Cholecystitis PDF

Cholecystitis
Lawrence M. Knab, MDa, Anne-Marie Boller, MD

b
,
David M. Mahvi, MDb,*
KEYWORDS
Acute cholecystitis Chronic cholecystitis Acalculous cholecystitis Gallstones
Cholecystectomy
KEY POINTS
Disorders of the gallbladder are the most common surgical diseases treated by the
general surgeon.
Risk factors for gallstones include advanced age, female gender, obesity, and certain
ethnicities, including North American Indian.
The gold standard treatment of acute cholecystitis is a laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Operating early in the disease course decreases overall hospital days and does not lead to
increased complications, conversion to open procedures, or mortality.
Cholecystitis during pregnancy is a challenging problem for surgeons. Operative interven-
tion is generally safe for both mother and fetus, given the improved morbidity of the lapa-
roscopic approach compared with open, although increased caution should be exercised
in women with gallstone pancreatitis.
OVERVIEW
Gallstone disease is an ancient problem. Autopsies on Egyptian mummies have shown

gallstones from at least 3500 years ago.1 Disorders of the gallbladder are the most
common surgical diseases treated by a general surgeon. More than 700,000 cholecys-
tectomies are performed in the United States every year, costing about 6.5 billion
dollars. This situation makes gallbladder disease the most costly digestive disorder.2
This article focuses specifically on the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of
acute cholecystitis (calculous and acalculous), as well as chronic cholecystitis.
EPIDEMIOLOGY
It is estimated that 20 to 25 million Americans (10%–15% of the population) have gall-

stones.2 Most people with gallstones are asymptomatic.3 Population-based studies
a
Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Lurie Building
Room 3-250, 303 East Superior Street, Chicago, IL 60611, USA; b Department of Surgery, North-
western University Feinberg School of Medicine, NMH/Arkes Family Pavilion Suite 650, 676
North Saint Clair, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
* Corresponding author. Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of
Medicine, NMH/Arkes Family Pavilion Suite 650, 676 North Saint Clair, Chicago, IL 60611.
E-mail address: [email protected]
Surg Clin N Am 94 (2014) 455–470

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2014.01.005 surgical.theclinics.com
0039-6109/14/$ – see front matter Ó 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Downloaded for Meliza Rivera ([email protected]) at Universidad Francisco Marroquin from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on
December 30, 2017. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2017. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
456 Knab et al
suggest that 10% to 18% of those with silent gallstones develop biliary pain and
7% require operative intervention.4,5 One percent to 4% of those with gallstones
develop complications such as acute cholecystitis, gallstone pancreatitis, and
choledocholithiasis.6
The prevalence of cholelithiasis in North America varies widely depending on ethnicity.
North American Indians have a prevalence as high as 73% in women older than 30 years.
White Americans have a lower prevalence of gallstones, at 16.6% in women and 7.9% in
men. Asian populations have intermediate rates of 5% to 20%, black African Americans
have rates of about 14%, and black Africans have low rates, at less than 5%.2
Incidence of gallbladder disease increases with age, making this an important issue
in our aging population. A study of gallstone prevalence at necropsy in the United
Kingdom reported an incidence of gallstones of 24% in women 50 to 59 years old,
increasing to 30% in the ninth decade. The rates for men are 18% in the 50-year-
old to 59-year-old range, with an increase to 29% in the ninth decade.7
RISK FACTORS
The development of cholelithiasis is multifactorial. Advancing age is a risk factor for

gallstone development in all ethnic groups. Gallstones are rarely reported in infants
and children, but prevalence markedly increases in individuals older than 20 years,
particularly in women. Female gender is also a risk factor. Women are at a greater
risk of having gallstones as well as undergoing operative intervention. Estrogen seems
to play a critical role in this increased risk, because pregnancy, parity, and estrogen
replacement therapy all increase the risk of gallstones.2 Obesity is another risk factor
for gallstone development, likely caused by increased hepatic secretion of cholesterol.
This risk factor is stronger in women than men. Obese women have a 7-fold increase
of developing gallstones compared with their normal weight female counterparts. Iron-
ically, rapid weight loss is also a risk factor for gallstone development and occurs as in
as many as 25% to 30% of patients after bariatric surgery.2
GALLSTONE FORMATION
The type of gallstone and location in the biliary system vary depending on ethnicity.
Most of the gallstones encountered in developed countries are cholesterol stones
(about 80%) with a few being pigmented (black stones).
The pathogenesis of cholesterol gallstones is dependent on multiple factors:
cholesterol supersaturation in the bile, crystal nucleation, gallbladder dysmotility,
and gallbladder absorption.
Pigmented gallstones can be divided into black stones and brown stones. Black
stones consist of calcium bilirubinate and mucin glycoproteins.2 Black stones are gener-
ally associated with hemolytic conditions or cirrhosis, which cause increased levels of un-
conjugated bilirubin.8 These stones are usually located in the gallbladder. Brown stones
are typically associated with bacterial infection, are more prevalent in Asian populations,
and are usually located elsewhere in the biliary tree as opposed to the gallbladder.8
ACUTE CHOLECYSTITIS
Acute cholecystitis accounts for 14% to 30% of cholecystectomies.9–11
Pathophysiology
Acute cholecystitis is defined as inflammation of the gallbladder, generally caused by
obstruction of the cystic duct. The most common causes of cystic duct obstruction
Cholecystitis 457
are gallstones or biliary sludge, although other less common causes include a mass
(primary tumor or gallbladder polyp), parasites, or foreign bodies (bullets have been
described).12 Cholecystitis can also occur in the absence of gallstones and is known
as acalculous cholecystitis, which is reviewed in a later section.
When the cystic duct is obstructed, the gallbladder mucosa continues to produce
mucus but has no outlet for drainage, leading to increased gallbladder pressure, venous
stasis, followed by arterial stasis and gallbladder ischemia and necrosis (Fig. 1). Necrotic
tissue can then lead to complications such as gallbladder perforation and empyema.
Clinical Presentation
Most patients who present with acute cholecystitis have symptoms of right upper
quadrant or epigastric abdominal pain. Often, this pain starts as diffuse epigastric
abdominal pain and develops a bandlike quality radiating around the back. As gall-
bladder inflammation worsens, the pain tends to localize in the right upper quadrant.
Patients may also describe previous episodes of biliary colic, in which the pain comes
in waves (hence the term colic) and is sometimes postprandial, particularly after high-
fat meals. Patients often describe being awakened in the middle of the night by
the pain. Nausea, vomiting, and anorexia are commonly associated with acute
cholecystitis.
Fig. 1. Pathogenesis of acute cholecystitis secondary to impacted gallstone in the cystic duct.
Arrows indicate interaction of the ischemic mucosa with bile resulting in inflammation.
(From Sethi H, Johnson CD. Gallstones. Medicine 2011;39(10):625; with permission.)
458 Knab et al
Physical examination can show tachycardia and a fever. Patients generally have
tenderness to palpation in the epigastric region or right upper quadrant. Some patients
may have a Murphy’s sign, which is cessation of inspiration with palpation in the right
upper quadrant over the gallbladder.
As with most inflammatory conditions, acute cholecystitis is usually associated with
leukocytosis, although the presentation can be variable. Only 32% to 53% of patients
have a fever on presentation, and 51% to 53% have leukocytosis.13,14 Evaluation of a
group of 103 patients with acute cholecystitis showed that most patients (71%) do not
present with a fever within the first 8 hours of arrival to the hospital.15 Sixty-eight
percent of those patients did have a leukocytosis (white blood cells >12,000), and
25% had both a fever and leukocytosis.15 Of the patients with gangrenous cholecys-
titis, 41% presented with fever and 73% with leukocytosis.15 The diagnosis must
always be made based on a combination of history, physical findings, laboratory
values, and diagnostic imaging if needed.
When a patient presents with symptoms consistent with acute cholecystitis, the
possibility of choledocholithiasis must also be entertained, because this can alter
operative plans. Relevant clinical findings such as clay-colored stools or dark urine
can provide clues. Increased bilirubin and liver enzyme levels and dilated common
bile duct on imaging can also indicate choledocholithiasis.
Imaging
Multiple imaging modalities can be used to diagnose acute cholecystitis including
transabdominal ultrasonography (US), cholescintigraphy, and magnetic resonance
imaging (MRI); however, US and cholescintigraphy are used most frequently. Transab-
dominal US is the ideal imaging modality to detect gallstones and measure the bile
duct diameter. Findings consistent with acute cholecystitis include a thickened gall-
bladder wall (>4 mm) secondary to edema, gallstones or sludge, and pericholecystic
fluid (Fig. 2). US has the advantages of being noninvasive, quick, relatively inexpen-
sive, and widely available, even after hours. One major limitation of US is poor visual-
ization when intraluminal gas is present between the probe and the gallbladder.
Cholescintigraphy is an alternative method of imaging and uses technetium-labeled
hepatic 2,6-dimethyl-iminodiacetic acid (HIDA). HIDA is injected intravenously, taken
up by the liver, and excreted in the bile and is therefore able to visualize the biliary sys-
tem. A normal scan shows uptake in the liver, gallbladder, bile duct, and duodenum
within an hour of injection (Fig. 3A). If the cystic duct is obstructed, as typically found
in acute cholecystitis, the gallbladder is not visualized on this scan (see Fig. 3B). The
main advantage of HIDA is its superior sensitivity in diagnosing acute cholecystitis.
However, there are several disadvantages. Compared with US, cholescintigraphy is
more expensive, time intensive (it takes several hours compared with 10–15 minutes
for US), requires skilled staff, and is often not available after hours. It also exposes pa-
tients to ionizing radiation and provides information limited to the hepatobiliary sys-
tem, whereas US and MRI do not expose patients to radiation and can provide
added information outside the hepatobiliary system.
MRI is increasingly used for hepatobiliary imaging as the technology and diagnostic
accuracy improve (Fig. 4). Advantages of MRI are that it can provide information about
the whole abdomen in addition to the biliary system, and it does not expose the patient
to ionizing radiation. Disadvantages of MRI, similar to HIDA, are limited availability
after hours and length of time needed for the examination.
Multiple studies have evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of these diagnostic
studies in acute cholecystitis.16–19 A meta-analysis evaluating US, HIDA, and MRI,
showed a range of sensitivities in US from 50% to 100%, with a summary estimate
Cholecystitis 459
Fig. 2. Acute cholecystitis. Sagittal sonogram showing a single calculus impacted in the neck
of the gallbladder. Additional findings include a mildly distended gallbladder and striated
wall thickening. (From Glanc P, Maxwell C. Acute abdomen in pregnancy: role of sonogra-
phy. J Ultrasound Med 2010;29(10):1458; with permission.)
of 81%, HIDA with sensitivities from 78% to 100% and a summary estimate of 96%,
and MRI with a range of 50% to 91% and a summary estimate of 85%.16 A head-to-
head comparison was evaluated in 11 studies (1199 patients) in the meta-analysis,
and again HIDA was found to be significantly superior to US. The sensitivity of HIDA
was 94% compared with 80% for US.16 In most studies, HIDA is significantly more
sensitive compared with US and MRI for diagnosing acute cholecystitis.
Fig. 3. (A) Normal technetium 99m HIDA series. Selected anterior planar images from an
HIDA examination show prompt and uniform tracer uptake by the hepatic parenchyma, fol-
lowed by excretion of activity into the intrahepatic and extrahepatic biliary tree and normal
filling of the gallbladder. Activity then proceeds unimpeded into the proximal small bowel.
This entire sequence is usually complete within 30 to 60 minutes. CBD, common bile duct;
GB, gallbladder; SB, small bowel. (B) Acute cholecystitis. Anterior planar images from an
HIDA examination show uniform tracer uptake within the hepatic parenchyma followed
by rapid clearance of hepatic activity with visualization of the biliary tree and unimpeded
flow into the distal small bowel (arrow). However, there is nonvisualization of the gall-
bladder even on delayed imaging up to 4 hours, consistent with acute cholecystitis. (From
Lambie H, Cook AM, Scarsbrook AF, et al. Tc99m-hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid (HIDA)
scintigraphy in clinical practice. Clin Radiol 2011;66(11):1095–6; with permission.)
460 Knab et al
Fig. 4. Diffusion-weighted MRI of abdomen showing acute cholecystitis and pancreatitis;

arrowheads indicate gallbladder wall thickening. (From Lee NK, Kim S, Kim GH, et al.
Diffusion-weighted imaging of biliopancreatic disorders: correlation with conventional
magnetic resonance imaging. World J Gastroenterol 2012;18(31):4106; with permission.)
The advantages and disadvantages must be evaluated for each individual patient
when deciding which type of imaging to use. If acute cholecystitis is highly suspected,
US is likely the ideal choice given its widespread availability, quick administration time,
low cost, and patient safety profile. If the diagnosis of acute cholecystitis is in question
and 1 imaging study was equivocal, HIDA is likely the better choice, given its superior
sensitivity compared with both US and MRI. The role of MRI is emerging as the avail-
ability and accuracy both improve.
Management of Acute Cholecystitis

Early surgical management of acute cholecystitis was confined to stone extraction.
Cholecystostomy was initially described by Bobbs and Sims and perfected by Kocher
and Tait.20 The first cholecystectomy was performed in 1882 by Carl Langenbuch in
Berlin, and for the following 100 years, open cholecystectomy was the gold standard
for cholecystitis.20–22 This gold standard changed after the first laparoscopic chole-
cystectomy was performed by a French surgeon in 1987. Over the course of a few
years, laparoscopic cholecystectomy became more common than open cholecystec-
tomy, and within a decade, laparoscopic cholecystectomy replaced the open equiv-
alent as the gold standard of therapy for acute cholecystitis.21 Data from Maryland
indicate that before the advent of laparoscopy in 1985 the rate of laparoscopic chole-
cystectomy was 0 patients per 1000 people compared with open cholecystectomy
with a rate of 1.65 per 1000 people. Just 7 years later, in 1992, the rate of laparoscopic
surgery increased to 1.66 per 1000 people, and the open cholecystectomy rate
decreased dramatically to 0.51 per 1000 people.9 There is little debate that the gold
standard treatment of acute cholecystitis is a cholecystectomy, and this has been
the case for many years. The laparoscopic approach, as well as the timing of the cho-
lecystectomy, has evolved rapidly over the last 20 years.
Timing of Operation
Two main treatment pathways have been used when dealing with acute cholecystitis.
The early cholecystectomy (EC) school of thought endorses performing a cholecys-
tectomy during the initial hospital stay. The idea is to reduce overall hospital stay
and prevent subsequent readmissions secondary to cholecystitis or symptomatic
Cholecystitis 461
cholelithiasis. The delayed cholecystectomy (DC) group endorses treating the patient
with antibiotics during the initial hospitalization and performing the cholecystectomy
about 4 to 8 weeks after the initial insult. The advantages posited for this approach
include operating in a field with less inflammation and therefore less potential for com-
plications and conversion to an open procedure.
Several meta-analyses and randomized control trials have evaluated this question,
and most of the data indicate that an EC is safe and results in a shorter overall hospital
stay (Table 1). The hypothesis that a DC significantly reduces complications and con-
version rates has not been validated by existing studies.
One randomized control trial by Lo divided 45 patients into the EC group and 41 pa-
tients in the DC group. The EC group underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy within
72 hours of admission, and the DC group was managed nonoperatively during the initial
hospitalization and readmitted 8 to 12 weeks later for an elective procedure. Twenty
percent of the DC group underwent an interval procedure because of failure to respond
to initial nonoperative treatment. The EC group had a longer median operative time
compared with the DC group (135 minutes vs 105 minutes, respectively) although there
was no significant difference in conversion to an open procedure (11% in the EC vs 23%
in the DC group).27 There was no significant difference in morbidity between the 2
groups, although there was a trend toward an increase in complications in the DC group
(13% in the EC vs 29% in the DC; P 5 .07). The EC group had a significantly shorter
overall hospital stay compared with the DC group (5 days vs 7 days, respectively).23
A second randomized control trial by Johansson included 74 patients in the EC
group (who underwent operation within 7 days from onset of symptoms) and 71 pa-
tients in the DC group (elective operation 6–8 weeks later). In this study, 25% of the
DC group underwent an interval procedure because of failure to respond to nonoper-
ative management. There was no significant difference in the operating time or the
conversion rates between the 2 groups.24
A meta-analysis28 evaluated 5 randomized control trials with a total of 223 in the EC
group and 228 in the DC group. The EC underwent an operation within 1 week of
symptom onset, and the DC group underwent an elective operation within 6 to
12 weeks. There was a trend toward increased postoperative bile leak in the EC group
compared with the DC group, although no significant difference in postoperative
Table 1
Early versus late cholecystectomy
n Early vs Late Cholecystectomy

Operating Conversion
Study Room Time to Open Complications Mortality Hospital
Reference Type EC LC (min) (%) (%) (%) Stay (d)
Lo et al,23 RCT 45 41 135 vs 105 11 vs 23 (NS) 13 vs 29 0 vs 0 6 vs 11
1998 (P 5 .02) (P 5 .07) (P<.001)
Johansson RCT 74 71 98 vs 100 31 vs 29 No significant 0 vs 0 5 vs 8
et al,24 difference (P 5 .05)
2003
Lai et al,25 RCT 53 51 123 vs 107 - 9 vs 8 (NS) 0 vs 0 7.6 vs 11.6
1998 (P 5 .04) (P<.001)
Kolla RCT 20 20 104 vs 93 25 vs 25 (NS) 20 vs 15 (NS) 0 vs 0 4.1 vs 10.1
et al,26 (NS) (P 5 .02)
2004
Abbreviations: LC, late cholecystectomy; n, number; NS, not significant; RCT, randomized
controlled trial.
462 Knab et al
complications or conversion rate was reported. The overall hospital stay was signifi-
cantly shorter in the EC group compared with the DC group by 4 days (P<.001).
When evaluating these studies, a few trends become apparent. One is that EC in
acute cholecystitis is safe and is not associated with a statistically significant increase
in complications or conversion rate. Patients who undergo EC also have an overall
shorter hospital stay compared with the DC group. In the DC group, there are many
patients (about 20%) who require emergency surgery for persistent symptoms and
are therefore at increased risk for conversion to an open procedure.
TYPE OF OPERATION
Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
As mentioned earlier, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the gold standard treatment of
acute cholecystitis. The shift from open to laparoscopic cholecystectomy occurred in
the late 1980s. As surgeon training progressed in laparoscopy, many surgeons started
using a single-incision approach known as single-incision laparoscopic cholecystec-
tomy (SILC). The advantages of SILC include the advantages of conventional multiport
laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC) over the open approach, as well as theoretic
improved cosmetic result and decreased postoperative pain secondary to a
decreased incision length; however, neither of these parameters has been consis-
tently validated in the literature. The main disadvantages of SILC are increased oper-
ative time, which can lead to increased intraoperative blood loss and hospital stay, as
well as increased overall costs compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery.
Many studies evaluating SILC exclude patients with acute cholecystitis. The inflam-
matory condition inherent in acute cholecystitis tends to make an already challenging
laparoscopic dissection and critical view of safety even more difficult when facing the
added technical considerations of a single port. One study evaluating risk factors for
prolonged operating time in SILC using multivariate analysis found that acute chole-
cystitis and body mass index were independent risk factors.29 In addition, prolonged
operating time was associated with statistically significant intraoperative blood loss
and hospital length of stay.29 A review evaluating 30 studies showed that acute chole-
cystitis was a significant risk factor for SILC failure, with a success rate of 60% in SILC
studies including patients with acute cholecystitis versus 93% success in those
studies excluding acute cholecystitis.30
A prospective randomized trial with 79 patients (about 25% with acute cholecystitis)
who underwent either SILC or CMLC reported a statistically significant increase in
overall cost associated with the SILC group compared with the CMLC ($2100 more,
on average). Several quality-of-life measures were evaluated, including postoperative
pain (followed out to 6 months), body image impact, and satisfaction with cosmetic
results, and no statistically significant differences were found.31
A meta-analysis32 that evaluated 12 randomized prospective trials (only 2 included
patients with acute cholecystitis) comparing SILC with CMLC reported that mean oper-
ating time was significantly increased in the SILC group compared with the CMLC group
(63 vs 46 minutes, respectively), and the conversion rate to laparotomy was similar. The
pain scores 6 hours and 24 hours postoperatively were not statistically significant be-
tween the 2 groups, and although the length of hospital stay for the SILC group trended
toward being less than the CMLC group (2.0 days vs 2.2 days), the difference was not
significant. There were no significant differences in postoperative morbidity, bleeding,
incisional hernias, or surgical site infections. Only 3 studies investigated patient satisfac-
tion with cosmetic outcome, and based on survey results, the SILC patients reported
statistically significant improved cosmetic results.
Cholecystitis 463
Using SILC in patients with acute cholecystitis should be approached with caution.
Although technically possible, SILC often results in increased operative time, blood
loss, and overall expense, without a clear advantage in postoperative pain or
decreased hospital stay.
Open Cholecystectomy
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has replaced open cholecystectomy as the gold stan-
dard treatment of acute cholecystitis, and many reported studies have repeatedly
proved the safety of the procedure after initial skepticism about bile duct injury rates.
These studies have reported bile duct injury rates ranging between about 0.3% and
0.4% after accounting for the initial learning curve after the introduction of the laparo-
scopic cholecystectomy.33–35 Studies have also shown similar morbidity and mortality
between laparoscopic and open surgery and decreased length of hospital stay and
postoperative pain.21,36 We argue that 100% of operations for acute cholecystitis
should be initiated laparoscopically. The surgeon must be aware of the variable biliary
anatomy (Fig. 5) and ensure a critical view of safety. The critical view of safety is a view
of the gallbladder after dissection showing only 2 structures entering the gallbladder:
the cystic artery and cystic duct (Fig. 6). If it is determined that the operation cannot be
completed safely and the critical view of safety not obtained via a laparoscopic dissec-
tion, conversion to an open operation is always an option. In some of the most expe-
rienced hands, conversion to an open procedure occurs in about 1% to 2% of patients
undergoing an elective procedure, although the rate increases in acute cholecys-
titis.37,38 There is little downside to an attempt at laparoscopy in a patient without pre-
vious upper abdominal surgery. A less frequent indication to convert to an open
procedure is concern for gallbladder malignancy.
Fig. 5. Schematic view of main variations of the biliary system anatomy in the triangle of
Calot and the gallbladder fossa. (A) Duct of Luschka (DL), (B) cystohepatic duct (CHD), (C)
vaginali ductuli (VD), (D) variant drainage of right posterior sector, (E) duplication of cystic
duct (CD), (F) duplication of gallbladder (GB). CBD, common bile duct; RBD, right bile duct.
(From Sharif K, de Ville de Goyet J. Bile duct of Luschka leading to bile leak after cholecys-
tectomy–revisiting the biliary anatomy. J Pediatr Surg 2003;38(11):E22; with permission.)
464 Knab et al
Fig. 6. Critical view of safety, showing only the cystic duct and artery entering directly into
the gallbladder with the bottom of the liver bed visible. (From Strasberg SM, Hertl M, Soper
NJ. An analysis of the problem of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am
Coll Surg 1995;180(1):113; with permission.)
Intraoperative Imaging of the Common Bile Duct

Intraoperative imaging of the common bile duct is a widely debated topic among sur-
geons. Surgeons perform intraoperative cholangiograms routinely, selectively, or not
at all. There are 2 main reasons to perform intraoperative imaging of the biliary anat-
omy: to delineate the relevant anatomy when there is question during the dissection
and to evaluate the presence of common bile duct stones. Many surgeons agree
that those patients who present with clinical evidence, laboratory values, or imaging
consistent with choledocholithiasis, including gallstone pancreatitis, jaundice,
increased liver enzyme levels, or a dilated common bile duct, should undergo common
bile duct evaluation by some method. There are varying strategies to evaluate the
common bile duct perioperatively, including preoperative or postoperative endo-
scopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, magnetic resonance cholangiopan-
creatography, or intraoperative imaging modalities, including cholangiography or
US. The most efficient and cost-effective method varies according to the resources
available at any given institution and must be individualized.
For those patients with no preoperative evidence of common bile duct stones, the
decision to evaluate the common bile duct is controversial. In a series of patients un-
dergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with routine intraoperative cholangiography
and no preoperative evidence of common bile duct stones, 4% had common bile
duct stones.39,40 The false-positive rate was between 0.8% and 1.6%.39 In a series
of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with selective intraoperative
cholangiography and no preoperative evidence of choledocholithiasis, only about
0.6% became symptomatic from retained common bile duct stones.39 These data
suggest that only about 15% of silent retained common duct stones cause symptoms.
The decision to proceed with intraoperative biliary imaging should be based on a
patient’s risk factors and presentation.
ACALCULOUS CHOLECYSTITIS
Pathophysiology
Acalculous cholecystitis (ACC) differs from calculous acute cholecystitis because it is
not precipitated by occlusion of the cystic duct by gallstones or biliary sludge. Two
Cholecystitis 465
percent to 15% of patients with acute cholecystitis do not have stone disease.41 ACC
is generally the result of biliary stasis and gallbladder ischemia, although the patho-
physiology has yet to be determined and is likely multifactorial. It is often associated
with critical illness, such as septic shock, severe trauma, burns, and major nonbiliary
operations.41 Biliary stasis can also be a precipitating cause as a result of prolonged
fasting or hyperalimentation. ACC has been associated with mortality as high as
41%.42
ACC is associated with an increased frequency of gallbladder complications, such
as gallbladder perforation, gangrenous gallbladder, and emphysematous gallbladder.
Reports indicate that 40% to 100% of patients presenting with ACC have one of these
complications.41
ACC can be difficult to diagnose, because the clinical manifestations are varied and
often nondescript. Patients can present in a similar fashion to acute calculous chole-
cystitis with right upper quadrant abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, anorexia, and
fever, although sometimes, the main complaint is vague abdominal pain. In the criti-
cally ill setting, a high index of suspicion must be maintained, because ACC is often
a diagnosis of exclusion in a critically ill patient with persistent fevers and leukocytosis.
ACC can result in rapid decompensation and mortality.
Imaging
Imaging modalities in ACC are similar to those of acute calculous cholecystitis, with
US findings of gallbladder wall thickening, pericholecystic fluid, and a distended gall-
bladder, although no gallstones or biliary sludge are present. In critically ill patients
with cardiac or renal insufficiency, gallbladder wall edema may be secondary to fluid
overload, and interpretation of transabdominal US can be difficult. In these scenarios,
an HIDA scan can be more efficacious.
TREATMENT
The preferred treatment of ACC is cholecystectomy, although many patients diag-

nosed with ACC are poor surgical candidates. Often, a temporizing percutaneous
cholecystostomy is performed, with the plan for a subsequent cholecystectomy
once the patient has improved clinically and is fit to undergo an operation.
There is, of course, debate as to which patients are operative candidates and when
cholecystostomy should be used instead of cholecystectomy. The literature on this
topic is varied and difficult to analyze, given the disparities between treatment groups
and the mixing of patients with calculous cholecystitis and ACC. Some studies show
increased perioperative morbidity and complications with cholecystectomy43 and
others with percutaneous cholecystostomy.44 Most of these studies do not include
enough patients to meaningfully determine survival rates. One study evaluated nation-
wide outcomes of percutaneous cholecystostomy for both calculous cholecystitis and
ACC. More than 58,000 ACC cases were included, and multivariate analyses indicated
that those who underwent a percutaneous cholecystostomy had decreased odds of
complications, although they had increased risk of mortality, length of hospital stay,
and overall expense.45 This study suggests that older patients with increased comor-
bidities tend to undergo cholecystostomy and that more patients should be consid-
ered for cholecystectomy. If the patient is a surgical candidate, a cholecystectomy
should be performed, because this generally leads to overall less hospital length of
stay, decreased expense, and complication rates, and mortality has not been shown
466 Knab et al
to be increased. If a patient is not a surgical candidate, a percutaneous cholecystos-

tomy is a useful option, but many patients are readmitted with biliary complications
and require a cholecystectomy at a later time.
CHRONIC CHOLECYSTITIS
Chronic cholecystitis and biliary colic account for 79% of cholecystectomies.10

Pathophysiology
Chronic cholecystitis occurs when a patient develops repeated occurrences of gall-
bladder inflammation, leading to gradual scarring and gallbladder dysfunction.46
The most common cause is gallstones intermittently obstructing the cystic duct, lead-
ing to biliary colic or episodic waves of epigastric pain and discomfort. The cystic duct
is commonly obstructed for some time, leading to gallbladder distention and inflam-
mation, followed by relief of the obstruction (the stone or sludge no longer obstructs
the cystic duct) and cessation of pain. This cycle can be repeated for months or years,
leading to a chronic gallbladder inflammation and scarring. Histologically, chronic
cholecystitis can be characterized by an increase in subepithelial and subserosal
fibrosis, as well as a mononuclear cell infiltrate secondary to this chronic
inflammation.46
Similar to acute cholecystitis, the most common presenting symptom of chronic
cholecystitis is pain. As described earlier in the section on pathophysiology, chronic
cholecystitis is often caused by repeated inflammatory episodes, and patients often
report episodes of biliary colic, which can last for hours at a time followed by a
pain-free period. These episodes are generally described as epigastric or right upper
quadrant pain, which can radiate to the back. Nausea, vomiting, and anorexia can also
be associated with these episodes. Chronic cholecystitis and acute cholecystitis are a
spectrum of diseases, and an episode of biliary colic caused by cystic duct obstruc-
tion can precipitate acute cholecystitis if the obstruction is not relieved. Many patients
who present with chronic cholecystitis do not have pain at the time of presentation but
endorse the characteristic history. Physical examination is often unremarkable as well,
unless the patient is experiencing pain.
Imaging
Transabdominal US is the main imaging modality used to diagnose chronic cholecys-
titis. Most patients with chronic cholecystitis have evidence of gallstones on US.
These imaging findings combined with a history of abdominal pain consistent with
biliary colic are generally diagnostic of biliary colic and chronic cholecystitis.
Management
The treatment of chronic cholecystitis is an elective cholecystectomy. Most patients
with typical biliary symptoms and gallstones on imaging have improvement of symp-
toms after a cholecystectomy.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: ACUTE CHOLECYSTITIS IN PREGNANCY
Gallstone-related disease remains the second most common nongynecologic condi-

tion requiring surgery in pregnant patients (acute appendicitis is more prevalent).47
Acute cholecystitis in pregnancy presents a challenging clinical scenario, which has
been the cause of some debate regarding surgical management in this patient
Cholecystitis 467
population. The surgical dogma advocated by many surgeons in the past has been to
pursue nonoperative management of pregnant patients until after delivery, when a
cholecystectomy can be performed without risk to the fetus. This treatment algorithm
has been challenged in recent years, because laparoscopic cholecystectomy has
proved to be a safe operation, which is tolerated well in most patient populations.
Pregnant patients are at increased risk of developing gallstones, because of
increased levels of estrogen and progesterone. Estrogen increases cholesterol secre-
tion and progesterone decreases bile acid secretion as well as decreasing gallbladder
contractility caused by smooth muscle inhibition.48 Gallstones have been reported in
as many as 1% to 3% of pregnant patients and biliary sludge in as many as 30%,
although acute cholecystitis is not more common in pregnancy. About 0.1% of preg-
nant patients develop acute cholecystitis.48
There are no prospective randomized trials comparing nonoperative management
and cholecystectomy in pregnant women with acute cholecystitis. A comprehensive
literature search that evaluated a total of 277 laparoscopic cholecystectomies per-
formed during pregnancy showed a fetal demise rate of 2.2%. Of the 6 reported cases
of fetal demise, 4 of the cases involved gallstone pancreatitis.49 The reported fetal
death rates after nonoperative management are varied and range from 0% to 12%.
One report indicated a 12% fetal death rate after nonoperative management of biliary
colic and acute cholecystitis and an increase to 60% if gallstone pancreatitis devel-
oped.50 An additional factor to consider aside from fetal death rates is the added
morbidity of recurrent episodes of biliary colic and cholecystitis in those women
treated nonoperatively. Individual reports indicate a wide variability in relapse rate.
One study reported recurrence rates of 92%, 64%, and 44% in the first, second,
and third trimesters, respectively.51 Another study reported lower rates of 20%,
45%, and 35% in the first, second, and third trimesters, respectively.47 In this series,
the rates of premature contractions, labor induction for treatment, and preterm deliv-
ery were all higher in the nonoperative group compared with the cholecystectomy
group.
SUMMARY
It is estimated that up to 15% of the American population have gallstones, and disor-
ders of the gallbladder are the most common diseases confronting general surgeons.
It is important for general surgeons to be aware that EC for acute cholecystitis has
been shown to decrease overall hospital days without leading to increased complica-
tions, mortality, or conversion to open procedures. Although cholecystitis is one of the
most common general surgical diseases, variations in cause, clinical presentation,
and severity require that surgeons fully understand the disease process and treatment
approaches.
REFERENCES
1. Stinton LM, Myers RP, Shaffer EA. Epidemiology of gallstones. Gastroenterol

Clin North Am 2010;39(2):157–69, vii.
2. Shaffer EA. Gallstone disease: epidemiology of gallbladder stone disease. Best
Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2006;20(6):981–96.
3. Halldestam I, Enell EL, Kullman E, et al. Development of symptoms and compli-
cations in individuals with asymptomatic gallstones. Br J Surg 2004;91(6):734–8.
4. McSherry CK, Ferstenberg H, Calhoun WF, et al. The natural history of diag-
nosed gallstone disease in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Ann
Surg 1985;202(1):59–63.
468 Knab et al
5. Ransohoff DF, Gracie WA, Wolfenson LB, et al. Prophylactic cholecystectomy or

expectant management for silent gallstones. A decision analysis to assess sur-
vival. Ann Intern Med 1983;99(2):199–204.
6. Riall TS, Zhang D, Townsend CM Jr, et al. Failure to perform cholecystectomy for
acute cholecystitis in elderly patients is associated with increased morbidity,
mortality, and cost. J Am Coll Surg 2010;210(5):668–77, 677–9.
7. Bates T, Harrison M, Lowe D, et al. Longitudinal study of gall stone prevalence at
necropsy. Gut 1992;33(1):103–7.
8. Venneman NG, van Erpecum KJ. Pathogenesis of gallstones. Gastroenterol Clin
North Am 2010;39(2):171–83, vii.
9. Steiner CA, Bass EB, Talamini MA, et al. Surgical rates and operative mortality
for open and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Maryland. N Engl J Med 1994;
330(6):403–8.
10. Orlando R 3rd, Russell JC, Lynch J, et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A
statewide experience. The Connecticut Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Regis-
try. Arch Surg 1993;128(5):494–8 [discussion: 498–9].
11. Pulvirenti E, Toro A, Gagner M, et al. Increased rate of cholecystectomies per-
formed with doubtful or no indications after laparoscopy introduction: a single
center experience. BMC Surg 2013;13:17.
12. Petersen JM, Knight TT. Gunshot cholecystitis. J Clin Gastroenterol 1995;21(4):
320–2.
13. Raine PA, Gunn AA. Acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 1975;62(9):697–700.
14. Hafif A, Gutman M, Kaplan O, et al. The management of acute cholecystitis in
elderly patients. Am Surg 1991;57(10):648–52.
15. Gruber PJ, Silverman RA, Gottesfeld S, et al. Presence of fever and leukocytosis
in acute cholecystitis. Ann Emerg Med 1996;28(3):273–7.
16. Kiewiet JJ, Leeuwenburgh MM, Bipat S, et al. A systematic review and meta-
analysis of diagnostic performance of imaging in acute cholecystitis. Radiology
2012;264(3):708–20.
17. Kalimi R, Gecelter GR, Caplin D, et al. Diagnosis of acute cholecystitis: sensi-
tivity of sonography, cholescintigraphy, and combined sonography-cholescin-
tigraphy. J Am Coll Surg 2001;193(6):609–13.
18. Chatziioannou SN, Moore WH, Ford PV, et al. Hepatobiliary scintigraphy is supe-
rior to abdominal ultrasonography in suspected acute cholecystitis. Surgery
2000;127(6):609–13.
19. Gill PT, Dillon E, Leahy AL, et al. Ultrasonography, HIDA scintigraphy or both in
the diagnosis of acute cholecystitis? Br J Surg 1985;72(4):267–8.
20. Hardy KJ. Carl Langenbuch and the Lazarus Hospital: events and circum-
stances surrounding the first cholecystectomy. Aust N Z J Surg 1993;63(1):
56–64.
21. Soper NJ, Stockmann PT, Dunnegan DL, et al. Laparoscopic cholecystec-
tomy. The new ’gold standard’? Arch Surg 1992;127(8):917–21 [discussion:
921–3].
22. Beal JM. Historical perspective of gallstone disease. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1984;
158(2):181–9.
23. Lo CM, Liu CL, Fan ST, et al. Prospective randomized study of early versus de-
layed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg 1998;
227(4):461–7.
24. Johansson M, Thune A, Blomqvist A, et al. Management of acute cholecystitis in
the laparoscopic era: results of a prospective, randomized clinical trial.
J Gastrointest Surg 2003;7(5):642–5.
Cholecystitis 469
25. Lai PB, Kwong KH, Leung KL, et al. Randomized trial of early versus delayed
laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 1998;85(6):
764–7.
26. Kolla SB, Aggarwal S, Kumar A, et al. Early versus delayed laparoscopic cho-
lecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a prospective randomized trial. Surg En-
dosc 2004;18(9):1323–7.
27. Skouras C, Jarral O, Deshpande R, et al. Is early laparoscopic cholecystectomy
for acute cholecystitis preferable to delayed surgery?: Best evidence topic
(BET). Int J Surg 2012;10(5):250–8.
28. Gurusamy K, Samraj K, Gluud C, et al. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled
trials on the safety and effectiveness of early versus delayed laparoscopic cho-
lecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 2010;97(2):141–50.
29. Sato N, Yabuki K, Shibao K, et al. Risk factors for a prolonged operative time in a
single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. HPB (Oxford) 2014;16(2):177–82.
30. Antoniou SA, Pointner R, Granderath FA. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecys-
tectomy: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 2011;25(2):367–77.
31. Leung D, Yetasook AK, Carbray J, et al. Single-incision surgery has higher cost
with equivalent pain and quality-of-life scores compared with multiple-incision
laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized blinded comparison.
J Am Coll Surg 2012;215(5):702–8.
32. Pisanu A, Reccia I, Porceddu G, et al. Meta-analysis of prospective randomized
studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) and
conventional multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy (CMLC). J Gastrointest
Surg 2012;16(9):1790–801.
33. Z’Graggen K, Wehrli H, Metzger A, et al. Complications of laparoscopic chole-
cystectomy in Switzerland. A prospective 3-year study of 10,174 patients. Swiss
Association of Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery. Surg Endosc 1998;
12(11):1303–10.
34. Nuzzo G, Giuliante F, Giovannini I, et al. Bile duct injury during laparoscopic
cholecystectomy: results of an Italian national survey on 56 591 cholecystec-
tomies. Arch Surg 2005;140(10):986–92.
35. Fletcher DR, Hobbs MS, Tan P, et al. Complications of cholecystectomy: risks of
the laparoscopic approach and protective effects of operative cholangiography:
a population-based study. Ann Surg 1999;229(4):449–57.
36. Lillemoe KD, Lin JW, Talamini MA, et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy as a
“true” outpatient procedure: initial experience in 130 consecutive patients.
J Gastrointest Surg 1999;3(1):44–9.
37. Wu JS, Dunnegan DL, Luttmann DR, et al. The evolution and maturation of lapa-
roscopic cholecystectomy in an academic practice. J Am Coll Surg 1998;
186(5):554–60 [discussion: 560–1].
38. Lau H, Brooks DC. Transitions in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the impact of
ambulatory surgery. Surg Endosc 2002;16(2):323–6.
39. Metcalfe MS, Ong T, Bruening MH, et al. Is laparoscopic intraoperative cholan-
giogram a matter of routine? Am J Surg 2004;187(4):475–81.
40. Khan OA, Balaji S, Branagan G, et al. Randomized clinical trial of routine on-
table cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 2011;
98(3):362–7.
41. Ryu JK, Ryu KH, Kim KH. Clinical features of acute acalculous cholecystitis.
J Clin Gastroenterol 2003;36(2):166–9.
42. Kalliafas S, Ziegler DW, Flancbaum L, et al. Acute acalculous cholecystitis: inci-
dence, risk factors, diagnosis, and outcome. Am Surg 1998;64(5):471–5.
470 Knab et al
43. Melloul E, Denys A, Demartines N, et al. Percutaneous drainage versus emer-

gency cholecystectomy for the treatment of acute cholecystitis in critically ill pa-
tients: does it matter? World J Surg 2011;35(4):826–33.
44. Abi-Haidar Y, Sanchez V, Williams SA, et al. Revisiting percutaneous cholecys-
tostomy for acute cholecystitis based on a 10-year experience. Arch Surg 2012;
147(5):416–22.
45. Anderson JE, Chang DC, Talamini MA. A nationwide examination of outcomes of
percutaneous cholecystostomy compared with cholecystectomy for acute
cholecystitis, 1998-2010. Surg Endosc 2013;27(9):3406–11.
46. Mulholland MW, Lillemoe K, Doherty GM, et al. Greenfield’s surgery: scientific
principles and practice. 4th edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins;
2006. p. 2277.
47. Lu EJ, Curet MJ, El-Sayed YY, et al. Medical versus surgical management of
biliary tract disease in pregnancy. Am J Surg 2004;188(6):755–9.
48. Gilo NB, Amini D, Landy HJ. Appendicitis and cholecystitis in pregnancy. Clin
Obstet Gynecol 2009;52(4):586–96.
49. Jelin EB, Smink DS, Vernon AH, et al. Management of biliary tract disease dur-
ing pregnancy: a decision analysis. Surg Endosc 2008;22(1):54–60.
50. Muench J, Albrink M, Serafini F, et al. Delay in treatment of biliary disease during
pregnancy increases morbidity and can be avoided with safe laparoscopic cho-
lecystectomy. Am Surg 2001;67(6):539–42 [discussion: 542–3].
51. Swisher SG, Schmit PJ, Hunt KK, et al. Biliary disease during pregnancy. Am J
Surg 1994;168(6):576–9 [discussion: 580–1].

Cholecystitis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cholecystitis PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cholecystitis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cholecystitis

Lawrence M. Knab, MDa, Anne-Marie Boller, MD

Gallstone disease is an ancient problem. Autopsies on Egyptian mummies have shown

It is estimated that 20 to 25 million Americans (10%–15% of the population) have gall-

Surg Clin N Am 94 (2014) 455–470

The development of cholelithiasis is multifactorial. Advancing age is a risk factor for

Acute cholecystitis accounts for 14% to 30% of cholecystectomies.9–11

Fig. 4. Diffusion-weighted MRI of abdomen showing acute cholecystitis and pancreatitis;

Management of Acute Cholecystitis

n Early vs Late Cholecystectomy

Intraoperative Imaging of the Common Bile Duct

The preferred treatment of ACC is cholecystectomy, although many patients diag-

to be increased. If a patient is not a surgical candidate, a percutaneous cholecystos-

Chronic cholecystitis and biliary colic account for 79% of cholecystectomies.10

SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: ACUTE CHOLECYSTITIS IN PREGNANCY

Gallstone-related disease remains the second most common nongynecologic condi-

1. Stinton LM, Myers RP, Shaffer EA. Epidemiology of gallstones. Gastroenterol

5. Ransohoff DF, Gracie WA, Wolfenson LB, et al. Prophylactic cholecystectomy or

43. Melloul E, Denys A, Demartines N, et al. Percutaneous drainage versus emer-

You might also like