Implications of routine cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy on postoperative testing: Review of more than 2,300 cases in a community-based practice.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that routine cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy may increase use of postoperative imaging and invasive testing. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of laparoscopic cholecystectomy cases at 6 community hospitals from 2017 through 2020. For surgeons performing routine vs selective cholangiography, we compared primary outcomes of operative time, 30-day complications, and postoperative imaging or procedures. RESULTS: In total, 2359 laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedures were performed. Eighteen surgeons performed routine cholangiography (1125 cases), and 13 performed selective (1234 cases). Mean operative time was longer in the routine group (125.3 vs 98.7 min, P < .001). Between groups, 30-day complications were similar. Two common bile duct injuries were identified in the routine group. Postoperatively, the routine group underwent 2.5 times more imaging and invasive testing (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In community hospitals, laparoscopic cholecystectomy can be performed safely by surgeons using cholangiography routinely or selectively. Routine cholangiography resulted in more postoperative imaging and invasive testing.

Newly implemented enhanced recovery pathway positively impacts hospital length of stay.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) are thought to improve surgical outcomes by standardizing perioperative patient care established in evidence-based literature. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of a colorectal surgery ERP on hospital length of stay (LOS) and other patient outcomes. METHODS: This is a comparative effectiveness study of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery 2 years prior (pre-ERP group) and 2 years after (ERP group) implementation of an ERP program. The primary outcome was hospital LOS. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day reoperations. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized to control for patient factors, general health factors, diagnosis, surgeon, colon versus rectal operations, and open versus minimally invasive operations-laparoscopic and robotic. An ERP checklist was developed to track adherence to components of the pathway. RESULTS: The study population included 1036 patients: 523 in the pre-ERP group and 513 in the ERP group. Unadjusted LOS was significantly shorter in the ERP group than the control pre-ERP group [3 (IQR 3.5) vs 5 days (IQR 4.6); p < 0.0001]. Multivariable regression analysis confirmed the reduction in LOS, controlling for age, colon/rectum procedure, open/laparoscopic/robotic approach, primary diagnosis, and alvimopan use. Postoperative outcomes were not significantly different between groups except for 30-day readmissions, which were unexpectedly higher in the ERP group (14.6 vs 8.7 %, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: A newly implemented ERP on a dedicated colorectal surgery service in an academic non-university hospital setting resulted in shorter hospital LOS, but increased readmissions, for patients undergoing elective open and minimally invasive colon and rectal surgery. Future multi-institutional studies are needed to understand the impact of ERP on postoperative complications and readmissions.