ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Since the laparoscopic cholecystectomy became an usual procedure, operative indications of the gallbladder polyps have had the tendency to enlarge. There are no precise management plan about the gallbladder polyps which is not included in the accepted operative indications. Therefore a management plan may be required for the patients who has gallbladder polyps which is not accepted operative indications. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 106 patients with gallbladder polyps who were diagnosed preoperatively by ultrasound and CT from January 1991 to January 2005. Our operation indications are polyp above 10 mm, symptomatic polyp, sessile polyp, coincidence of stone, focal thickening of gallbladder wall, diffuse wall thickening and detection during other operations. The gallbladder polyps which were suspected to the gallbladder cancer strongly on radiologic studies and polyps above 20 mm size were excluded in this studies. RESULTS: Among the 106 patients, 87 patients underwent operation, and polypoid lesions disappeared during the follow-up period in 3 patients, and 16 patients are on regular follow up. Fifty-six cases received operation with accepted operative indications, and the thirty-one cases underwent operation by the patient's demand. Two groups showed significant difference in true polyp on pathological diagnosis (P < 0.001). There was 16.07% true polyp in opertive indication based 56 patients and no true polyp in patient's demanded 31 cases. The pathologic diagnoses were cholesterol polyp in 27 patients (87.15%), no polyp in 2 patients, adenomatous hyperplasia in 2 patients. The correlation of the polyp size and pathologic diagnosis was an inverse relation to the polyp size and incidence of pseudopolyp (P=0.014). CONCLUSION: We propose that the 6-month-interval follow-up observation is fully safe for polyps sized below 10 mm and not included in accepted operative indications.
Subject(s)
Humans , Cholecystectomy, Laparoscopic , Cholesterol , Diagnosis , Follow-Up Studies , Gallbladder Neoplasms , Gallbladder , Hyperplasia , Incidence , Polyps , Retrospective Studies , Surgical Procedures, Operative , UltrasonographyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Nonoperative management is currently considered a treatment modality in 50 to 80% of patients with blunt liver injury. Nevertheless 10 to 50% of patients need operative management, and the criteria for operative management have not established. The purpose of this study is to find criteria for operative management of patients with blunt liver injury. METHODS: The records of 117 patients who experienced blunt hepatic injury from January 1992 to April 1999 were reviewed retrospectively with respect to hemodynamic stability, transfusion requirement, injury severity score, liver injury grade, amount of blood in the peritoneal cavity, and pooling of contrast material on computerized tomography (CT). RESULTS: Among the 117 patients, 29 patients (25%) were treated operatively (Group 1) and 88 patients (75%) were treated nonoperatively (Group 2). The initial systolic blood pressure in Group 1 was significantly lower than that of Group 2 (74.4+/-30.3 mmHg vs 107.1+/-27.2 mmHg, p<0.001). The amounts of transfusion for hemodynamic stability were 2.1 units in Group 1 and 0.4 units in Group 2 (p<0.001). The injury Severity score of Group 1 was significantly higher than that of Group 2 (20.8 +/- 11.0 vs 10.7+/-6.8, p=0.03). The mean injury grade was 3.7+/-0.1 for Group 1 and 2.4+/-1.0 for Group 2, which was a statistically significant difference was seen (p<0.001). The amount of hemoperitoneum in Group 1 was significantly higher than that of Group 2 (p<0.001). The pooling of contrast material on CT was detected in 3 cases in Group 1. CONCLUSION: We can establish the following criteria for operative management: operative management is necessary for hemodynamic instability during resusci tation, positive peritoneal irritation signs, and presence of pooling of contrast material on CT. In cases above grade IV, above 500 mL of hemoperitoneum on CT, or above 2 units of blood transfusion during resuscitation, close observation in an intensive care unit is necessary. If abnormality develops during observation, prompt operative management is mandatory.