilized the approach to safely perform LC for patients with acute cholecystitis and dense adhesion around the calot's triangle which precluded safe dissection. Some surgeons reported that the FFLC may be quicker than the traditional dissection starting at the Calot's triangle, although no randomized trial has been undertaken to confirm that. We aim to perform this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare outcome of fundal first laparoscopic cholecystectomy with conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Three reviewers independently searched the Pubmed, medline, google schoolar, Cochrane library and Embase databases for prospective or retrospective articles comparing outcomes of fundus first LC and conventional LC. The search terms were "retrograde cholecystectomy", "antegrade cholecystectomy", "fundus first cholecystectomy", "fundus down cholecystectomy", and "dome down cholecystectomy". Studies were selected based on predetermined criteria and data were extracted from the study for meta-analysis. Twelve studies were included for meta-analysis. Our analysis revealed that FFLC is associated with less conversion to open surgery, less time of surgery, less risk of bile duct injuries and shorter duration of hospital stay compared conventional cholecystectomy in patients with difficult cholecystectomy. In conclusion, fundus first laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a safer alternative to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with difficult cholecystectomy.