Transhepatic versus transperitoneal approach in percutaneous cholecystostomy: a meta-analysis.

AIM: To determine whether the transhepatic or transperitoneal approach is the optimal percutaneous cholecystostomy approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken in which the Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed databases were searched for studies that compared both approaches in patients undergoing percutaneous cholecystostomy. Statistical analysis of dichotomous variables was carried out using odds ratio as the summary statistic. RESULTS: Four studies totalling 684 patients (396 [58%] males, mean age 74 years) who had undergone percutaneous cholecystostomy via the transhepatic (n=367) and transperitoneal (n=317) approach were analysed. Although the overall risk of bleeding was low (4.1%), it was significantly higher in the transhepatic approach compared with the transperitoneal approach (6.3% versus 1.6% respectively, odds ratio = 4.02 [1.56, 10.38]; p=0.004). There were no significant differences in pain, bile leak, tube-related complications, wound infection, or abscess formation between the approaches. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous cholecystostomy can be performed safely and successfully via the transhepatic and transperitoneal approaches. Although the overall rate of bleeding was significantly higher with the transhepatic approach, there were confounding factors due to technical differences between the studies. The small number of the included studies, in addition to variability of the definitions of outcomes, imposed other limitations. Further large-volume cases series and ideally a randomised trial with well-defined outcomes are required to confirm these findings.

Gender representation within radiology conferences in the UK in 2021.

AIM: To examine the gender representation and equality within academic meetings and society conferences within the UK radiology conferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: UK-based subspecialty radiology meetings organised by major radiological associations and societies (online and in-person) from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021 were included. Speakers and chairs were documented with reference to their gender, years on General Medical Council (GMC) register, academic publications, and h-index. Data were analysed using SPSS v27 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). RESULTS: Of 298 sessional chairs, 105 were female (35.2%). Of 639 speakers, 212 (33.2%) were female. Three subspecialties (interventional radiology, uro-radiology, and nuclear medicine) had a higher proportion of female speakers than the percentage of female consultants with specialist interest. Of the 71 invited international speakers, 28.2% (20/71) were female. Online conferences had a significantly greater proportion of female speakers (43.2% versus 24.1%, p<0.001) and chairs (48.7% versus 20.4%, p<0.001) compared to in person. Male speakers had a higher median number of publications (31 versus 12, p<0.0001) and median h-index (11 versus 4, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that women are under-represented in radiology society meetings, particularly within certain subspecialty groups. Radiological societies should actively encourage a more balanced gender representation at conferences with online conference shown to improve female representation.

Learning from mistakes when reporting urgent and emergency vascular studies.

The majority of out-of-hours cases relate to neurological, chest, and gastrointestinal pathologies with acute vascular cases being encountered less commonly. Trainees and exposure of non-vascular/interventional radiology (IR) consultants to angiographic imaging is often limited in working hours and this may lead to reporting on-call cases outside of normal daytime practice. In a recent local review, a number on-call vascular studies were found to contain a number of vascular-related discrepancies. Vascular reporting is a complex subspecialty, which comprises many clear diagnoses (large vessel occlusions, large vessel aneurysms, or dissections); however, also several subtle and complex abnormalities. These more subtle abnormalities, at times, require dedicated vascular specialist review to ensure subtle findings are communicated appropriately to the clinical team. The recent increased complexity of endovascular treatments and their complications has also provided further challenge for the non-specialist reporter. Similarly, improved imaging techniques have allowed for non-obvious but significant findings that may require urgent management, such as small aneurysms and dissection flaps. We will review a range of key vascular findings that demonstrate learning opportunities, particularly within the acute and on-call settings. These will include gastrointestinal haemorrhage, subtle aortic pathologies, head and neck vascular emergencies, small to mid-sized vessel injuries and imaging of post-procedural complications. Educational hints and tips will be provided to enable learning from mistakes encountered by trainees and non-vascular specialist radiologists in the on-call or urgent reporting settings, and these will be reviewed with reference to the literature.

Percutaneous Cholecystostomy for Severe Acute Cholecystitis: A Useful Procedure in High-Risk Patients for Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Acute cholecystitis has the potential to cause sepsis and death, particularly in patients with poor physiological reserve. The gold standard treatment of acute cholecystitis (cholecystectomy) is often not safe in high-risk patients and recourse is made to percutaneous cholecystostomy as either definite treatment or temporizing measure. The aim of this study is to evaluate early and late outcomes following percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients with acute cholecystitis treated at our institution. METHODS: All patients who underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis (excluding patients with malignancy) between January 2005 and September 2014 were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients (22 female, median age, 74 years; range, 27-95 years) underwent percutaneous cholecystostomy during the study period. In total, 12 patients (22.6%) had acalculous cholecystitis. The main indications for percutaneous cholecystostomy were significant co-morbidities (n = 28, 52.8%) and patients too unstable for surgery (n = 21, 39.6%). The median time to percutaneous cholecystostomy from diagnosis of acute cholecystitis was 3.6 days (range, 0-45 days). The median length of hospital stay was 27 (range, 4-87) days. The overall 90-day mortality was 9.3% with two further deaths at 12-month follow up. The mortality was significantly higher in patients with American Society of Anesthesiology grade 4-5 (18% vs 0% in American Society of Anesthesiology grade 2-3, p = 0.026) and in patients with acalculous cholecystitis (25% vs 4.5%, p = 0.035). The overall readmission rate was 18%. A total of 24 (45.2%) patients had surgery: laparoscopic cholecystectomy, n = 11; laparoscopic converted to open, n = 5; open total cholecystectomy, n = 5; open cholecystectomy, n = 1; laparotomy and washout, n = 1; laparotomy partial cholecystectomy and closure of perforated small intestine and gastrostomy, n = 1. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous cholecystostomy is a useful temporary or permanent procedure in patients with acute cholecystitis of both calculous and acalculous origin, who are unfit for surgery.