The definition of Early Cholecystectomy (EC) is still debatable. This paper aims to find whether the timing of EC affects outcomes. This is a multicentric prospective observational study including patients with acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) who had cholecystectomy within ten days from the onset of symptoms. Kruskall-Wallis test, Fisher’s Exact test and Spearman rank correlation were used for statistical analysis. The patients were divided into three groups depending on the timing of the operation: 0-3 days, 4-7 days, or 8-10 days from the onset of symptoms. 1117 patients were studied over a year. The time from the onset of symptoms to EC did not affect the postoperative complications and mortality, the conversion and the reintervention rate. It was a significant risk factor for intraoperative complications (0-3 days, 2.8%; 4-7 days, 5.6%; 8-10 days, 7.9%; p=0.01) and subtotal cholecystectomies (0-3 days, 2.7%; 4-7 days, 5.6%; 8-10 days, 10.9%; p<0.001). ACC is an evolutive inflammatory process and, as the days go by, the local and systemic inflammation increases which makes surgery more complex and difficult with higher risk of intraoperative complications. We recommend performing EC for ACC as soon as possible within the first ten days of the onset of symptoms.

Background: This systematic review aims to investigate whether percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGDB), as definitive treatment, is superior to emergency cholecystectomy (EC) in high-risk patients with acute cholecystitis (AC). Material and methods: A systematic literature search was performed until December 2022 using Scopus, Medline/PubMed and Web of Science databases in order to compare PTGDB as definitive treatment vs EC in AC. Results: Seventeen studies (1 Randomized Control Trials and 16 observational studies) have been included with a total of 783,672 patients (32,634 treated with PTGDB vs 4,663 who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 343 who underwent open cholecystectomy and 746,032 who underwent cholecystectomy, but without laparoscopic or open approach being specified). The quality assessment (ROBINS-I) of the not randomized studies showed a serious risk, differently the evaluation of the randomized study (RoB 2) showed a low risk of bias. Analysis of the results shows that PTGDB, despite being minimally invasive, do not have different incidence of complications than EC (RR 0.77 95% CI [0.44 to 1.34]; I2 = 99%; P=0.36). A lower postoperative mortality was reported in patients who underwent EC (2.37%) than in PTGDB group (13.78 %) (RR 4.21; 95% CI [2.69 to 6.58]; P < 0.00001), furthermore the risk of hospital readmission for biliary complications (RR 2.19 95% CI [1.72 to 2.79]; I2 = 48 %; P<0.00001) and hospital stay (MD 4.29 95% CI [2.40 to 6.19]; P<0.00001) were lower in EC group. Conclusions: No advantage in using PTGDB as a definitive treatment over EC in the management of critically ill patients with AC has been demonstrated; the results of our systematic review and meta-analysis suggest using EC as the treatment of first choice, even for very high-surgical-risk patient in which PTGDB should be reserved. The major limitation of this systematic review and meta-analysis is associated to a low quality of evidence for the serious bias in the not randomized studies. For this reason, new high powered and well-designed clinical trials are needed to recommend PTGDB as definitive treatment in patients unfit for surgery or those who refuse to undergo surgery.

Critically ill patients treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) can present many abdominal conditions that need a prompt diagnosis and timely treatment because of their general frailty. Clinical evaluation and diagnostic tools like ultrasound or CT scan are not reliable or feasible in these patients. Bedside laparoscopy (BSL) is a minimally invasive procedure that allows surgeons to assess the abdominal cavity directly in the ICU, thus avoiding unnecessary exploratory laparotomy or incidence related to intra-hospital transfer. We conducted a review of the literature to summarize the state-of-the-art of BSL. Medline, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Scopus databases were utilized to identify all relevant publications. Indications, contraindications, technical aspects, and outcomes are discussed. The procedure is safe, feasible, and effective. When other diagnostic tools fail to diagnose or exclude an intra-abdominal condition in ICU patients, BSL should be preferred over exploratory laparotomy.