Clinical and operative outcomes of patients with acute cholecystitis who are treated initially with image-guided cholecystostomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) tube placement followed by delayed cholecystectomy has been shown to be an effective treatment option in high-risk populations such as older and critically ill patients. The goal of this study was to review the short- and long-term clinical and operative outcomes of patients with acute cholecystitis initially treated with PC tube placement. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent image-guided PC tube insertion between 2001 and 2011 at the Royal University Hospital or St. Paul's Hospital, Saskatoon. Clinical outcomes, complications and elective cholecystectomy follow-up were noted. RESULTS: A total of 140 patients underwent PC tube insertion, 76 men and 64 women with a mean age of 68.4 (standard deviation 17.7) years. Of the 140, 94 (67.1%) had an American Society of Anesthesiologists classification score of III or IV. Percutaneous cholecystostomy tubes remained in place for a median of 21.0 days, and the median hospital stay was 7.0 days. Readmission owing to complications from PC tubes occurred in 21 patients (15.0%), and 10 (7.1%) were readmitted with recurrent cholecystitis after tube removal. Forty-four patients (31.4%) returned for subsequent elective cholecystectomy, of whom 32 (73%) underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 4 (9%) underwent open cholecystectomy, and 8 (18%) underwent laparoscopic converted to open cholecystectomy. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous cholecystostomy is a safe procedure that can be performed in patients who are older or have numerous comorbidities. However, less than one-third of such patients in our cohort subsequently had the definitive intervention of elective cholecystectomy, with a high rate of conversion from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".