Defining Prolonged Length of Stay (PLOS) Following Elective Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Derivation of a Preoperative Risk Score to Inform Resource Utilization, Risk Stratification, and Patient Consent. Issue 5 (8th May 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lucocq, James; Scollay, John; Patil, Pradeep
• Is Part Of: Annals of surgery. Volume 277:Issue 5(2023)
• Page Start: e1051
• Page End: e1055
• Publication Date: 2023-05-08
• Subjects: laparoscopic cholecystectomy -- length of stay -- risk tool -- morbidity; Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005469
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-4932

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: The present study defines prolonged length of stay (PLOS) following elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and its relationship with perioperative morbidity. A preoperative risk tool to predict PLOS is derived to inform resource utilization, risk stratification and patient consent. Background: Surgical candidates for elective LC are a heterogeneous group at risk of various perioperative adverse outcomes. Preoperative recognition of high-risk patients for PLOS has implications on feasibility for day surgery, resource utilization, preoperative risk stratification, and patient consent. Methods: Data for all patients who underwent elective LC between January 2015 and January 2020 across 3 surgical centers (1 tertiary referral center and 2 satellite units) in 1 health board were collected retrospectively (n=2166). The optimal cut-off of PLOS as a proxy for operation-related adverse outcomes was found using receiver operating characteristic curves. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted on a derivation subcohort to derive a preoperative model predicting PLOS. Receiver operating characteristic curves were performed to validate the model. Patients were stratified by the risk tool and the risks of PLOS were determined. Results: A LOS of ≥3 days following elective LC demonstrated the best diagnostic ability for operation-related adverse outcomes [area under curve (AUC)=0.87] and defined the PLOS cut-off. The rate of PLOS was 6.6% (144/2166), 86.1% of which had a perioperative adverse outcome. PLOS was strongly associated with all adverse outcomes (subtotal, conversion-to-open, intraoperative complications, postoperative complication/imaging/intervention) ( P <0.001). The preoperative model demonstrated good diagnostic ability for PLOS in the derivation (AUC=0.81) and validation cohorts (AUC=0.80) and stratified patients appropriately. Conclusions: Morbidity in PLOS patients is significant and pragmatic patient selection in accordance with the risk tool may help centers improve resource utilization, risk stratification, and their consent process. The risk tool may help select candidates for cholecystectomy in a strictly ambulatory/outpatient center.