Adverse reactions following T-tube removal

[Potential risk to patient safety by discontinuation of production of classical T-drains? : Nationwide survey in Germany and statement of the surgical working group for liver, gall bladder and pancreatic diseases (CALGP) of the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery (DGAV)]

The revision of the medical device regulation (MDR) legislation by the European Union and supplementations by the member states has been implemented for good reasons but causes dramatic side effects. It is no longer allowed to produce some rarely used medical devices by various manufacturers that have been successfully used for decades. Before production, a new application to the MDR would be necessary, which is not a realistic business case for companies producing rarely used devices. This problem currently relates to the Kehr T‑drain made from soft rubber or latex that has been in use since the late nineteenth century. A surgically placed T‑drain, although rarely necessary nowadays, is still in use worldwide for special indications in an attempt to avoid severe complications. These special indications include complex hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) procedures and perforations of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract where T‑drains may be used to secure the hepatojejunostomy or to create a stable fistula. The HPB working group (CALGP) of the German Society of General and Visceral Surgery (DGAV) provides a statement from a surgical perspective on this matter after a survey of all its members. Politics should be very careful not to generalize when implementing useful new regulations at a European and national level. Established and comprehensible treatment concepts should not be restricted and exemption permits should be quickly granted in these cases because the discontinuation of these niche products may lead to potential patient safety issues and even fatalities.

A life-threatening complication of biliary peritonitis following T-tube removal: A case report and review of literature

Introduction and importance

The purpose of T-tubes is to induce inflammation around it in the common bile duct, forming a fibrous tract for drainage of bile. The leakage of bile into the peritoneum is a drastic complication following T-tube removal. A provisional diagnosis of choleperitoneum is established in the presence of persistent pain with guarding and rigidity. Imaging techniques can be used for the identification of biliary leakage. With most cases, patients recover with either conservative or surgical management.

Case presentation

We present you a 65 years old malnourished female with features of choleperitoneum immediately following T-tube removal and was planned for conservative management with constant monitoring in surgical intensive care unit. The patient deteriorated despite adequate treatment and went into septic shock which resulted into her demise.

Clinical discussion

Biliary peritonitis is not very uncommon but a life-threatening complication of T-tube removal. Poor nutritional status may also lead to delay in fistulous tract formation and there is a relative risk of biliary leakage during removal of T-tube. The use of a latex T-tube is more effective in mature tract formation and has less incidence of bile leakage. Seldinger's method, which involves using a wire to guide the removal of the T-tube, shows a significant reduction of biliary leakage.

Conclusion

The mortality in biliary peritonitis significantly rises in cases of infected bile. The adverse reaction following the removal of T-tube was 4.3% and about 3% were severe enough to be admitted to the hospital.

•

Biliary peritonitis is not very uncommon but a life-threatening complication of T-tube removal.

•

Malnourishment causes delayed tract formation and increases risk of bile leakage during T-tube removal.

•

Seldinger's method for T-tube removal shows a significant reduction in biliary leakage.

Case-based review: bile peritonitis after T-tube removal

T-tube placement into the common bile duct (CBD) is most commonly performed after CBD exploration for cholelithiasis or repair of an iatrogenic CBD injury. Bile peritonitis occurring after T-tube removal is generally considered an exceedingly rare complication, which on occurrence necessitates urgent intervention. No clear guidance exists on the timing of T-tube removal and its relationship to the development of bile peritonitis. This study aimed to determine the incidence of bile peritonitis after T-tube removal, its relationship to the timing of removal and how knowledge of this can help the general surgeon.

T-tube drainage of the common bile duct choleperitoneum: etiology and management

External drainage of the common bile duct by placement of a T-tube is a common practice after choledochotomy. This practice may result in the specific complication of bile peritonitis due to leakage after removal of the T-tube. This complication has multiple causes: some are patient-related (corticotherapy, chemotherapy, ascites), and others are due to technical factors (inappropriate suturing of the drain to the ductal wall, minimal inflammatory reaction related to some drain materials). The clinical presentation is quite variable depending on the amount and rapidity of intra-peritoneal spread of of bile leakage. Abdominal ultrasound (US), with US-guided needle aspiration and occasionally Technetium(99) scintigraphy are useful for diagnosis. Traditional therapy consists of surgical intervention including peritoneal lavage and re-intubation of the choledochal fistulous tract to allow for a further period of external drainage. When leakage is walled off and well-tolerated, a more nuanced and less invasive conservative therapy may combine percutaneous drainage with endoscopic placement of a trans-ampullary biliary drainage.

Comparison of laparoscopic choledochotomy closure techniques

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (CBDE) has traditionally been accompanied by T-tube drainage. However, other methods of choledochotomy closures have been reported. This study compared three laparoscopic methods of choledochotomy closure in a prospective, randomized fashion to determine which method should be the preferred technique.

METHODS

In this porcine model, 24 animals initially underwent laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) clipping to simulate an obstruction. Two days later, the animals underwent laparoscopic clip removal and simulated CBDE through a 1.5-cm choledochotomy. The animals were then randomized to one of three groups: primary choledochotomy closure (group I), antegrade CBD stenting with primary closure (group II), or T-tube placement (group III). To assess for CBD stenoses and leaks, the animals were killed 2 months postoperatively, at which time a cholangiogram was performed and the bile duct harvested. The ratio of proximal CBD to choledochotomy site was assessed radiographically and histologically.

RESULTS

The operative time was significantly longer in group III (200 +/- 13 min, p < 0.05) than in group I (141 +/- 17 min) and group II (154 +/- 16 min). The ratio of the proximal CBD diameter to the choledochotomy site diameter by cholangiogram was 2.1:1.0 in group I, to 1.2:1.0 in group II, and 1.1:1.0 in group III (p < 0.01). The ratio of the proximal CBD intraluminal area to the choledochotomy site intraluminal area was 2.1:1.0 in group I compared to 1.1:1.0 in groups II and III (p < 0.01). None of the animals developed jaundice or sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Significant stenoses were present at the choledochotomy site in the primary closure group, and T-tube placement resulted in prolonged operative times. We conclude that laparoscopic antegrade CBD stenting with primary closure of the choledochotomy site is the preferred technique after choledochotomy in an animal model. Further assessment in a clinical trial is warranted.