Systematic review and meta-analysis of early vs late interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy following percutaneous cholecystostomy

Background High risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis are commonly treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PTC) drainage. The optimal timing of subsequent interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains unclear. Methods Medline, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched to identify studies published between 01/01/2000 and 31/12/2020, reporting on interval LC outcomes in patients initially treated by PTC. Early and late interval LC were defined as <30 and ≥30 days respectively. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used for quality assessment. Meta-analysis of proportions was conducted using a random-effects model. Results A total of 512 studies were screened, 41 met the inclusion criteria. There were 22 studies in both early and later interval LC groups, with 3 included studies reporting both early and late groups. Following quality assessment, 29 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between early and late interval LC in terms of conversion rates (7.2% vs 8.3%, p=0.854), 90-day morbidity (12.8% vs 15.9%, p=0.496), and 90-day mortality (0.25% vs 0.32%, p=0.704). Heterogeneity was significant (I2>50%) in all groups. Conclusions Current evidence of interval LC within or beyond 30 days demonstrates no significant impact on outcomes. Patient factors, clinical experience, and hospital facilities may prove more important predictors