A Clinical Study of Cholelithiasis at a Tertiary Health Care Centre

Jump To References Section

Authors

  • Professor and Head, Department of Surgery, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Nashik - 422003, Maharashtra ,IN
  • PG Resident, Department of Surgery, Dr. Vasantrao Pawar Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Nashik - 422003, Maharashtra ,IN

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18311/mvpjms/2019/v6i2/22955

Keywords:

Cholecystectomy, Cholelithiasis
Cholecystectomy

Abstract

Introduction: Cholelithiasis is the most common disease state involving the gallbladder and biliary tree. Gallstones become symptomatic only when they obstruct a visceral structure. In developing countries, there exists a trend toward an increasing prevalence of the risk factors for gallstone disease. Materials and Methods: Cases were selected after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria. Thereafter data collection was done by meticulous history taking, clinical examination, appropriate laboratory and radiological investigations, operative findings, and post operative evaluation of cases. Results: This study comprised of 52 cases. Female to male ratio was 15:11. The most common presenting complaint was pain in abdomen in 49 (94.23%) patients. On clinical examination most common sign was tenderness in 48 (92.31%) patients. Abdominal ultrasonography showed gallstones in all cases. Either laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy was performed. Complications included wound infection, haemorrhage, and bile duct injury. On histo-pathological examination the most common finding was chronic Cholecystitis seen in 39 (75.00%) cases. Conclusion: The incidence of disease was more in females. The most common complaint was pain and the most common sign was tenderness. Abdominal ultrasonography should be imaging study of choice for suspected cases of cholelithiasis. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the procedure of choice.

Downloads

Published

2020-05-07

Issue

Section

Original Research Article

 

References

Foster PJ, Buhrmann R, Quigley HA, Johnson GJ. The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys. Br. J. Ophthalmol 2002; 86:238–42. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.86.2.238.

Quigley HA, Broman AT. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2006; 90:262–7. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2005.081224.

Pascolini D, Mariotti SP. Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2012; 96:614–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2011-300539.

Maheshwari R, S Choudhari N, Deep Singh M. Tonometry and Care of Tonometers. J. Curr. Glaucoma Pract. 2012; 6(3): 124–130. https://doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10008-1119.

Bland MJ, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 1(8476):307–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.

Tonnu PA, Ho T, Sharma K, White E, Bunce C, GarwayHeath D. A comparison of four methods of tonometry: method agreement and interobserver variability. Br. J. Ophthalmol 2005; 89:847–50. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2004.056614

Parker VA, Herrtage J, Sarkies NJ. Clinical comparison of the Keeler Pulsair 3000 with Goldmann applanation tonometry. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 2001; 85(11):1303–1304. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.85.11.1303.

Vandewalle E, Vandenbroeck S, Stalmans I, Zeyen T. Comparison of ICare, dynamic contour tonometer, and ocular response analyzer with Goldmann applanation tonometer in patients with glaucoma. Eur. J. Ophthalmol. 2009; 19(5): 783–789. https://doi.org/10.1177/112067210901900516.

ChandrakumarBalaratnasingam, William H. Morgan, Louise Bass, Stephen J. Cringle, Dao-Yi Yu; Time-Dependent Effects of Elevated Intraocular Pressure on Optic Nerve Head Axonal Transport and Cytoskeleton Proteins. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2008; 49(3):986–999. doi: 10.1167/iovs.07-1090. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.07-1090.

Patel H, Gilmartin B, Cubbidge RP, Logan NS. In vivo measurement of regional variation in anterior scleral resistance to Schiotz indentation. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 2011; 31:437–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2011.00840.x.

Nagarajan S, Velayutham V, Ezhumalai G. Comparative evaluation of applanation and indentation tonometers in a community ophthalmology setting in Southern India. Saudi J. Ophthalmol. 2016; 30(2):83–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjopt.2015.11.002.

Jackson CRS. Schiotz tonometers – an assessment of their usefulness. Brit. J. Ophthal. 1965; 49:478. Krieglstein GK, Waller WK. Goldmann applanation versus handapplanation and https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.49.9.478.

Schiötz indentation tonometry. Albrecht Von Graefes Arch. Klin. Exp. Ophthalmol. 1975; 194(1):6-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00408271.