Outcome comparison between percutaneous cholecystostomy and cholecystectomy: a 10-year population-based analysis.

BACKGROUND: Controversy surrounding the role of percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) is fed by the absence of large amounts of data concerning its outcomes, and many authors have maintained that there is no evidence to support a recommendation for PC rather than cholecystectomy (CCS) in elderly or critically ill patients with acute cholecystitis (AC).

METHODS: We conducted this study by tracking trends in the utilization and outcomes of PC and CCS using longitudinal health research data in Taiwan.

RESULTS: Analyses were conducted on 236,742 patients, 11,184 of whom had undergone PC and 225,558 of whom had undergone CCS. Average annual percentage changes (AAPCs) from 2003 to 2012 increased significantly by 18.34% each year for PC and by 2.82% each year for CCS. The subset analyzes showed that the mortality rates were far higher in patients underwent PC than in patients underwent CCS in all subgroups, which increased from a minimum of 1.45-fold to a maximum of 34.22-fold. The gap of the mortality rates between PC group and CCS group narrowed as the patients aged and with the seriousness of the diseases increased. Most patients with PC or CCS who died in-hospital or within 30 days after discharge were 70 years of age or older, and a large number of them received a CCI score of at least 1. The AAPCs of the overall mortality rates from 2003 to 2012 decreased by 6.78% each year for PC and by 7.33% each year for CCS. PC was related to a higher rate of cholecystitis recurrence and readmission for complications, but a lower rate of in-hospital complications and routine discharge than CCS, and 36.41% of all patients treated with PC underwent subsequent CCS. Additionally, the patients with PC experienced longer hospital stays and generated higher costs than the patients with CCS.

CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent PC demonstrated poorer prognoses than did patients who underwent CCS. The role of PC in the Tokyo guidelines may be overstated; it is not as safe as the Tokyo guidelines have suggested in moderate-grade cholecystitis cases, and it should be limited to only the elderly and sicker patients.