Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones

Various techniques for the surgical treatment of common bile duct stones: a meta review

Common bile duct stones (CBDSs) may occur in up to 3%–14.7% of all patients for whom cholecystectomy is preformed. Patients presenting with CBDS have symptoms including: biliary colic, jaundice, cholangitis, pancreatitis or may be asymptomatic. It is important to distinguish between primary and secondary stones, because the treatment approach varies. Stones found before, during, and after cholecystectomy had also differing treatments. Different methods have been used for the treatment of CBDS but the suitable therapy depends on conditions such as patient' satisfaction, number and size of stones, and the surgeons experience in laparoscopy. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with or without endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy, laparoscopic CBD exploration (transcystic or transcholedochal), or laparotomy with CBD exploration (by T-tube, C-tube insertion, or primary closure) are the most commonly used methods managing CBDS. We will review the pathophysiology of CBDS, diagnosis, and different techniques of treatment with especial focus on the various surgical modalities.

Hospital cost categories of one-stage versus two-stage management of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

In the era of cost-conscious healthcare, hospitals are focusing on costs. Analysis of hospital costs per cost category may provide indications for potential cost-saving measures in the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS) with gallbladder in situ.

METHODS

Between October 2005 and September 2006, 53 consecutive patients suffering from CBDS underwent either a one-stage procedure [laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with stone clearance and cholecystectomy (LCCE)] or a two-stage procedure [endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy and stone clearance (ERCP/ERS) followed by LCCE]. Costs were defined in different cost categories for each activity centre and were linked to the individual patient via the "bill of activities". Only patients (n = 38) with an uneventful post-procedural course and with available cost data were considered for cost analysis. Total length of hospital stay (LOS) was 2 (0-6) days after one-stage and 8 (3-18) days after two-stage procedure (p < 0.0001).

RESULTS

Costs per patient were significantly (p < 0.0001) less after one-stage versus two-stage management, i.e. total hospital costs (euro2,636 versus euro4,608), hospitalisation costs (euro701 versus euro2,190), consumables/pharmacy (euro645 versus euro1,476) and para-medical personnel (euro1,035 versus euro1,860; p = 0.0002). Operation room (OR) costs were comparable for one-stage and two-stage management (euro1,278 versus euro1,232; p = 0.280). Total hospital costs during ERCP were euro2,648 (euro729-4,544), during LCCE without LCBDE were euro2,101 (euro1,033-4,269), and during LCCE with LCBDE were euro2,636 (euro1,176-4,235).

CONCLUSION

In the management of patients with CBDS and gallbladder in situ a one-stage procedure is associated with significantly less costs as compared with a two-stage procedure. From the economical point of view these patients should preferably be treated via a one-stage procedure as long as safety and efficacy of this approach are provided.

Cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a case-control study comparing the short- and long-term outcomes for a "laparoscopy-first" attitude with the outcome for sequential treatment (systematic endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy)

BACKGROUND

No unanimous consensus has been achieved regarding the ideal management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis. The treatment of gallbladder and common bile duct (CBD) stones may be achieved currently according to a two-step-protocol (endoscopic sphincterotomy associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy) or by a one-step laparoscopic procedure, including exploration of the CBD and cholecystectomy. Endoscopic sphincterotomy is reported to have considerable morbidity/mortality and CBD stone recurrence rates, whereas laparoscopic CBD clearance is a demanding procedure, which to date has not spread beyond specialized environments.

METHODS

To evaluate our "laparoscopy first" (LF) approach for patients affected by gallbladder/CBD stones (laparoscopic exploration and intraoperative decision whether to proceed with laparoscopic CBD exploration or to postpone CBD stone treatment to a postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP]), we performed a retrospective, two-center case-control comparison of the postoperative outcome for 49 consecutive patients treated for gallbladder/CBD stones from January 2000 through December 2004. The results obtained with this LF approach were compared with those achieved with the traditional, "endoscopy-first" (EF) approach (ERCP plus endoscopic sphincterotomy, followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy). The mean follow-up period was 6.4 years (range, 4-8 years).

RESULTS

No difference emerged concerning early and late complications, mortality, or laparotomies needed to accomplish cholecystectomy and CBD clearance. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter for the LF group. In the LF group, only 22 patients underwent choledochotomy (45%), and 15 patients underwent perioperative ERCP (30%). Conversions decreased with practice. After choledochotomy, an increasing number of patients underwent primary closure of the CBD (with no biliary drain), without complications.

CONCLUSIONS

An LF approach to gallbladder/CBD stones is safe and feasible. It may allow the majority of surgeons to avoid excessively difficult/dangerous surgical procedures as well as unnecessary ERCPs in most cases. A tendency toward a lower incidence of conversions and a rarer use of biliary drains may lead to an improved immediate outcome for patients undergoing an LF approach.

Stone clearance and risk factors for failure in laparoscopic transcystic exploration of the common bile duct

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has become a gold standard globally. At the time of surgery, 5 to 10% of patients have coexisting stones in the common bile duct (CBD). There are several alternatives in treating these patients. We have chosen to try to extract the CBD stones at the primary operation by laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration.

METHODS

During the years 1994-2002 laparoscopic attempt of exploration of the CBD was made in 207 patients. Data was prospectively collected in a database, and was analyzed using unconditional logistic regression for risk factor analysis.

RESULTS

In 155 of the 207 patients an attempt of transcystic CBD exploration was made and it was successful in 132 cases (85%). The median operating time was 184 minutes (range 89-384 minutes) and the median postoperative hospital stay was one day (range 1-31 days). The odds ratio for failure in stone clearance among patients with a bile duct diameter greater than 6 mm was 6.90 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87-54.61) compared to patients with a bile duct diameter of 6 mm or less. There was a significant threefold increase in risk among patients with stones of greater than 5 mm diameter compared to patients with stones 5 mm or less.

CONCLUSIONS

The laparoscopic transcystic exploration of the CBD had a high frequency of stone clearance and low morbidity in the present study. Moreover, large stones are a risk factor for failure in stone clearance.

Why is there recurrence after transcystic laparoscopic bile duct clearance? Risk factor analysis

AIM

Incidence of common bile duct stones (CBDS) is approximately 10% in patients with symptomatic gallstones undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (TC-CBDE) is safe and efficient in achieving bile duct clearance from stones, with a success rate of between 85% and 95%. The aim of this retrospective study is the evaluation of risk factors and recurrence in patients treated with TC-CBDS.

METHODS

From October 2003 until September 2007, 110 consecutive patients with common bile duct stones and gallbladder were included in the study. Average age was 64 years (range 21-82 years). The procedure was completed laparoscopically in 106 patients (96.4%): with TC-CBDE in 90 patients (85%), who are the object of this study; and with TC-CBDE + perioperative guide wire papillotomy ("rendezvous") in 16 cases (15%). In the 90 patients treated with TC-CBDE which we examined, the risk factors were: preoperative liver function tests, diameter of the common bile duct (normal 8 mm or less), number of stones (<or=3 or more), presence of stones with biliary sludge, and pre- or intraoperative diagnosis. Student's test was used for statistical analysis with a P value of < 0.05 defined as statistically significant.

RESULT

The conversion rate to open surgery was 3.6%. There were no mortalities. The average operative time was 115.6 min. The morbility rate was 7.7% with 4.8% local complications and 2.9% general complications. Average follow-up on 90 patients (after TC-CBDE) was 28 months (range 4.2-48 months). We found six recurrences (6.7%). The statistic analysis showed that only number of stones >3 with biliary sludge predicted a recurrence (p < 0.05) while the other factors did not show important clinical variables.

CONCLUSION

TC-CBDE is safe and effective in the majority of cases of CBDS. The incidence of recurrence is low but there are some risk factors, such as number of stones >3 with biliary sludge, which do not favor the successful outcome of the procedure. In such cases, it is essential that the TC-CBDE is integrated with other procedures which, although more complex, assure the clearance of the bile duct.

[Common bile duct stones. Diagnostic and therapeutic management]

The best predictors for the presence of common bile duct stones (CBDS) are cholangitis, jaundice, and direct visualization of stones with ultrasound. In the setting of high suspicion of choledocholithiasis, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) is indicated because when CBDS are identified, it allows immediate therapy in the same sitting. If there is a moderate probability of choledocholithiasis, endosonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography are the first-line options. In patients with gallbladder stones and CBDS, preoperative ERC with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is widely recommended as a standard approach. The interval between that and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) should be at least 24 h (<6 weeks) to exclude possible complications due to the ERC/ES. In the setting of open cholecystectomy, open bile duct surgery is significantly superior to ERC with sphincterotomy in achieving common bile duct clearance and is the method of choice. Only in centres with advanced laparoscopic expertise is the laparoscopic removal of CBDS an equivalent treatment option.

[Advantages of laparoscopic stented choledochorrhaphy. Six years experience]

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is nowadays a valid option in the management of common bile duct stones. T tube and primary closure have been used to close the choledochotomy, but these methods are not free of complications. We present our experience with the stented choledochorrhaphy.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 104 patients, who underwent LCBDE between January 1999 and February 2007. T tube was used in the first period. From July 2001 the method of choice has been the closure of the CBD over an endoprosthesis placed under direct view and later removed by gastroscopy.

RESULTS

The technique was performed on 70 consecutive patients. Median operation time was 90 minutes. There was no conversion to open surgery. Stones could not be retrieved in 4.2% of patients. The median hospital stay was 4 days. Morbidity was 7%, although only 2.8% was related to the stent (acute pancreatitis). Postoperative mortality was 1.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

The stented laparoscopic choledochorrhaphy allows an efficient biliary decompression, and seems to avoid the complications of the T tube and primary closure. This method should be considered as a valid option after choledochotomy.

Gallstone disease: from genes to evidence-based therapy

The number of gallstone patients is increasing in ageing populations with a high prevalence of metabolic syndrome and obesity. Recently variants of hepatic ATP binding cassette transporters have been identified as genetic susceptibility factors for gallstone disease, pointing to novel means for risk assessment and prevention. Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the mainstay of therapy for symptomatic gallbladder stones, the clinical management of gallstone disease is changing rapidly, with an increase in day case surgery and the advent of transluminal endoscopic surgery. Here, we summarize the molecular and genetic mechanisms of gallstone formation as well as the current evidence-based algorithms for diagnosis and therapy of gallbladder and bile duct stones.

[Laparoscopic treatment of common bile duct lithiasis associated with gallbladder lithiasis]

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic bile duct exploration has become one of the main options for the treatment of choledocholithiasis associated with cholelithiasis. Our objective is to describe the results of a consecutive series of patients.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

We retrospectively analyzed 101 (66 female/16 male) patients who underwent laparoscopic bile duct exploration. Age was 58 +/- 18 years. We analyzed operaion time, hospital stay and postoperative complications according to the surgical approach (transcystic or choledochotomy). Clinical follow up was carried out for 90 days after surgery and then subsequently by telephone.

RESULTS

1435 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed between January 1998 and December 2005. Of those, 101 of those patients underwent laparoscopic bile duct exploration for cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones. We evaluated clinical, laboratory and ultrasound predictors: 70 patients had positive and 31 negative predictors. Laparoscopic transcystic approach was successful in 78 patients and laparoscopic choledochotomy in 17 patients. Operation time was 154 +/- 59 minutes and hospital stay 4.31 +/- 3.44 days. Six patients (5.9%) were converted to open surgery. Two patients were re-operated for postoperative bile leakage. The overall effectiveness was 94%. Postoperative mortality was 0.99%. Median follow up was 51 months. Three patients died of unrelated conditions, three underwent ERCP and one had transfistular extraction for retained stones (3.96%).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic treatment for common bile duct stones associated with gallbladder stones is a highly effective procedure with a low incidence of retained stones.

Laparo-endoscopic “Rendezvous” to treat cholecysto-choledocolithiasis: Effective, safe and simplifies the endoscopist’s work

AIM: To investigate our clinical experience with combined laparo-endoscopic Rendezvous (RV) for the treatment of patients affected by gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones and especially to study the never evaluated opinion of the endoscopist concerning the difficulty of the intraoperative endoscopic procedure during the RV in comparison with standard endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS: Eighty consecutive patients affected by cholecystolithiasis and diagnosed or suspected CBD stones were treated with a standardized “tailored” RV. The relevant technical features, the feasibility, the effectiveness in stone clearance, the safety but also the simple evaluation of difficulty and agreement of the endoscopist were analyzed with a questionnaire.

RESULTS: The feasibility was 97.5% and the effectiveness 100% concerning CBD clearance and solution of coexisting problems at the papilla. Minor morbidity was 3.3%, the operating time was prolonged by a mean of 14 min, the mean hospital stay was 3.8 d and only one stone’s recurrence occurred. The endoscopist evaluated the procedure to be simpler than standard ERCP-ES in 81.2% of the cases.

CONCLUSION: Simultaneous RV carries high effectiveness and safety at least comparable to those reported for other options. The endoscopist is very often satisfied with this approach because of the minimization of some steps of the endoscopic procedure and avoidance of relevant iatrogenic risk factors. If the mandatory collaboration between surgeons and endoscopists is guaranteed, this approach can often be preferable for the patient, the surgeon, the endoscopist and the hospital.

Is ductal evaluation always necessary before or during surgery for biliary pancreatitis?

BACKGROUND

Whether all patients undergoing cholecystectomy following an episode of biliary pancreatitis require direct common bile duct evaluation is controversial. We hypothesized such evaluation can be omitted safely among select patients at low risk for choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

One hundred forty-eight patients undergoing cholecystectomy for biliary pancreatitis (January 1995-December 2005) met the following inclusion criteria: (1) no preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); (2) normal or decreasing liver function tests (LFTs) preoperatively; and (3) no ductal dilation on non-invasive preoperative imaging. Group I had intraoperative cholangiography (IOC, n = 27); group II did not (n = 121).

RESULTS

No differences between groups I and II were evident in postoperative retained-stone related events: recurrent pancreatitis (11% vs 8%, P = .7), cholangitis (0% in both groups), and asymptomatic LFT elevation (0% vs 3%, P > .99).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct ductal evaluation can be omitted safely in select patients undergoing cholecystectomy for biliary pancreatitis who are at low risk for choledocholithiasis.

Treatment of common bile duct stones discovered during cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Several techniques of laparoscopic bile duct exploration and intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) have been developed to treat patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones in one session and avoid the complications of ES. With all these options available, very few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been undertaken. This review analyzes those studies.

METHODS

We searched PubMed. Four RCTs and a Cochran Database Systematic Review were found.

RESULTS

Two RCTs compared preoperative ES and laparoscopic CBD exploration (E) for known CBD stones. Laparoscopic CBDE had shorter length of hospitalization. Two RCTs compared immediate and delayed treatment and found that length of stay was less with laparoscopic CBDE, but clearance rates and morbidity/mortality were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies suggest that CBD stones discovered at the time of cholecystectomy are best treated during the same operation. The transcystic approach is safest if applicable. Individual surgeons must be aware of their own capabilities and those of the available endoscopists and perform the safest technique.

Prospective validation study of an algorithm for triage to MRCP or ERCP for investigation of suspected pancreatico-biliary disease

BACKGROUND

In patients with suspected pancreatico-biliary disease, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) should be reserved for those requiring therapeutic intervention. However, difficulty arises in identifying patients likely to require therapy in the early phase of diagnostic work-up. An algorithm has been developed by the authors based upon prospective assessment of ERCP patients for triage of patients to magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) or ERCP with suspected pancreatico-biliary disease. We aimed to validate this algorithm in an independent group of patients using a different group of endoscopists blinded to the algorithm.

METHODS

Patients were stratified into different categories by clinical, ultrasound and liver function test findings. The algorithm stratified patients by the likelihood of therapeutic intervention. The accuracy of the algorithm for a therapeutic outcome was assessed by receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve analysis.

RESULTS

Hundred and twenty-five consecutive patients (Oct 2005 to July 2006) were prospectively assessed by MRCP or ERCP according to the algorithm, and the outcomes recorded. Fifty-seven patients were triaged to MRCP and 63 patients were triaged to ERCP. A category was not assessable in five patients. Three patients from the MRCP group required subsequent therapeutic ERCP. Diagnostic ERCP was performed in three patients in the ERCP group. ERCP-related complications occurred in four patients. The algorithm performed well in predicting the requirement for intervention as determined by the area under the ROC curve [0.84 (95%CI 0.76-0.92)].

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirms that an algorithm-based approach can reproducibly predict those patients requiring therapeutic biliary intervention.

Timing of cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

According to the literature, the conversion rate for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) for cholecystodocholithiasis reaches 20%, at least when LC is performed 6 to 8 weeks afterward. It is hypothesized that early planned LC after ES prevents recurrent biliary complications and reduces operative morbidity and hospital stay.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent LC after ES between 2001 and 2004 were retrospectively evaluated. Recurrent biliary complications during the waiting time for LC, conversion rate, postoperative complications, and hospital stay were documented.

RESULTS

This study analyzed 167 consecutive patients (59 men) with a median age of 54 years. The median interval between ES and LC was 7 weeks (range, 1-49 weeks). During the waiting time for LC, 33 patients (20%) had recurrent biliary complications including cholecystitis (n = 18, 11%), recurrent choledocholithiasis (n = 9, 5%), cholangitis (n = 4, 2%), and biliary pancreatitis (n = 2, 1%). Of these 33 patients, 15 underwent a second endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC). The median time between ES and the development of recurrent complications was 22 days (range, 3-225 days). Most of the biliary complications (76%) occurred more than 1 week after ES. Conversion to open cholecystectomy occurred for 7 of 33 patients with recurrent complications during the waiting period, compared with 13 of 134 patients with an uncomplicated waiting period (p = 0.14). This concurred with doubled postoperative morbidity (24% vs 11%; p = 0.09) and a longer hospital stay (median, 4 vs 2 days; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective analysis, 20% of all patients had recurrent biliary complications during the waiting period for cholecystectomy after ES. These recurrent complications were associated with a significantly longer hospital stay. Cholecystectomy within 1 week after ES may prevent recurrent biliary complications in the majority of cases and reduce the postoperative hospital stay.

Open cholecystectomy in the laparoendoscopic era

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has all but replaced the traditional open approach. Hence open cholecystectomy (OC) is principally reserved for cases in which laparoscopy fails, leaving fewer surgeons with experience in the procedure required for the most challenging cases. This review of OC includes discussion of the indications for a primary open approach, conversion from laparoscopy, technical aspects of OC, and alternatives (cholecystostomy and subtotal cholecystectomy). Strategies for safe OC must be formally addressed in residency programs.

Triple non-invasive diagnostic test for exclusion of common bile ducts stones before laparoscopic cholecystectomy

AIM: To evaluate the impact of a preoperative “triple non-invasive diagnostic test” for diagnosis and/or exclusion of common bile duct stones.

METHODS: All patients with symptomatic gallstone disease, operated on by laparoscopic cholecystectomy from March 2004 to March 2006 were studied retrospectively. Two hundred patients were included and reviewed by using a triple diagnostic test including: patient’s medical history, routine liver function tests and routine ultrasonography. All patients were followed up 2-24 mo after surgery to evaluate the impact of triple diagnostic test.

RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were identified to have common bile duct stones. Lack of history of stones, negative laboratory tests and normal ultrasonography alone was proven to exclude common bile duct stones in some patients. However, a combination of these three components (triple diagnostic), was proven to be the most statistically significant test to exclude common bile duct stones in patients with gallstone disease.

CONCLUSION: Using a combination of routinely used diagnostic components as triple diagnostic modality would increase the diagnostic accuracy of common bile duct stones preoperatively. This triple non-invasive test is recommended for excluding common bile duct stones and to identify patients in need for other investigations.

Laparoscopic common bile duct stone clearance with flexible choledochoscopy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is as safe and efficient as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in achieving bile duct clearance from stones. No clear guidelines are available on LCBDE with respect to indications for trans-cystic approach versus choledochotomy, or regarding when to use either flexible choledochoscopy (FCD) or intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) guidance.

METHODS

From January 2001 until November 2006, 113 consecutive patients with common bile duct stones (CBDS) and gallbladder in situ were enrolled in a prospective non-randomized study to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy with LCBDE on an intention-to-treat basis. Twenty-three patients were aged 80 years or older with severe comorbidity. Preoperative ERCP with attempted stone clearance was performed in 24 patients. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was attempted for CBDS in the presence of acute cholecystitis in 24 patients. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was performed via the trans-cystic approach in 83 patients and via choledochotomy in 30 patients. Flexible choledochoscopy was used in 79 patients and IOC guidance in 34 patients.

RESULTS

No mortality occurred. Postoperative complications were encountered in nine patients. Laparoscopic stone clearance of the bile duct was successful in 91.8% of the patients. Median length of hospital stay (LOS) was two days (range, 0 to 24 days) after trans-cystic LCBDE and six days (range, 2 to 34 days) after stone clearance via choledochotomy (p < 0.0001). Choledochotomy was performed for CBDS measuring an average of 11.5 mm (range, 5 to 30 mm) in diameter while trans-cystic LCBDE was successful for stones measuring an average of 5 mm (range, 2 to 14 mm) (p < 0.0001). Mean duration of surgery was 75 minutes (range, 30 to 180 minutes) when FCD was used, and 107 minutes (range, 45 to 240 minutes) in patients undergoing LCBDE under IOC guidance (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and LCBDE with stone extraction can be performed with high efficiency, minimal morbidity and without mortality. A trans-cystic approach is feasible in most patients, whereas choledochotomy should be restricted to large bile duct stones that cannot be extracted through the cystic duct. The use of flexible choledochoscopy is preferable to IOC guidance.

Cholecystectomy in Sweden 2000-2003: a nationwide study on procedures, patient characteristics, and mortality

Background

Epidemiological data on characteristics of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic cholecystectomy are limited. In this register study we examined characteristics and mortality of patients who underwent cholecystectomy during hospital stay in Sweden 2000 – 2003.

Methods

Hospital discharge and death certificate data were linked for all patients undergoing cholecystectomy in Sweden from January 1^st 2000 through December 31^st 2003. Mortality risk was calculated as standardised mortality ratio (SMR) i.e. observed over expected deaths considering age and gender of the background population.

Results

During the four years of the study 43072 patients underwent cholecystectomy for benign biliary disease, 31144 (72%) using a laparoscopic technique and 11928 patients (28%) an open procedure (including conversion from laparoscopy). Patients with open cholecystectomy were older than patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (59 vs 49 years, p < 0.001), they were more likely to have been admitted to hospital during the year preceding cholecystectomy, and they had more frequently been admitted acutely for cholecystectomy (57% Vs 21%, p < 0.001). The proportion of women was lower in the open cholecystectomy group compared to the laparoscopic group (57% vs 73%, p < 0.001). Hospital stay was 7.9 (8.9) days, mean (SD), for patients with open cholecystectomy and 2.6 (3.3) days for patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy, p < 0.001. SMR within 90 days of index admission was 3.89 (3.41–4.41) (mean and 95% CI), for patients with open cholecystectomy and 0.73 (0.52–1.01) for patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. During this period biliary disease accounted for one third of all deaths in both groups. From 91 to 365 days after index admission, SMR for patients in the open group was 1.01 (0.87–1.16) and for patients in the laparoscopic group 0.56 (0.44–0.69).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed on patients having a lower mortality risk than the general Swedish population. Patients with open cholecystectomy are more sick than patients with laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and they have a mortality risk within 90 days of admission for cholecystectomy, which is four times that of the general population. Further efforts to reduce surgical trauma in open biliary surgery are motivated.