Comparative Operative Outcomes of Early and Delayed Cholecystectomy for Acute Cholecystitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the operative outcomes of early and delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. BACKGROUND: Randomized trials comparing early to delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis have limited contemporary external validity. Furthermore, no study to date has been large enough to assess the impact of timing of cholecystectomy on the frequency of serious rare complications including bile duct injury and death. METHODS: This is a population-based retrospective cohort study of patients emergently admitted to hospital with acute cholecystitis and managed with cholecystectomy over the period of April 1, 2004, to March 31, 2011. We used administrative records for the province of Ontario, Canada. Patients were divided into 2 exposure groups: those who underwent cholecystectomy within 7 days of emergency department presentation on index admission (early cholecystectomy) and those whose cholecystectomy was delayed. The primary outcome was major bile duct injury requiring operative repair within 6 months of cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes included major bile duct injury or death, 30-day postcholecystectomy mortality, completion of cholecystectomy with an open approach, conversion among laparoscopic cases, and total hospital length of stay. Propensity score methods were used to address confounding by indication. RESULTS: From 22,202 patients, a well-balanced matched cohort of 14,220 patients was defined. Early cholecystectomy was associated with a lower risk of major bile duct injury [0.28% vs 0.53%, relative risk (RR)=0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-0.90], of major bile duct injury or death (1.36% vs 1.88%, RR=0.72, 95% CI: 0.56-0.94), and, albeit non-significant, of 30-day mortality (0.46% vs 0.64%, RR=0.73, 95% CI: 0.47-1.15). Total hospital length of stay was shorter with early cholecystectomy (mean difference 1.9 days, 95% CI: 1.7-2.1). No significant differences were observed in terms, open cholecystectomy (15% vs 14%, RR=1.07, 95% CI: 0.99-1.16) or in conversion among laparoscopic cases (11% vs 10%, RR=1.02, 95% CI: 0.93-1.13). CONCLUSIONS: These results support the benefit of early overdelayed cholecystectomy for patients with acute cholecystitis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".