Safra Kesesi Cerrahisi Öncesinde Hastanın Preoperatif Değerlendirilmesi
Özet
Kolesistektomi ameliyatı öncesinde gerçekleştirilen preoperatif hasta değerlendirmesi, cerrahi başarıyı artırmak ve olası komplikasyonları en aza indirmek adına kritik bir öneme sahiptir. Kolelitiazis tedavisinde altın standart kabul edilen laparoskopik kolesistektomi, açık cerrahiye kıyasla daha az ağrı ve hızlı iyileşme sunsa da genel komplikasyon riskleri daha yüksektir. Bu nedenle cerrahların, zor bir safra kesesi vakasıyla karşılaşabileceğini öngörerek hastanın tıbbi öyküsünü, fizik muayene bulgularını (özellikle Murphy belirtisini) ve laboratuvar tetkiklerini titizlikle incelemesi gerekir. Tanı sürecinde noninvaziv yapısıyla ultrasonografi ilk tercih olup, karmaşık olgularda MRKP, EUS, ERCP ve Batın BT gibi gelişmiş görüntüleme tekniklerinden yararlanılmaktadır. Ayrıca akut kolesistit, Mirizzi Sendromu, siroz/portal hipertansiyon, malignite şüphesi, pulmoner hipertansiyon ve hamilelik gibi cerrahi tekniği doğrudan etkileyen özel durumlara dikkat edilmelidir. Bu risk faktörlerinin varlığında, cerrahi kararı hastaya göre bireyselleştirilmeli; gerektiğinde kolesistostomi ve antibiyoterapi gibi ameliyat dışı girişimler veya üçüncü basamak merkezlere sevk seçenekleri planlanmalıdır.
Preoperative patient assessment before cholecystectomy is of critical importance in optimizing surgical outcomes and minimizing potential complications. Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy is recognized as the gold standard in cholelithiasis treatment due to less postoperative pain and faster recovery, it carries a higher overall complication rate than open surgery. Therefore, surgeons must anticipate a challenging gallbladder encounter by meticulously analyzing the patient's medical history, physical examination findings—specifically the Murphy's sign—and comprehensive laboratory tests. Ultrasonography remains the initial noninvasive imaging choice, while advanced techniques like MRCP, EUS, ERCP, and abdominal CT are leveraged for complex cases. Furthermore, high-risk conditions such as acute cholecystitis, Mirizzi Syndrome, cirrhosis/portal hypertension, suspected malignancy, pulmonary hypertension, and pregnancy must be carefully evaluated as they directly modify patient management. In the presence of these severe comorbidities, alternative non-surgical interventions like percutaneous cholecystostomy, antibiotic therapy, or transferring the patient to specialized tertiary centers should be integrated into the clinical strategy.
Referanslar
Soper, N.J., P. T. Stockmann, D. L. Dunnegan ve ark., Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The new 'gold standard'? Arch Surg, 1992. 127(8): p. 917-21; discussion 921-3.
Schirmer, B.D., S. B. Edge, J. Dix ve ark., Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Treatment of choice for symptomatic cholelithiasis. Ann Surg, 1991. 213(6): p. 665-76; discussion 677.
Wiesen, S.M., S. W. Unger, J. S. Barkin ve ark., Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the procedure of choice for acute cholecystitis. Am J Gastroenterol, 1993. 88(3): p. 334-7.
Wilson, R.G., I. M. Macintyre, S. J. Nixon ve ark., Laparoscopic cholecystectomy as a safe and effective treatment for severe acute cholecystitis. Bmj, 1992. 305(6850): p. 394-6.
Rattner, D.W., C. Ferguson, ve A.L. Warshaw, Factors associated with successful laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Ann Surg, 1993. 217(3): p. 233-6.
Johansson, M., A. Thune, L. Nelvin ve ark., Randomized clinical trial of open versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg, 2005. 92(1): p. 44-9.
Yamashita, Y., T. Takada, Y. Kawarada ve ark., Surgical treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg, 2007. 14(1): p. 91-7.
Vollmer, C.M., Jr. ve M.P. Callery, Biliary injury following laparoscopic cholecystectomy: why still a problem? Gastroenterology, 2007. 133(3): p. 1039-41.
Khan, M.H., T. J. Howard, E. L. Fogel ve ark., Frequency of biliary complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy detected by ERCP: experience at a large tertiary referral center. Gastrointest Endosc, 2007. 65(2): p. 247-52.
Ginat, D. ve W.E. Saad, Cholecystostomy and transcholecystic biliary access. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol, 2008. 11(1): p. 2-13.
Brunt, L.M., D.J. Deziel, Telem D. A. ve ark., Safe Cholecystectomy Multi-society Practice Guideline and State of the Art Consensus Conference on Prevention of Bile Duct Injury During Cholecystectomy. Ann Surg, 2020. 272(1): p. 3-23.
Singer, A.J., G. McCracken, M. C. Henry ve ark., Correlation among clinical, laboratory, and hepatobiliary scanning findings in patients with suspected acute cholecystitis. Ann Emerg Med, 1996. 28(3): p. 267-72.
Adedeji, O.A. ve W.A. McAdam, Murphy's sign, acute cholecystitis and elderly people. J R Coll Surg Edinb, 1996. 41(2): p. 88-9.
Lee, H.J., B. I. Choi, J. K. Han ve ark., Three-dimensional ultrasonography using the minimum transparent mode in obstructive biliary diseases: early experience. J Ultrasound Med, 2002. 21(4): p. 443-53.
Sharma, M., P. Somani, ve T. Sunkara, Imaging of gall bladder by endoscopic ultrasound. World J Gastrointest Endosc, 2018. 10(1): p. 10-15.
Kats, J., M. Kraai, A. J. Dijkstra ve ark., Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography as a diagnostic tool for common bile duct stones: a comparison with ERCP and clinical follow-up. Dig Surg, 2003. 20(1): p. 32-7.
Dumot, J.A., ERCP: current uses and less-invasive options. Cleve Clin J Med, 2006. 73(5): p. 418, 421, 424-5 passim.
Pearl, J., R. Price, W. Richardson ve ark., Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and use of laparoscopy for surgical problems during pregnancy. Surg Endosc, 2011. 25(11): p. 3479-92.
