Standardization of a goal-oriented approach to acute cholecystitis: easy-to-follow steps for performing subtotal cholecystectomy.

Abstract

A critical view of safety (CVS) is important to ensure safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy. When the CVS is not possible, subtotal cholecystectomy is performed. While considering subtotal cholecystectomy, surgeons are often concerned about preventing bile leakage from the cystic ducts. The two main types of subtotal cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis are fenestrating and reconstituting. Previously, there were no selection criteria for these two; therefore, open conversion was performed. This study aimed to evaluate our goal-oriented approach to choose fenestrating or reconstituting subtotal cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. We introduced our goal-oriented approach in April 2019. Before introducing this approach, laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis was performed without criteria for subtotal cholecystectomy. After our approach was introduced, laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis was performed according to the subtotal cholecystectomy criteria. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis between 2015 and 2021. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis was performed by surgeons regardless of whether they were novices or veterans. The period from April 2015 to March 2019 was before the introduction (BI) of our approach, the period from April 2019 to December 2021 was after the introduction (AI) of our approach. There were 177 and 186 patients with acute cholecystitis during the BI and AI periods, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of preoperative characteristics, operative time, and blood loss. No difference in the laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy rate between groups (10.2% [BI] vs. 13.9% [AI]; p = 0.266) was obserbed. The open conversion rate during the BI period was significantly higher than that during the AI period (7.4% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.015). Our goal-oriented approach is feasible, safe, and easy for many surgeons to understand.