Purpose <p>International guidelines for management of acute biliary pathology recommend emergency cholecystectomy (EmC), citing improved outcomes compared to elective cholecystectomy (ElC) based on trials which may not reflect the capacity constraints in clinical practice, nor selection based on multiple prior attendances with emergency biliary pathology or attendances following a decision for ElC. We therefore conducted a longitudinal retrospective study evaluating all attendances with biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy with the aim of assessing whether EmC is justified in this context.</p> Methods <p>Data was collected on patients undergoing cholecystectomy between 2016 and 2021 at four centres. Patients who had an emergency presentation with a biliary pathology prior to cholecystectomy up to 2010 were included. Patients were divided into EmC and ElC groups, EmC was defined as cholecystectomy occurring during an emergency admission with biliary pathology. Multilevel regression modelling was used to identify independent predictors for time to surgery from index presentation, number of re-attendances and length of stay (LoS).</p> Results <p>2,056 patients were included: 1,786 (86.9%) had ElC and 270 (13.1%) EmC. EmC was independently associated with a reduction in time to surgery (-112.32 days [95% CI -140.22 to -84.42]). However, there was a significant increase in both post-operative and overall LoS (+ 3.34 days [95% CI 1.81–4.86]) across all admissions with EmC. EmC did not significantly reduce rates of emergency re-attendance prior to surgery overall.</p> Conclusion <p>Although EmC reduces time to surgery, it does not reduce the number of emergency re-attendances and increases LoS. In the context of limited emergency theatre capacity, it may be beneficial to prioritise those who benefit most from EmC.</p>