Comparison of early and interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Which is better? A multicentered study (Retracted Article)

dc.contributor.authorUysal, Erdal
dc.contributor.authorTürel, Kadir Serkan
dc.contributor.authorSipahi, Mesut
dc.contributor.authorYılmaz, Nimet
dc.contributor.authorYılmaz, Fatih A.
dc.contributor.buuauthorIşık, Özgen
dc.contributor.departmentUludağ Üniversitesi/Tıp Fakültesi/Genel Cerrahi Anabilim Dalı.tr_TR
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-9541-5035tr_TR
dc.contributor.researcheridAAW-9602-2020tr_TR
dc.contributor.scopusid36600543700tr_TR
dc.date.accessioned2023-04-04T11:47:52Z
dc.date.available2023-04-04T11:47:52Z
dc.date.issued2016-10-02
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: The aim of this study was to compare early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and LCs performed at different time intervals for treatment of acute cholecystitis, contribute to the literature with data obtained from different centers, and provide assistance to clinicians about the timing of LC in acute cholecystitis. Materials and Methods: The study was designed as a retrospective, observational, and multicentered study. The data of 470 patients who had undergone LC for treatment of acute cholecystitis between January 2010 and March 2016 were included. Four different centers contributed to the study. The patients were divided into 4 groups. The groups were identified according to the timing of LC following the onset of findings and symptoms of acute cholecystitis as group 1 (first week), group 2 (1 to 4 wk), group 3 (4 to 8 wk), and group 4 (> 8 wk). The clinical and demographical characteristics, comorbidities, complications, hospital stay, duration of operation, conversion rates, and rehospitalizations in the following 30 days of patients in the groups were compared. Results: A significant increase was found in group 4 compared with groups 1 and 2 in relation to comorbidities (P < 0.01) (P= 0.042). No statistically significant difference was observed among the groups for the comparison of operation durations, conversion rates, and total number of complications (P > 0.05). The groups were compared with regard to the mean hospital stay, and the hospital stay was found to be significantly higher in group 4 than in group 1 (P= 0.001). In our study, the 30-day readmission rate was determined to be significantly higher in the > 8-week group (group 4) compared with the first-week (group 1) and 1- to 4-week group (group 2) (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Interval LC does not decrease the complication rate, conversion rate, or the operation time. Early LC could be preferred for treatment of acute cholecystitis as no significant differences related to the conversion rate, operation time, and overall complication rate are observed between the early and delayed LCs; however, a shorter hospital stay and lower 30-day readmission rate are observed in early LC for the treatment of acute cholecystitis.en_US
dc.identifier.citationUysal, E. vd. (2016). "Comparison of early and interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Which is better? A multicentered study". Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy and Percutaneous Techniques, 26(6), E117-E121.en_US
dc.identifier.endpageE121tr_TR
dc.identifier.issn1530-4515
dc.identifier.issn1534-4908
dc.identifier.issue6tr_TR
dc.identifier.pubmed27846178tr_TR
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84995528898tr_TR
dc.identifier.startpageE117tr_TR
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000345
dc.identifier.urihttps://journals.lww.com/surgical-laparoscopy/Abstract/2016/12000/Comparison_of_Early_and_Interval_Laparoscopic.24.aspx
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11452/32177
dc.identifier.volume26tr_TR
dc.identifier.wos000391108300004
dc.indexed.pubmedPubMedtr_TR
dc.indexed.scopusScopustr_TR
dc.indexed.wosSCIEtr_TR
dc.language.isoentr_TR
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkinsen_US
dc.relation.collaborationYurt içitr_TR
dc.relation.collaborationSanayitr_TR
dc.relation.journalSurgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy and Percutaneous Techniquestr_TR
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergitr_TR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccesstr_en_USTR
dc.subjectSurgerytr_TR
dc.subjectEarlytr_TR
dc.subjectIntervalen_US
dc.subjectLaparoscopic cholecystectomyen_US
dc.subjectAcute cholecystitisen_US
dc.subjectRandomized-trialen_US
dc.subjectCost-utilityen_US
dc.subjectMetaanalysisen_US
dc.subjectManagementen_USen_US
dc.subject.emtreeAcute cholecystitisen_US
dc.subject.emtreeAdulten_US
dc.subject.emtreeAgeden_US
dc.subject.emtreeArticleen_US
dc.subject.emtreeBile duct injuryen_US
dc.subject.emtreeBile leakageen_US
dc.subject.emtreeCommon bile duct diseaseen_US
dc.subject.emtreeControlled studytr_TR
dc.subject.emtreeConversion to open surgeryen_US
dc.subject.emtreeEarly laparoscopic cholecystectomyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeFemaleen_US
dc.subject.emtreeHospital readmissionen_US
dc.subject.emtreeHumanen_US
dc.subject.emtreeIntermethod comparisonen_US
dc.subject.emtreeInterval laparoscopic cholecystectomyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLaparoscopic cholecystectomyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLength of stayen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLung infectionen_US
dc.subject.emtreeMajor clinical studyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeMaleen_US
dc.subject.emtreeObservational studyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeOperation durationen_US
dc.subject.emtreePancreatitisen_US
dc.subject.emtreePostoperative complicationen_US
dc.subject.emtreePostoperative hemorrhageen_US
dc.subject.emtreePostoperative ileusen_US
dc.subject.emtreePostoperative infectionen_US
dc.subject.emtreePriority journalen_US
dc.subject.emtreeRetrospective studyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeSurgical infectionen_US
dc.subject.emtreeUrinary tract infectionen_US
dc.subject.emtreeCholecystitis, acuteen_US
dc.subject.emtreeClinical trialen_US
dc.subject.emtreeLaparoscopic cholecystectomyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeMiddle ageden_US
dc.subject.emtreeMulticenter studyen_US
dc.subject.emtreePostoperative complicationsen_US
dc.subject.emtreeProceduresen_US
dc.subject.emtreeTime factoren_US
dc.subject.emtreeTreatment outcomeen_US
dc.subject.emtreeTrendsen_US
dc.subject.emtreeTurkeyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeVery elderlyen_US
dc.subject.emtreeYoung adulten_US
dc.subject.meshAdulten_US
dc.subject.meshAgedtr_TR
dc.subject.meshAged, 80 and overtr_TR
dc.subject.meshCholecystectomy, laparoscopictr_TR
dc.subject.meshCholecystitis, acuteen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshLength of stayen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshMiddle ageden_US
dc.subject.meshOperative timeen_US
dc.subject.meshPostoperative complicationsen_US
dc.subject.meshRetrospective studiesen_US
dc.subject.meshTime factorsen_US
dc.subject.meshTreatment outcomeen_USen_US
dc.subject.meshTurkeyen_US
dc.subject.meshYoung adulten_US
dc.subject.scopusAcute Cholecystitis; Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy; Gallbladderen_US
dc.subject.wosSurgerytr_TR
dc.titleComparison of early and interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of acute cholecystitis. Which is better? A multicentered study (Retracted Article)en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.typeRetracted Publication
dc.wos.quartileQ4tr_TR

Files

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections