Safety of cholecystectomy performed by surgeons who prefer fundus first versus surgeons who prefer a standard laparoscopic approach

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

BackgroundAn alternative method to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) is the “fundus first” method (FFLC). Concerns have been raised that FFLC can lead to misinterpretation of important anatomical structures, thus causing complications of a more serious kind than SLC. Comparisons between the methods are complicated by the fact that FFLC is often used as a rescue procedure in complicated cases. To avoid confounding related to this we conducted a population-based study with comparisons on the surgeon level. MethodIn GallRiks, the Swedish registry for Gallbladder surgery, we stratified all cholecystectomies performed 2006–2020 in three groups: surgeries carried out by surgeons that uses FFLC in <20 % of the cases (N = 150,119), in 20–79 % of the cases (N = 10,212) and in 80 % or more of the cases (N = 3176). We compared the groups with logistic regression, adjusting for sex, age, surgical experience, year of surgery and history of acute cholecystitis. All surgical complications (bleeding, gallbladder perforation, visceral perforation, infection, and bile duct injury) were included as outcome. A separate analysis was done with regards to operation time. ResultsNo difference in incidence of all surgical complications or bile duct injury were seen between groups. The rates of bleeding (OR 0.34 [0.14–0.86]) and gallbladder perforation (OR 0.61 [0.45–0.82]) were significantly lower in the “fundus first > 80% group” and the operative time was shorter (OR 0.76 [0.69–0.83]). ConclusionIn this study including >160,000 cholecystectomies, both methods was found to be equally safe. Key messageDuring laparoscopic cholecystectomy, the standard method of dissection and fundus first dissection are equally safe surgical techniques. Surgeons need to learn both methods to be able to use the one most appropriate for each individual case.