ABSTRACT
Background Cholecystectomy is one of the most commonly performed abdominal operations. Demands on acute operating theatre availability have led to out-of-hours (evenings, nights, or weekend) cholecystectomy being performed, although it is not known whether outcomes differ between out-of-hours and in-hours (daytime on weekdays) cholecystectomy.
Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare outcomes following out-of-hours versus in-hours urgent cholecystectomy.
Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus databases were systematically searched from inception to December 2020 for studies comparing outcomes from out-of-hours and in-hours urgent cholecystectomy in adults. The outcomes of interest were rates of bile leakage, bile duct injury (BDI), overall post-operative complications, conversion to open cholecystectomy, specific intra- and post-operative complications, length of stay (LOS), readmission and mortality. Sensitivity analysis of adjusted multivariate results was also performed.
Results In total, 194,135 urgent cholecystectomies (30,001 out-of-hours; 164,134 in-hours) from 11 studies were included. Most studies were of high (64%) or medium (18%) quality. There were no differences between out-of-hours and in-hours cholecystectomy for rates of bile leakage, BDI, overall post-operative complications, conversion to open cholecystectomy, operative duration, readmission, mortality, and post-operative LOS. Higher rates of post-operative sepsis (odds ratio (OR) 1.58, 95% CI: 1.04-2.41; p=0.03) and pneumonia (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.06-2.26; p=0.02) were observed following out-of-hours cholecystectomy on univariate meta-analysis but not on adjusted multivariate meta-analysis.
Conclusions There was no increased risk or difference in specific complications associated with out-of-hours compared with in-hours urgent cholecystectomy.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work did not receive any specific funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Not applicable.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
This study does not contain any primary data.
