Table 1.
Studies and demographic data of the included patients.
| Study | City (country) | Design | Duration (years) | Demographic data | |||||
| PCT population | Age years) | Male (%) | Comorbidity index | Severity | ACC (%) | ||||
| Abi–Haidar (2012)1 | Boston (USA) | Retrospective | 9 | 51 | mean 70.4 (SD 13.9) | ASA3–4 88.2% | TG2–3 27.5% | 17.6 | |
| Al–jundi (2012)2 | Chesterfield (UK) | Retrospective | 5 | 30 | mean 76.1 (R 52–90) | 56.7 | – | – | 3.1 |
| Anderson 2013)3 | San Diego (USA) | Retrospective | 11 | 306,747 (CC vs ACC) | CC Gr: mean 54.7 | 40.1 | CC Gr: mean CCS 3.5 | – | 19.07 |
| ACC Gr: mean 57.8 | 49.7 | ACC Gr: mean CCS 3.9 | |||||||
| Atar (2014)4 | Petach Tikva (Israel) | Retrospective | 3 | 81 | median 82 (R 47–99) | 40.7 | – | – | 12.3 |
| Bakkaloglu (2006)5 | Istanbul (Turkey) | Retrospective | 4 | 27 | median 71.4 (R 64–93) | 18.5 | ASA3 74.1%; ASA4 25.9% | – | 7.4 |
| Bickel (2016)6 | Nahariya (Israel) | Retrospective | 6 | 59 | mean 72.5 (R 41–96) | 66.1 | – | – | – |
| Boules (2016)7 | Cleveland (USA) | Retrospective | 14 | 380 | mean 65.3 ± 14.2 | 58.7 | mean CCS 3.2 ± 2.1 | – | 41.8 |
| Carrafiello (2012)8 | Varese (Italy) | Retrospective | 3 | 30 | mean 78.6 (R 57–97) | 56.7 | – | – | – |
| Cha (2014)9 | Jeju (Korea) | Retrospective | 5 | 82 | mean 72.1 ± 13.7 | 52.4 | ASA1–3 59.8%; ASA4 40.2% | – | 44 |
| Chang (2014)10 | Seoul, (South Korea) | Retrospective | 11 | 60a | mean 68.6 ± 13.8 | mean KPS 24.8 ± 9.7 | TG2 65%; TG3 18.3% | 48.3 | |
| Chok (2010)11 | Hongkong, (China) | Retrospective | 8 | 23 | mean 83 (R 71–95) | 47.8 | ASA3 34.8%; ASA4 52.2% | – | 0 |
| Chou (2015)12 | Taipei (Taiwan) | Retrospective | 2 | 209: Gr1 (52.1%) OTD < 24 h | Gr1: mean 76.5 ± 14 | 69.7 | Gr1: ASA3 68.8%; ASA4 25.7% | – | Gr1: 14.7 |
| Gr2 (47.9%) OTD > 24 h | Gr2: mean 72.4 ± 16.3) | 75 | Gr2: ASA3 81%; ASA4 16% | Gr2: 9 (P = 0.2) | |||||
| De Mestral (2013)13 | Toronto (Canada) | Retrospective | 7 | 890 | mean age 75 ± 14 | ADG: 1st 8%; 2nd 16%; 3rd 21%; 4th 55% | – | – | |
| El–Gendi (2016)14 | Alexandria (Egypt) | Prospective | 2 | Gr1: 75 + interval LC | Gr1: mean 50.19 ± 12.01 | 36 | Gr1: ASA1 76%; ASA2 24% | TG2 100% | – |
| Gr2: 75 matched emergency LC onlyb | Gr2: mean 49.65 ± 11.63 | 40 | Gr2: ASA1 73.3%; ASA2 26.7% | ||||||
| Flexer (2014)15 | Bradford (UK) | Retrospective | 3 | 25 | median 66.2 (R 40–95) | 44 | – | – | – |
| Griniatsos (2008)16 | Athens (Greece) | Retrospective | 2 | 24 | median 79 (IR 78–82.5) | 58.3 | ASA3 70.3%; ASA6 29.7% | TG2 83.3% TG3 16.7% | 4.2 |
| Horn (2015)17 | Aarhus (Denmark) | Retrospective | 10 | 278 | median 72.5 (21–99) | 43.5 | – | – | – |
| Hsieh (2012)18 | Taipei (Taiwan) | Retrospective | 1.5 | 160 | mean 75.9 | 72.9 | ASA3 74.1%; ASA4 22.9% | – | 13.7 |
| Jang (2015)19 | Seoul (South Korea) | Retrospective | 6 | 93 | mean 73.8 ± 12.14 | 44.08 | CCS 5.08 ± 1.49 | – | 24.8 |
| Jung (2015)20 | Iksan (South Korea) | Retrospective | 4 | 74: Gr1 (40.4% LC < 10 d | Gr1: mean 67.9 ± 16.4 | 56.7 | Gr1: ASA2 50%; ASA3 40%; ASA6 0% | Gr1: TG2 36.7%; TG3 3.3% | 13.5 |
| Gr2: 61.6% LC > 10 d | Gr2: mean 69.17 ± 11.4 (P = 0.703) | 61.4 (P = 0.686) | Gr2: ASA2 52.3%; ASA3 34.1%; ASA6 2.3% (P = 0.482) | Gr2: TG2 34.1%; TG3 4.5% (P = 0.95) | |||||
| Karakayali (2014)21 | Ankara (turkey) | Prospective | 5 | Gr1: 91 emergency LC onlyb | Gr1: mean 60 ± 10 | 52.1 | Gr1: ASA1 33.3%; ASA2 66.7% | – | – |
| Gr2: 80 + interval LC | Gr2: mean 65 ± 9 | 67.4 | Gr2: ASA1 20.9%; ASA2 79.1% | ||||||
| Khasawneh (2015)22 | Minnesota (USA) | Retrospective | 3 | 202 (excluding died) | median 71 (R 59–80) | 62.5 | CCS median 5.5(R 4–8) | – | 41 |
| Kinkegard (2015)23 | Aarhus (Denmark) | Retrospective | 10 | 56 | median 73.5 (40–95) | 60.7 | – | – | 100 |
| Li (2013)24 | Nanjing(China) | Retrospective | 5 | 73 | median 82 (R 71–94) | 65.8 | ASA3 64.4%; ASA4 35.6% | TG2 6.8% TG3 93.2 | 42.5 |
| Lin (2016)25 | Taiperi (Taiwan) | Retrospective | 15 | 93 | mean 72.4 (R 31–96) | 63.4 | ASA2 13.97%; SA3 61.29%; SA4 24.73% | TG2 67.7% TG3 32.2% | – |
| Marci (2006)26 | Messina (Italy) | Retrospective | 8 | 27 | mean 76 (R 70–88) | ASA3 55.5%; ASA4 7.4% | – | 0 | |
| McKay (2012)27 | Winnipeg (Canada) | Retrospective | 12 | 67 | median 73.5 (R 25–99) | 62.7 | CCS 2 (R 0–7) | – | – |
| Melloul (2011)28 | Lausanne (Switzerland) | Retrospective | 23 on ITU | median 65 (R 37–86) | 78.3 | – | – | 52 | |
| Mizrahi (2015)29 | Jerusalem (Israel) | Retrospective | 10 | Gr1: 163 + interval LC | PCT Gr: mean 64 ± 1; | 66 | PCT Gr: median ASA2 | – | – |
| Gr2: 476 interval LCb | Gr2: mean 48 ± 0.8 (P < 0.001) | 39 | Gr2: ASA2 (P = .21) | ||||||
| Morse (2010)30 | South Caroline (USA) | Retrospective | 6.5 | 50 on ICU | mean 72 ± 11 | 66 | ASA3 32%; ASA4 68% | – | 22 |
| Nasim (2011)31 | Karachi (Pakistan) | Retrospective | 20 | 62 | mean 63.1 | 45 | ASA1–2 29%; ASA3–671% | – | 21 |
| Ni (2015)32 | Shandong (china) | Retrospective | 7 | 62 | mean 73.9 | 45.1 | ASA3–4 72.6% | – | – |
| Nikfarjam (2013)33 | Melbourne (Australia) | Retrospective | 6 | 32 | median 78 (45–97) | 50 | ASA3 72%; ASA4 28% | – | 25 |
| Pang (2016)34 | Singapore (Singapore) | Retrospective | 6 | 71 | mean 73 (R 38–96) | 60.6 | ASA3 47.9%; ASA4 52.1% | TG25.6% TG374.6% | 4.2 |
| Paran (2006)35 | Kfar–Sava (Israel) | Retrospective | 3 | 54 | mean 61 (31–94) | 44.4 | – | – | – |
| Peters (2014)36 | Almelo(Netherlands) | Retrospective | 8 | 111 | mean 72.1 (R 25–93) | 52.3 | ASA3 62%; ASA4 29% | – | 21.6 |
| Rodriguez–Sanjuan (2012)37 | Santander (Spain) | Retrospective | 10 | Gr1: 29 | Gr1: mean 81.8 (R 56–97) | 62.1 | Gr1: ASA3 51.7%; ASA4 41.3% | – | 1.6 |
| Gr2: 32 emergency LC (both groups within 72 h)b | Gr2: mean 83.6 (R 80–93) | 59.4 | Gr II: ASA3 90.6%; ASA4 9.4% | ||||||
| Sanjay (2013)38 | Dundee (UK) | Retrospective | 10 | 53 | median 74(14–93) | 75 | ASA3–4 (92.4%) | – | 37.7 |
| Simorov (2013)39 | Omaha (USA) | Retrospective | 4 | 704 | – | – | – | ACC 100 | |
| T. Smith (2013)40 | Wisconsin (USA) | Retrospective | 11 | 143 | mean 72 ± 13.5 | 65 | CCS mean 3.29 ± 2.77 | – | – |
| Suzuki (2015)41 | New York (USA) | Retrospective | 7 | 82 | mean 73 (R 39–96) | 63 | – | – | – |
| Viste (2015)42 | Bergen (Norway) | Retrospective | 6 | 104 | median 73.5 | 54.8 | ASA1 15.4%; ASA2 42.3%; ASA3 37.5%; ASA4 4.8% | TG2 83.7%; TG3 6.7% | 17.3 |
| Wang (2016)43 | Taipei (Taiwan) | Retrospective | 10 | 184 with clear ducts on CDC | mean 70.1 | 29.9 | CCS 1.4 (SD 1.6) | TG2 41.8%; TG3 7.6% | 25 |
| Yeo (2016)44 | Tan Tock Seng (Singapore) | Retrospective | 10 | 103 | mean 80 (R 43–105) | 55 | median CCI 7 (R 2–14); ASA3 85% | TG2 73%; TG3 27% | – |
| Zehetner (2014)45 | Los Angeles (USA) | Retrospective | 11 | Gr1: 23 PCT; Gr2: matched 1:1 cohort LC after FRMT 72 hb | Gr1: mean 57.3 ± 14.7 | 30 | – | – | 0 |
| Zerem (2014)46 | Mostar, (Bosnia Herzegovina) | Retrospective | 11 | 36 | mean 75 ± 9.7 | 33.3 | ASA3 63.8%; ASA4 5.6% | – | 11.1 |
ACC, acalculous cholecystitis; ASA, American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status classification; CC, calculous cholecystitis; CCS, Charlson comorbidity score; d, days; Gr, group; h, hours; IR, interquartile range; ITU, intensive care unit; KPS, Karnofsky performance score; LC, laparoscopic cholecystectomy; OTD, onset of symptoms to drain; R, range; SD, standard deviation from the mean; TG, Tokyo severity grade.
a As definitive treatment.
b No prior PCT.