Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

Common bile duct exploration with choledochotomy and primary repair during pregnancy: Case Report

We present a case of a woman in the second trimester of pregnancy who was admitted due to symptomatic common bile duct stones and gallstones. The patient underwent ultrasonography (US) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) imaging, as well as a series of relevant blood tests, to establish a diagnosis. After a comprehensive assessment, simultaneous T-tube-free laparoscopic transcholedochal stone extraction and cholecystectomy were performed safely in the pregnant patient with common bile duct stones and gallstones. Postoperatively, the patient had an uneventful recovery. This case report aims to provide detailed information on the selection of treatment options for symptomatic choledocholithiasis combined with gallstones during pregnancy and to explore the feasibility and safety of performing concurrent T-tube-free laparoscopic choledochotomy for stone extraction in pregnant patients.

Comparative Efficacy and Complications Between One-stage Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration and Two-stage ERCP Plus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Treatment of Choledocholithiasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Early and effective management of choledocholithiasis is imperative to decrease patient morbidity. Despite the widespread use of ERCP, advancements in laparoscopy and choledochoscopy have renewed interest in laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE). This meta-analysis compares outcomes of 2-stage ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) versus one-stage transcystic LCBDE plus LC.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, CENTRAL, and Embase databases according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies were selected based on specific criteria. Data on stone clearance, postoperative pancreatitis, bleeding, mortality, and length of stay were extracted.

RESULTS

Seven comparative non-randomized studies enrolling 669 "one-stage LCBDE patients" and 724 "two-stage ERCP patients" were included. Overall, there were no statistically significant differences regarding the rates of stone clearance, pancreatitis, bleeding, and mortality between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

One-stage transcystic LCBDE is noninferior to the 2-stage ERCP + LC approach, supporting its use as a first-line treatment for choledocholithiasis.

Intraoperative Cholangiogram Interpretation for Laparoscopic Transcystic Bile Duct Exploration: Is Concurrence Possible?

Background

Laparoscopic transcystic bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) represents a secure and efficacious approach for managing common bile duct (CBD) stones, particularly in patients concurrently undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The decision to proceed with LTCBDE hinges on real-time assessment of the intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC), which is highly operator-dependent and poorly interpreted. No established criteria exist to guide the evaluation of IOCs for LTCBDE. This study aims to ascertain the concordance among surgeons, experienced in LTCBDE, on critical aspects of IOC interpretation.

Methods

A retrospective collection of IOC images of 40 patients who underwent LC, IOC, and LTCBDE at a tertiary university hospital between 2017 and 2018 was undertaken. Two hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) and 2 acute care surgery (ACS) specialists independently reviewed the images. They were tasked with assessing IOC features hypothesized to influence duct exploration and stone extraction complexity, along with overall suitability for LTCBDE based exclusively on the IOC images. Agreement percentages were calculated and Kappa inter-rater reliability statistics were assessed.

Results

The overall agreement percentages concerning IOC features ranged between 52.5% and 82.5% with agreements surpassing 75% deemed robust. Maximum agreement was achieved in the interpretation of cystic duct morphology, whether straight or characterized by spiral valves. The concurrence for amenability of LTCBDE also demonstrated substantial accord among surgeons (ACS: 92.5%, HPB: 95%, total: 87.5%). Consistently high agreement was evident within specialty groups.

Conclusions

Anatomical attributes displayed superior agreement levels, as opposed to variables necessitating measurements. We recommend the development of a structured approach for the interpretation of IOC to facilitate surgical education in LTCBDE.

Bile Duct Injury During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Has Anything Changed in 32 Years of Queensland Experience?

Background Bile duct injury (BDI) is a serious complication of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Large studies report an incidence of 0.08%-0.3%, but they also suggest that BDI in the LC era is more severe than in the era of open cholecystectomy. In light of our reported experience of managing BDI in 2002, this study aims to evaluate changes over the past two decades. Methods A single-center retrospective review for all patients referred to the hepatobiliary surgeons at the Princess Alexandra Hospital in Queensland, Australia for the management of BDI that occurred during LC from January 2001 to May 2022. This was compared to our historical data from 1990 to 2000 and statistically analyzed. Demographic characteristics, type of injury, intra-operative cholangiogram completion, attempted repair, the timing of referral to the tertiary center, and definite repair of BDI were analyzed. Results Sixty-five patients were referred to us with a similar severity of BDI to our previous study, but analysis showed an increase in intraoperative recognition of the injury to 74.4% (32 out of 43 patients). Additionally, the number of intra-operative cholangiograms performed increased dramatically to 66.2% (43 patients) which resulted in an increase in recognition of BDI. Conversion rate to open technique and attempted primary repair by operating surgeon decreased to 63% (27 patients) and 16% (11 patients), respectively, with referral time significantly shortened (P-value < 0.001). Conclusion The past two decades show an increased recognition of BDI, use of intra-operative cholangiogram, and decreased attempts to repair by the operating surgeon which can result in significant long-term complications. Instead, early recognition of BDI is critical for improved patient outcomes alongside expedited referral and appropriate surgical management by a hepatobiliary surgeon at a tertiary center.

Enhancing patient outcomes through nursing care in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration; a randomized control trail

BACKGROUND

When compared to open surgery, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is known to cause less discomfort and a faster recovery. This study examines the effect of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) strategy on LCBDE outcomes.

METHODS

In March 2021 to May 2024, 400 patients with LCBDE participated in randomized research. The six patient groups were: Multimodal Pain Management (n = 50), Standard Pain Management (n = 50), ERAS (n = 50), Preoperative Assessment (n = 100), Standard Preoperative Assessment (n = 100), and Standard Care (n = 50). The patient's satisfaction, long-term recovery, pain, anxiety, and complication rates were among the outcomes that were measured.

RESULTS

After the intervention, the mean anxiety level of the ERAS group was significantly lower (P < 0.05), and their rates of complications were also decreased. Reduced postoperative pain scores, which were 5 on day 1 and decreased to 3 by day 3, were the consequence of the multimodal pain management strategy inside ERAS. A 90% satisfaction rating and an average recovery period of five days were reported by the ERAS group. Long-term results in ERAS showed that the average time to return to work was only 25 days, and there was a decreased incidence of chronic pain.

CONCLUSION

The ERAS protocol enhances the short- and long-term course of recovery for patients with LCBDE, leading to increased satisfaction and better clinical outcomes. These results suggest that the ERAS method should be used as the gold standard for postoperative care for patients with LCBDE.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is an effective, safe, and less-costly method of treating choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Advancements in laparoscopic techniques led to the adoption of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) as an alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for management of choledocholithiasis (CD). The goal of this study was to describe the initial experience at a safety net hospital with acute care surgeons performing LCBDE for suspected CD. We hypothesized LCBDE would reduce length of stay and hospital costs compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and ERCP performed in the same hospital admission.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study from 2019 to 2023 comparing LCBDE to LC/ERCP among patients diagnosed with CD. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables and Chi-square tests for categorical variables. Data reported as median [interquartile range] or research subjects with condition (percentage).

RESULTS

A total of 110 LCBDE were performed, while 121 subjects underwent LC and ERCP. Patients in the LCBDE group were more likely to be female with a total of 87 female subjects (77.6%) compared to 76 male subjects (62.8%) (95% CI 1.14-3.74). Initial WBC was lower in the LCBDE group at 8.4 [6.9-11.8] compared to the LC/ERCP group at 10.9 [7.9-13.5] (p = 0.0013). Remaining demographics and lab values were similar between the two groups. Patients who underwent LCBDE had a significantly shorter length of stay at 2 days [1-3] compared to those in the LC/ERCP group at 4 days [3-6] (p < 0.001). Hospital charges for the LCBDE group were $46,685 [$38,687-$56,703] compared to $60,537 [$47,527-$71,739] for the LC/ERCP group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is associated with significantly lower hospital costs and shorter length of stay with similar post-operative complication and 30-day readmission rates. Our results show that LCBDE is safe and should be considered as a first-line approach in the management of CD.

Initial Experience with Disposable Single-Use Cholangioscope During Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

Introduction: For patients with choledocholithiasis, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is more cost effective than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and results in shorter hospital length of stay. As LCBDE can be technically challenging to perform, utilizing a disposable single-use cholangioscope (DSUC) for LCBDE through a cystic ductotomy has several advantages, such as potentially avoiding a choledochotomy and expanding access to cholangioscopes as a DSUC is disposable and does not require infrastructure for cleaning or maintenance. Methods: An IRB-approved, retrospective chart review from 2021 to 2023 was conducted for patients who underwent concurrent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and LCBDE with a DSUC (SpyGlass™ Discover, Boston Scientific, Natick, MA) for the management of choledocholithiasis diagnosed either preoperatively or during intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC). Primary endpoint was successful clearance of biliary duct stones. Results: Twelve patients with a mean age of 55.3 years (SD ±13.9) and mean body mass index of 33.8 (SD ±10.8) were found to have filling defects on IOC for LC and underwent LCBDE with DSUC. Of these, 10 patients had stones. Complete stone clearance was achieved in all 10 patients with various stone extraction maneuvers. The mean operative time was 189 minutes (SD ±63.6) and mean hospital length of stay postoperatively was 1 day (SD ±.8). Mean length of follow-up postoperatively was 26.9 (SD ±16.0) days. There were no intraoperative complications, no need for repeat procedures, and only one postoperative complication involving a superficial surgical site infection requiring oral antibiotics. Conclusions: LCBDE with a DSUC is safe and efficacious for clearing stones and identifying pathology of the CBD. Familiarity with this device is especially useful for surgeons who want to simultaneously manage choledocholithiasis at the same time as cholecystectomy to reduce hospital stay and overall cost.

Pragmatic algorithm for management of common bile duct calculi in resource-limited settings in India

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) facilitates the removal of common bile duct (CBD) calculi by endoscopy. When ERCP fails, exploration of CBD is required for the clearance of CBD calculi. The optimum way for the exploration of CBD is by choledochoscopy. Dedicated flexible or rigid choledochoscopes are expensive and available only in few places in India. Since 1991, we subjected patients with suspected CBD calculi to ERCP, followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Patients in whom ERCP failed to clear CBD were subjected to open exploration of CBD using any easily available, suitable, straight rigid scope for choledochoscopy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Since March 1991, out of 8866 patients with cholelithiasis, 862 underwent ERCP. Ninety-six patients in whom ERCP failed to clear CBD underwent open exploration of CBD. In each case of exploration of CBD, choledochoscopy was performed using a straight rigid scope, either a cystoscope, paediatric cystoscope, hysteroscope or 5-mm laparoscopy telescope with a 5-mm cannula.

RESULTS

The CBD clearance was complete in 95 patients, and one patient had an impacted calculus at the ampulla. CBD explorations were followed by choledochoduodenostomy, T-tube placement or suturing of choledochotomy. No residual calculi were observed after such exploration.

CONCLUSION

From our results, we advocate the following algorithm for CBD calculi in resource-limited settings. Subject patients with CBD calculi to ERCP followed by LC. In case of failed ERCP, open exploration of CBD with choledochoscopy using any suitable rigid scope. Dedicated flexible or rigid choledochoscope is not essential. This approach is cost-effective and successful.

Current Gallstone Treatment Methods, State of the Art

This study aims to provide valuable references for clinicians in selecting appropriate surgical methods for biliary tract stones based on patient conditions. In this paper, the advantages and disadvantages of various minimally invasive cholelithiasis surgical techniques are systematically summarized and innovative surgical approaches and intelligent stone removal technologies are introduced. The goal is to evaluate and predict future research priorities and development trends in the field of gallstone surgery. In recent years, the incidence of gallstone-related diseases, including cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis, has significantly increased. This surge in cases has prompted the development of several innovative methods for gallstone extraction, with minimally invasive procedures gaining the most popularity. Among these techniques, PTCS, ERCP, and LCBDE have garnered considerable attention, leading to new surgical techniques; however, it must be acknowledged that each surgical method has its unique indications and potential complications. The primary challenge for clinicians is selecting a surgical approach that minimizes patient trauma while reducing the incidence of complications such as pancreatitis and gallbladder cancer and preventing the recurrence of gallstones. The integration of artificial intelligence with stone extraction surgeries offers new opportunities to address this issue. Regarding the need for preoperative preparation for PTCS surgery, we recommend a combined approach of PTBD and PTOBF. For ERCP-based stone extraction, we recommend a small incision of the Oddi sphincter followed by 30 s of balloon dilation as the optimal procedure. If conditions permit, a biliary stent can be placed post-extraction. For the surgical approach of LCBDE, we recommend the transduodenal (TD) approach. Artificial intelligence is involved throughout the entire process of gallstone detection, treatment, and prognosis, and more AI-integrated medical technologies are expected to be applied in the future.

Management of Choledocholithiasis in a Community Hospital: Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Versus Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND

Approximately 10% of intraoperative cholangiograms identify choledocholithiasis (CDL), stones in the common bile duct. Choledocholithiasis management options include endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by cholecystectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) followed by ERCP (LC + ERCP), cholecystectomy with open common bile duct exploration, or laparoscopic cholecystectomy with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC + LCBDE). The goal of these interventions is to clear the obstruction from CDL.

METHODS

Patients from a single-center community hospital undergoing LC with intraoperative cholangiogram (LC + IOC) progressing to LC + LCBDE from July 2020 to August 2022 were evaluated for hospital length of stay (LOS), operative times, and complications. These were compared to the prior standard practice of pre/post-operative ERCP.

RESULTS

The results were evaluated using ANOVA, Student-Newman-Keuls, and chi square analysis. In comparison of LC + CBDE to ERCP + cholecystectomy, LOS was reduced (1.8 vs 4.6 days P < .0001). No difference in LOS between LC + IOC and LC + CBDE (1.4 vs 1.8 days, P > .05) was found. No difference in complication rates was found. Mean operative time differed between LC + IOC and LC + CBDE (63 vs 113 minutes, P < .0001). Fifty-five attempts of LC + CBDE were performed with only 10 requiring post-operative ERCP.

DISCUSSION

Since implementation of LC + CBDE, there has been reduced LOS without increasing complication rates. Operative times are increased with LC + CBDE but offset by reduced LOS, additional anesthesia events, and procedures. Our institution will continue to pursue LC + CBDE when indicated with efforts to improve resource allocation.

Novel technique for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration using flexible videobronchoscope to study on clinical outcomes of single-stage (laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration) versus dual-stage (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy) for cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis - Prospective study in a tertiary care centre (BRACE study - BRonchoscope Assisted Common bile duct Exploration Study)

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to study on clinical outcomes of single-stage (laparoscopic cholecystectomy [LC] and laparoscopic common bile duct [CBD] exploration using flexible videobronchoscope) versus dual-stage (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy) for cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis-prospective study in a tertiary care centre (BRACE STUDY-Bronchoscope-Assisted CBD Exploration [CBDE] Study).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between April 2022 and April 2023, patients who underwent LC with laparoscopic CBDE and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by LC participated in this single-centre prospective research. The Institute Ethics Committee granted its approval after receiving an ethical review. The primary endpoint of the proposed research was the removal of the gall bladder and CBD stones. The secondary outcomes studied were complications using the Clavien-Dindo score, cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction score and post-procedure duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 168 patients were included in the study. The success rate of LC with laparoscopic CBD exploration using a flexible videobronchoscope (Group 1) was significantly higher as compared to ERCP f/b LC (Group 2) (96.4% vs. 84.5%, P value = 0.02). Out of the 84 patients in Group 1, direct choledochotomies were performed on 83 of them. Group 1 had a considerably shorter hospital stay (4.6 ± 2.4 vs. 5.3 ± 6.2 days; P = 0.03). Both the cost ( P = 0.002) and the number of procedures per patient ( P < 0.001) were considerably higher in Group 2. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 and above) were significantly higher in Group 2 ( P = 0.04). Patient satisfaction in Group 1 scored more favourably than those in Group 2 (2.26 ± 0.3 vs. 1.92 ± 0.7; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

For concurrent gall bladder and CBD stones, single-stage management by LCBDE using a flexible videobronchoscope has a significantly better primary outcome and lower major complications than dual-stage management. The single-stage strategy also has advantages in terms of a shorter hospital stay, the need for fewer procedures, cost efficiency and patient satisfaction.

Long-term outcomes of choledochoduodenostomy for choledocholithiasis: increased incidence of postoperative cholangitis after total or distal gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Choledochoduodenostomy (CDD) is performed to treat choledocholithiasis (CDL) cases where endoscopic stone removal is difficult. Recognizing CDD characteristics is important for CDL treatment planning.

METHODS

A total of 116 patients, including 33 patients ≥ 80 years old (29 with previous total gastrectomy, 19 with previous distal gastrectomy, 20 with built-up stones, 19 with periampullary diverticulum, 10 with confluence stones, 8 with repetitive recurrent stones, 4 with hard stones, 3 with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography [ERC] not available due to lack of cooperation, 2 with a history of pancreatitis post-ERC, and 2 in whom ERC could not be performed due to a disturbed anatomy) underwent CDD for CDL. Postoperative complications and long-term outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The in-hospital mortality rate was 0%. The morbidity (grade ≥ IIIA according to the Clavien-Dindo classification) rates in the elderly (≥ 80 years old) and non-elderly (51-79 years old) patients were 3.0% (1/33) and 2.4% (2/83), respectively (p = 0.85). Long-term complications included cholangitis in eight (7%) patients, of which three cases were repetitive and seven had an operative history of total or distal gastrectomy. The incidence of postoperative cholangitis after total or distal gastrectomy was 15% (7/48), which was significantly higher than that involving other causes (1.5%, 1/68; p < 0.01). Two patients with cholangitis after total gastrectomy experienced early recurrence of lithiasis at 2 and 9 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

CDD is safe, even in elderly patients. However, a history of total gastrectomy or distal gastrectomy may increase the incidence of postoperative cholangitis.

Single-Stage Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration and Cholecystectomy Versus Two-Stage Endoscopic Stone Extraction Followed by Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy for Patients With Cholelithiasis and Choledocholithiasis: A Systematic Review

Gallbladder stones with common bile duct (CBD) stones can be managed by a single-stage laparoscopic approach with transcystic or transcholedochal CBD exploration and cholecystectomy or a two-stage approach with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Comparative outcomes between these approaches remain controversial. The objective was to compare single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage ERCP stone removal followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for clearance of CBD stones, complications, length of stay, and costs. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized trials and observational studies comparing outcomes of interest between single and two-stage approaches. Meta-analyses using random effects models were conducted. Seven studies with 382 patients were included. The single-stage approach achieved higher stone clearance rates (OR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.12-2.08) with a shorter length of stay (mean duration: 3.5 days, 95% CI: -5.1 to -1.9 days) compared to the two-stage method. No significant difference was seen in complication rates (45% vs 40%, p=0.43) or costs ($19,000 vs $18,000, p=0.34). For patients with gallbladder and CBD stones, single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration with cholecystectomy appears superior for stone clearance while comparable in safety and cost to a two-stage approach. Further randomized trials are warranted.

Metabolic dysfunction-associated gallstone disease: expecting more from critical care manifestations

About 20% of adults worldwide have gallstones which are solid conglomerates in the biliary tree made of cholesterol monohydrate crystals, mucin, calcium bilirubinate, and protein aggregates. About 20% of gallstone patients will definitively develop gallstone disease, a condition which consists of gallstone-related symptoms and/or complications requiring medical therapy, endoscopic procedures, and/or cholecystectomy. Gallstones represent one of the most prevalent digestive disorders in Western countries and patients with gallstone disease are one of the largest categories admitted to European hospitals. About 80% of gallstones in Western countries are made of cholesterol due to disturbed cholesterol homeostasis which involves the liver, the gallbladder and the intestine on a genetic background. The incidence of cholesterol gallstones is dramatically increasing in parallel with the global epidemic of insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, expansion of visceral adiposity, obesity, and metabolic syndrome. In this context, gallstones can be largely considered a metabolic dysfunction-associated gallstone disease, a condition prone to specific and systemic preventive measures. In this review we discuss the key pathogenic and clinical aspects of gallstones, as the main clinical consequences of metabolic dysfunction-associated disease.

TAVAC: choledochoscopy disposable scopes, and the single-stage vs. two-stage approach to choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have been published evaluating the benefits and drawbacks of clearing the common bile duct of stones using a single-stage approach (LCBDE + LC) versus a two-stage approach (ERCP followed by LC). These studies have demonstrated that a single-stage approach offers similar outcomes and morbidities as a two-stage approach, with the added benefit of a lower cost and shorter length of stays. However, it is significant we understand why LCBDE is not commonly performed currently and also the lapse in surgical trainee exposure and competence in LCBDE. This paper aims to address the lapse in surgical trainee exposure to LCBDE, evaluate the scopes currently available to perform LCBDE, and review current data evaluating the risks and benefits of single-stage versus two-stage approaches to.

METHODS

We utilized PubMed to analyze all publications related to the various disposable scopes utilized to perform choledochoscopy. We also discuss the need for disposable scopes and how this new market niche is transforming the choledochoscopy space.

RESULTS

We analyzed the data related to single-stage and two-stage approach to choledocholithiasis. We noted an overall shorter length of stay and also decreased costs in favor of a single-stage approach.

CONCLUSION

A single-stage LCBDE is the most cost-effective treatment option for choledocholithiasis in patients with choledocholithiasis undergoing a cholecystectomy. In addition, single-stage approach is associated with shorter length of stay. Knowledge of the available choledochoscopes and tools available to surgeons to perform choledochoscopy is significant. The evidence does support the use of disposable choledochoscope from a cost and cross-contamination perspective. Additionally, efforts should be made to incorporate LCBDE into the teaching paradigm of surgical training programs.

Laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration versus transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiography during cholecystectomy after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) poses a particular challenge given the altered anatomy and inability to perform a standard endoscopic retrograde cholangiogram (ERC). The optimal treatment strategy for intraoperatively encountered CBD stones in post-RYGB patients has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes following laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) and laparoscopy-assisted transgastric ERC for CBDs during cholecystectomy in RYGB-operated patients.

SETTING

Swedish nationwide multi-registry study.

METHODS

The Swedish Registry for Gallstone Surgery and ERCs, GallRiks (n = 215,670), and the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry (SOReg) (n = 60,479) were cross-matched for cholecystectomies with intraoperatively encountered CBD stones in patients with previous RYGB surgery between 2011 and 2020.

RESULTS

Registry cross-matching found 550 patients. Both LTCBDE (n = 132) and transgastric ERC (n = 145) were comparable in terms of low rates of intraoperative adverse events (1% versus 2%) and postoperative adverse events within 30 days (16% versus 18%). LTCBDE required significantly shorter operating time (P = .005) by on average 31 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) [10.3-52.6], and was more often used for smaller stones <4 mm in size (30% versus 17%, P = .010). However, transgastric ERC was more often used in acute surgery (78% versus 63%, P = .006) and for larger stones >8 mm in size (25% versus 8%, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

LTCBDE and transgastric ERC have similarly low complication rates for clearance of intraoperatively encountered CBD stones in RYGB-operated patients, but LTCBDE is faster while transgastric ERC is more often used in conjunction with larger bile duct stones.

The short- and long-term outcome after the surgical management of common bile duct stones in a tertiary referral hospital

BACKGROUND

The removal of common bile duct stones by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) shows excellent results with low complication rates and is therefore considered a gold standard. However, in case of stones non-removable by ERCP, surgical extraction is needed. The surgical approach is still controversial and clinical guidelines are missing. This study aims to analyze the outcomes of patients treated with choledochotomy or hepaticojejunostomy for common bile duct stones.

METHODS

All patients who underwent choledochotomy or hepaticojejunostomy for common bile duct stones at a tertiary referral hospital over 11 years were included. The analyzed data contains basic demographics, diagnostics, surgical parameters, length of hospitalization, and morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 4375 patients underwent cholecystectomy, and 655 received an ERCP with stone extraction, with 48 of these patients receiving subsequent surgical treatment. ERCP was attempted in 23/30 (77%) of the choledochotomy patients pre/intraoperatively and 11/18 (56%) in hepaticojejunostomy patients. The 30-day major complication rate (Clavien-Dindo > II) was 1/30 (3%) in the choledochotomy group and 2/18 (11%) in the hepaticojejunostomy group. Complications after 30 days occurred in 3/30 (10%) patients and 2/18 (11%), respectively, and no mortality occurred.

CONCLUSION

ERCP should still be considered the gold standard, although due to low short- and long-term morbidity rates, choledochotomy and hepaticojejunostomy represent effective surgical solutions for common bile duct stones.

Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Through Diathermy, Choledochotomy, and Primary Closure: A 6-Year Retrospective Cohort Study

Background and Objective: Choledocholithiasis is a frequent pathology, unfortunately when its endoscopic management fails, there is no consensus of how it should be addressed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) using electrosurgery (coagulation) for choledochotomy followed by primary closure after endoscopic treatment failure. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LCBDE from 2013 to 2018 was conducted in Bogotá, Colombia. Clinical demographics, operative outcomes, recurrence rate of common bile duct stones, and long-term bile duct complications were analyzed. A descriptive analysis was performed. Results: A total of 168 patients were analyzed. Most of the patients were males (53.37%) with a median age of 73 years with no comorbidities (65%). Stone clearance was successful in 167 patients (99.4%). Nonlethal complications were noted in 3 patients during the surgery or in the immediate postoperative (1.79%) and managed with T-tube or endoscopically. No cases of mortality surgery related were observed. There were no signs of any type of biliary injury or stricture observed in any of the patients during the 24-month follow-up period. Conclusions: LCBDE with diathermy and primary closure is a safe and effective treatment option for choledocholithiasis for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in terms of long-term outcome as well as short-term outcome.

[Modern minimally invasive technologies for the treatment of cholelithiasis]

Surgical community has not yet reached any consensus on the adequate treatment of gallstone disease with combined stones of the gallbladder and bile ducts. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic papillosphincterotomy (EPST) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCE) have been considered the optimal treatment method for the past thirty years. Thanks to improvement of technologies and experience in laparoscopic surgery, many centers in the world offer simultaneous treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis, i.e. LCE and laparoscopic choledocholithotomy. Transcystical and transcholedochal extraction of calculi from the common bile duct is the most common. Intraoperative cholangiography and choledochoscopy are used to assess extraction of calculi while T-shaped drainage, biliary stent and primary suture of common bile duct are used to complete choledocholithotomy. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy is associated with certain difficulties, requires some experience in choledochoscopy and intracorporeal suturing of common bile duct. There are many unresolved issues regarding the choice of laparoscopic choledocholithotomy technique depending on the number and dimensions of stones, diameter of cystic duct and common bile duct. The authors analyze literature data on the role of modern minimally invasive interventions in the treatment of gallstone disease.

Laparoscopic Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration: 8-Year Experience at a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) is used to treat cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. This study aimed to investigate the safety, effectiveness and generalisability of LTCBDE in patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis based on our LTCBDE experience within 8 years.

METHODS

Four hundred patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis (including 62 of cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis with common bile duct no-dilatation) treated with LTCBDE at a single centre from January 2014 to February 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. They were divided into the first 200 and last 200 LTCBDE cases. The disease characteristics, cystic duct incision methods, surgical outcomes and follow-up data were analysed retrospectively. Each patient was followed up for > 3 months.

RESULTS

Four hundred patients underwent LTCBDE, including 188 males and 212 females aged from 15 to 91 years (average age: 56 years). LTCBDE was successful in 377 (94.3%) patients, while treatment was converted to laparoscopic choledocholithotomy with T-tube drainage in 23 (5.8%), owing to intraoperative choledochoscope insertion failure. The CBD diameter (10.89 ± 1.76 vs 9.97 ± 2.39, P < 0.05), cystic duct diameter (4.62 ± 1.03 vs 5.03 ± 1.29, P < 0.05), and operation time (164.60 ± 24.30 vs 135.34 ± 30.00, P < 0.05). Residual stones were found in six (1.5%) patients and removed during the second operation; post-operative bile leakage was found in one (0.3%) patient, who was discharged safely after the second operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Phase I LTCBDE is safe and effective in treating cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. With continuous technological advances, LTCBDE has been effectively promoted and applied.

Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy, safety and economy of ERCP and LTCBDE in the treatment of common bile duct stones

Objectives: This study further compared the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) approaches in the treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS) from the perspective of efficacy, safety and economy.

Methods: The therapeutic efficacy and safety of ERCP and LTCBDE approaches were retrospectively compared. Cost-effectiveness analysis of clinical economics was performed to analyze and evaluate the two approaches.

Results: There was no significant difference in the success rate of surgery and bile stone residue between ERCP and LTCBDE group. The incidence of postoperative complications in ERCP group was significantly higher than that in the LTCBDE group; while the incidence of pancreatitis in the ERCP group was significantly higher than that in the LTCBDE group. There was no significant difference in biliary infection, bile leakage and sepsis between ERCP and LTCBDE groups. In terms of cost, the costs of surgery and nursing were significantly lower, the costs of treatment and sanitary materials were significantly higher in the ERCP group than that in the LTCBDE group. There was no significant difference in the costs of medical examination, laboratory test, medicine cost and total cost between ERCP group and LTCBDE group. The total length of hospital stay, length of hospital stay before surgery and duration of surgery in the ERCP group were significantly lower than that in the LTCBDE group; there was no significant difference in length of hospital stay after surgery between the ERCP and LTCBDE group. The cost-effectiveness ratio of ERCP group was 34171.25, and the cost-effectiveness of LTCBDE group was 34524.25. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the two groups was 51415.

Conclusion: ERCP and LTCBDE approaches had similar therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of CBDS. The safety of LTCBDE approach is superior to that of ERCP approach for the treatment of CBDS. ERCP approach is more economical in the treatment of CBDS than LTCBDE approach.

Inpatient Choledocholithiasis Management: a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Management Algorithms

BACKGROUND

Choledocholithiasis is commonly encountered. It is frequently managed with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (either preoperative, intraoperative, or postoperative relative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy). The purpose of this study is to determine the most cost-effective method to manage inpatient choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

A decision tree model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with a ceiling willingness to pay threshold assumed of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year. Model parameters were determined through review of published literature and institutional data. Costs were from the perspective of the healthcare system with a time horizon of 1 year. Sensitivity analyses were performed on model parameters.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was cost-effective, resulting in 0.9909 quality-adjusted life years at an expected cost of $18,357. Intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography yielded more quality-adjusted life years (0.9912) at a higher cost ($19,717) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4,789,025, exceeding the willingness to pay threshold. Both preoperative and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies were eliminated for being both more costly and less effective. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration remained cost-effective if the probability of successful biliary clearance was above 0.79, holding all other variables constant. If its base cost remained below $18,400 and intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography base cost rose above $18,200, then laparoscopic common bile duct exploration remained cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is the most cost-effective method to manage choledocholithiasis. Efforts to ensure availability of local expertise and resources for this procedure are warranted.

Is the use of fully covered metal stents effective in the treatment of difficult lithiasis of the common bile duct?

BACKGROUND

The management of difficult lithiasis of common bile duct (CBD) often requires a multimodal approach. Fully Covered Metal Stents (FCSEMS) could fragment the stones, dilate strictures of the CBD and progressively enlarge the papillary orifice. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of FCSEMS in the treatment of difficult lithiasis of CBD.

METHODS

All consecutive cases of difficult lithiasis of CBD after an attempt of clearance with complete sphincterotomy were retrospectively considered from 2009 to 2019. Intrahepatic lithiasis cases were excluded. Multivariable analysis (stepwise logistic regression if p value < 0.1 at univariable analysis) was made to understand factors associated with efficacy of FCSEMS in difficult lithiasis of CBD.

RESULTS

163 cases of difficult lithiasis over 1516 cases of lithiasis of CBD (incidence of 11%) were considered. Among eligible patients, 96 (mean age 78 ± 11.9 years, 43% males) placed a FCSEMS during the first ERCP. Mean diameter of stone was 17.5 ± 5.5 mm. An attempt of dilation during the same procedure was made in 18% cases. After removal of the stent, 52 (54%) patients had complete clearance of CBD at cholangiography. The rest of patients (44), subsequently underwent multimodal treatment (final success of 95%). After logistic regression, variables positively associated with clearance of CBD were sex male (OR 3.5) and stent permanence ≥ 30 days (OR 3.2). Diameter of the stone ≥ 2 cm was associated with failure (OR 0.2). 7 post-ERCP pancreatitis, 6 post-sphincterotomy bleeding and 3 cholangitis occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

FCSEMS are useful in the approach of difficult lithiasis of CBD with no significant adverse events associated.

Application of an internal drainage tube in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

Choledocholithiasis is a common disease of the biliary system. The traditional surgical method for this is to remove the gallbladder, open the common bile duct, remove the stones and place a T-tube in the common bile duct for drainage. Common bile duct exploration usually requires a T-tube. Without a T-tube, there is a risk of bile leakage due to pressure in the bile duct. After the T-tube is placed, patients experience some form of discomfort and inconveniences with daily life, and there is also a risk of accidental detachment, as well as a risk of bile leakage when the T-tube is removed. In severe cases, patients may need to be hospitalized again. With advancements being made in surgical instruments and technology, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration has been widely used. Due to the carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration requires a long period of time for T-tube sinus formation compared with open surgery. Therefore, the extubation time needs to be prolonged in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. The use of an internal drainage tube may be used in order to avoid the aforementioned disadvantages. Since 2012, the authors have performed laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with the placement of an internal drainage tube for the treatment of common bile duct stones, and have completed >160 surgeries. The present study provides a summary of the data of these 160 cases. The 160 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Following the removal of the stones, an internal drainage tube was placed, and the common bile duct incision was primary sutured. All patients were discharged, and there were no complications, such as biliary leakage, biliary bleeding and biliary stricture. On the whole, the present study demonstrates that where possible, the placement of an internal drainage tube in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is safe and reliable, and may be used to avoid the risk of bile leakage without a T-tube, any inconveniences for patients, and the risk of bile leakage following the removal of the T-tube.

One-stage fluoroscopy-guided laparoscopic transcystic papillary balloon dilation and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis who previously had undergone gastrectomy for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with a history of gastrectomy have a higher incidence of cholecystocholedocholithiasis (CCL) and related morbidities than the general population. However, the management of common bile duct (CBD) stones with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is challenging in patients after Roux-en-Y or Billroth II reconstruction because of the altered gastrointestinal anatomy. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of one-stage laparoscopic transcystic papillary balloon dilation and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LTPBD+LC) in patients with previous gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included five patients with CCL who had previously undergone gastrectomy. All five underwent LTPBD+LC between May 2015 and February 2020 at our institution. The primary end-point was complete clearance of the CBD stones.

RESULTS

Of the 311 patients who had undergone gastrectomy for gastric cancer from December 2009 to December 2018 at our institution, six (1.9%) were later diagnosed with CCL. Five of the six patients did not need emergency biliary drainage and underwent conservative therapy and subsequent elective LTPBD+LC. LTPBD+LC was successfully performed in all cases. None of the patients required conversion to open surgery. The rate of complete clearance of the CBD stones was 100%. The mean operative time of the entire procedure was 126 minutes (range, 102-144 minutes), and the mean blood loss was 12.4 mL (range, 1-50 mL). There were no major perioperative complications, and the mean length of postoperative hospital stay was 4.2 days (range, 3-7 days).

CONCLUSION

One-stage LTPBD+LC may be a feasible procedure for patients with CCL who have previously undergone gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

Role of Prophylactic Cholecystectomy After Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Biliary Stone Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and complication rate of cholecystectomy deferral versus prophylactic cholecystectomy among patients post-endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones.

BACKGROUND

Although previous reports suggest a decreased risk of biliary complications with prophylactic cholecystectomy, biliary endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy may provide a role for deferring cholecystectomy with the gallbladder left in situ.

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were performed through August 2019 in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Measured outcomes included: mortality, recurrent biliary pain or cholecystitis, pancreatitis, cholangitis, and eventual need for cholecystectomy. Random effects models were used to determine pooled effect size and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Nine studies (n = 1605) were included. A total of 53.8% (n = 864) patients had deferred cholecystectomy post-sphincterotomy. Deferral cholecystectomy as compared to prophylactic cholecystectomy resulted in a significant increased risk of mortality [odds raio (OR) 2.56 (95% confidence interval, CI 1.54-4.23); P < 0.0001; I2 = 18.49]. Patients who did not undergo prophylactic cholecystectomy developed more recurrent biliary pain or cholecystitis [OR 5.10 (95% CI 3.39-7.67); P < 0.0001; I2 = 0.00]. Rate of pancreatitis [OR 3.11 (95% CI 0.99-9.83); P = 0.053; I2 = 0.00] and cholangitis [OR 1.49 (95% CI 0.74-2.98); P = 0.264; I2 = 0.00] was unaffected. Overall, 26.00% (95% CI 14.00-40.00) of patients with deferred prophylactic cholecystectomy required eventual cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic cholecystectomy remains the preferred strategy compared to a deferral approach with gallbladder in situ post-sphincterotomy for patients with bile duct stones. Future studies may highlight a subset of patients (ie, those with large balloon biliary dilation) that may not require cholecystectomy.

Coledocolitiasis y exploración laparoscópica de la vía biliar. Un estudio de cohorte

Introducción. La coledocolitiasis es la presencia de cálculos en las vías biliares. En la mayoría de los casos se trata mediante la colangio pancreatografía retrógrada endoscópica y menos comúnmente por intervención quirúrgica laparoscópica. El objetivo de este estudio fue describir una cohorte retrospectiva de pacientes sometidos a exploración laparoscópica de la vía biliar. Métodos. Se incluyeron pacientes intervenidos entre los años 2014 y 2018, en dos instituciones de nivel III en Cali, Colombia, referidos para valoración por cirugía hepato-biliar, por dificultad para la extracción de los cálculos por colangio pancreatografia retrograda endoscópica, debido al tamaño, la cantidad, o la dificultad para identificar o canular la papila duodenal. Resultados. De los 100 pacientes incluidos, se encontró que el 72 % fueron mujeres, con rango de edad entre 14 y 92 años. Al 39 % de los pacientes se les extrajo un solo cálculo y al 16 % 10 cálculos. Un 12 % presentaron cálculos gigantes (mayores de 2,5 cm de ancho) y un 44 % presentaron litiasis múltiple. Al 69 % de los pacientes se les realizó colecistectomía. El porcentaje de éxito de limpieza de la vía biliar por laparoscopia fue del 95 %. Discusión. La exploración laparoscópica de la vía biliar es una técnica posible, reproducible, segura y con excelentes resultados para el manejo de la coledocolitiasis.

The ABCdE score for PREdicting Lithotripsy Assistance during transcystic Bile duct Exploration by Laparoendoscopy (PRE-LABEL)

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones are reported in ~ 15% of patients who undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. Prior to lithotripsy techniques, transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) was limited to smaller CBD stones. The addition of lithotripsy to LCBDE increases cost, operative time and staffing requirements. Predicting which patients might require lithotripsy would be useful in operative planning. The primary aim was to investigate clinical variables for predicting lithotripsy assistance during transcystic bile duct exploration by laparoendoscopy (PRE-LABEL). Secondary aims were to develop and validate a predictive scoring tool.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of consecutive patients who underwent transcystic LCBDE at a single centre in the UK was performed to investigate clinical variables for PRE-LABEL and develop a scoring tool (ABCdE score: age, bilirubin, CBD diameter, ERCP). Binary logistic regression was used to investigate which independent variables (predictors) were associated with lithotripsy assistance during transcystic LCBDE. The ABCdE score was applied to both UK and Spain patient cohorts to determine its sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.

RESULTS

From 8 pre-operative clinical variables analysed, age ≤ 40 years, bilirubin > two-times upper limit of normal, CBD diameter ≥ 10 mm and ERCP failure of stone extraction were independent predictors of requiring lithotripsy during transcystic LCBDE and formed the ABCdE score. The hazard ratios were 2.87, 3.79, 2.78 and 10.06, respectively. An ABCdE score ≥ 2 resulted in 71% sensitivity, 81% specificity and 79% accuracy in predicting lithotripsy during LCBDE (UK cohort). Validation using a contemporary cohort from Spain yielded similar sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the only study to date reporting independent predictors of requiring lithotripsy assistance during transcystic LCBDE. ABCdE score ≥ 2 can highlight patients that may require lithotripsy in order to avoid failure of transcystic LCBDE and therefore avoid choledochotomy or post-operative ERCP.

Single-stage management of choledocholithiasis: intraoperative ERCP versus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the criterion standard for treating patients with symptomatic gallstone disease; however, the optimal technique for extracting common bile duct stones remains unclear. Recent studies have noted improved outcomes with single-stage techniques, such as intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (iERCP) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); however only few studies have directly compared those two single-stage techniques.

OBJECTIVES

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, we retrospectively analyzed the postoperative outcomes of all patients who underwent single-stage LC for choledocholithiasis from 2005 to 2017. Using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, as well as International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes, we stratified patients into two cohorts: those who underwent iERCP and LCBDE. Applying univariate techniques, we evaluated baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes for both cohorts. Our primary outcomes of interest were 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality; our secondary outcomes included rates of reoperation, readmission, operative time, and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Of the 1814 single-stage LC patients during our 13-year study period, 1185 (65.3%) underwent LCBDE; 629 (34.6%) underwent iERCP. Our univariate analysis showed that the two cohorts were homogeneous in terms of baseline characteristics, including demographics, preoperative comorbidities, laboratory values, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores. 30-day postoperative morbidity (including infectious and noninfectious complications) and overall mortality between groups were low and comparable. The mean operative time was slightly longer with LCBDE (125.1 ± 62.0 min) than iERCP (113.5 ± 65.2 min; P < 0.001), however the mean hospital length of stay, readmission rate, and reoperation rate were similar.

CONCLUSION

We found that both iERCP and LCBDE resulted in low, comparable rates of morbidity and mortality. Centers with readily available endoscopic expertise might favor iERCP for its ease of access and shorter operative time. However, LCBDE remains an appropriate technique for patients with choledocholithiasis, especially when immediate endoscopic intervention is unavailable.

Two-stage versus single-stage procedure for the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis in elderly patients: a retrospectively cohort study

BACKGROUND

there is an increasing incidence rate of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis associated with the increasing proportion of senile individuals.

METHODS

a total of 100 elderly patients (over 80 years of age) suffering both from cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis were retrospectively studied from January 2010 to December 2016. Patients were scheduled for either a single-stage or two-stage procedure. The LCBDE group (n = 54) included cases that underwent a single stage procedure of laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct combined with cholecystectomy. The ERCP/EST group (n = 46) included cases that underwent a two stage procedure of preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography with endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by cholecystectomy. Comorbidity conditions, presenting symptoms, bile duct clearance, length of hospital stay and the frequency of procedural, postoperative and long-term complications were recorded.

RESULTS

the LCBDE group had a higher stones clearance rate than the ERCP/EST group (100.0% vs 89.1%, p < 0.05). Postoperative complications and hospitalization length were comparable in the two groups (p > 0.05). There were more procedural complications in the ERCP/EST group than in the LCBDE group (10.8% vs 0%, p < 0.05). Furthermore, a patient in the ERCP/EST group died due to duodenal perforation. More patients in the ERCP/EST group experienced long-term complications than those in the LCBDE group (23.9% vs 3.7%, p < 0.05) during a mean follow-up period of 28.4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

the single-stage procedure is a safe and effective technique for elderly patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. LCBDE provides a good stone clearance rate with few long term complications.

Laparoscopic Transcystic Versus Transductal Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic transcystic (TC) and transductal (TD) common bile duct (CBD) exploration.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN Register, and bibliographic reference lists. CBD clearance rate, perioperative complications, and biliary complications were defined as the primary outcome parameters. Procedure time, length of hospital stay, conversion to open procedure were the secondary outcomes. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

We identified 30 studies reporting a total of 4073 patients comparing outcomes of laparoscopic TC (n = 2176) and TD (N = 1897) CBD exploration. The TC approach was associated with significantly lower overall complications (RD: -0.07, P = 0.001), biliary complications (RD: -0.05, P = 0.0003), and blood loss (MD: -16.20, P = 0.02) compared to TD approach. Moreover, the TC approach significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD: -2.62, P < 0.00001) and procedure time (MD: -12.73, P = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference in rate of CBD clearance (RD: 0.00, P = 0.77) and conversion to open procedure (RD: 0.00, P = 0.86) between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic TC CBD exploration is safe and reduces overall morbidity and biliary complications compared to the TD approach. Moreover, it is associated with significantly shorter length of hospital stay and procedure time. High-quality randomised trials may provide stronger evidence with respect to impact of the cystic duct/CBD diameter, number or size of CBD stones, or cystic duct anatomy on the comparative outcomes of TC and TD approaches.

Pediatric Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: An Opportunity to Decrease ERCP Complications

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) with common bile duct exploration (CBDE) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are two therapeutic techniques for choledocholithiasis. The preferred technique is unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified subjects who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and IOC/CBDE or ERCP from July 1, 2006, to December 31, 2016. We retrospectively reviewed 81 patients (≤ 18 y) who received these interventions for suspected choledocholithiasis. Main outcomes analyzed were success of intervention and complications.

RESULTS

Of the 81 patients, 21 ERCPs and three endoscopic ultrasounds (EUSs) were performed before LC. Eighteen of 21 (85.7%) patients had stones or sludge cleared by ERCP, whereas 3 (14.3%) had normal common bile ducts without evidence of stones. Five of 24 (20.8%) had significant post-ERCP complications. Seven of 24 (29.2%) had more than one admission. Sixty of 81 patients underwent LC with IOC ± CBDE. Twenty one of 60 (36.2%) were found to have abnormal IOC. Eight of 15 (53.3%) attempted laparoscopic CBDE were successful. Eleven of 21 (52.4%) patients with abnormal IOC had post-LC ERCP (10) and EUS (1). Patients admitted to the Pediatric Surgery service were more likely to undergo LC first than ERCP/EUS (OR 3.46, 95% CI 1.26 to 9.45, P = 0.016). Patients undergoing LC first had a shorter length of stay (mean LOS 5.13 d versus 4.07, median 5.0 versus 3.0 d, P-value < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Successful and safe laparoscopic treatment of choledocholithiasis is possible in the pediatric patient. A laparoscopic-first approach to suspected choledocholithiasis may reduce the number of procedures needed in this patient population.

Primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is feasible for elderly patients: 5-Year experience at a single institution

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been demonstrated safety and effective for patients with gallbladder stones and extrahepatic bile duct stones, however few studies reported its suitability for the treatment of elderly patients. Thus, our study aims to investigate the safety and feasibility of primary closure after LCBDE in the treatment of elderly patients.

METHODS

408 out of 499 patients with Gallbladder stones complicated with choledocholithiasis who were undergone LCBDE and primary closure were divided into two groups: Group A (<65 years old, n = 249) and Group B (≥65 years old, n = 159) and the related clinical data were compared and analyzed by statistical method.

RESULTS

Pre-operative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of elderly patients was significantly higher than the younger patients (P < 0.05). In both groups, the positive rate of Choledocholithiasis and bile sludge at exploration, number of stones in CBD, utilization rate of Electro-hydraulic lithotripsy, estimated blood loss, successful duct clearance, the rate of postoperative bile leakage, postoperative bile duct stricture, reoperation, stone recurrence, and other postoperative complications showed no significant difference (p > 0.05). There were also no statistical differences between both groups in time to removal of drainage, postoperative hospital stay, readmission within 30 days and mortality (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

It is safe and feasible to treat the elderly patients with common bile duct stones under the premise of strict surgical indications, skilled laparoscopic procedures and accurate endoscopic suture techniques.

Parameters Suggesting Spontaneous Passage of Stones from Common Bile Duct: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones are common. However, they are known to pass spontaneously, which obviates the need for ERCP.

AIM

The aim of this study is to identify specific predictors for spontaneous passage of CBD stones.

METHODS

Data was retrospectively collected for all patients who were hospitalized with clinical, laboratory, or ultrasonographic evidence of choledocholithiasis and who underwent magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in Hadassah Medical Center between 2005 and 2011. The patients were classified into 4 groups: group A (positive MRCP and positive ERCP), group B (positive MRCP but negative ERCP), group C (positive MRCP but did not undergo ERCP), and group D (negative MRCP that did not undergo ERCP) for choledocholithiasis. All positive MRCP-groups (A+B+C) were further grouped together into group E. We compared groups A versus B and groups E versus D.

RESULTS

Comparing groups A versus B, only gamma-glutamyl transferase predicted spontaneous passage of stones from CBD, as the level was significantly higher in group A (677±12.1) versus group B (362.4±216.2) (P=0.023). Patients with small stone diameter (P=0.001), distal stones (P=0.05), and absence of intrahepatic dilatation (P=0.047) tend to pass their stones spontaneously. Comparing groups D versus E, it was found that male gender (P=0.03), older age (P<0.001), high levels of GGT (P=0.022), high levels of alkaline phosphatase (P=0.011), high levels of total bilirubin (P=0.007), and lower levels of amylase (P<0.001) are predictors for positive MRCP studies for CBD stones.

CONCLUSION

Identification of specific predictors is important to avoid unnecessary invasive endoscopic intervention.

Hem-o-lok clip found in the common bile duct 3 years after laparoscopic cholecystectomy and surgical exploration

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stone extraction is a common and preferred choice for gallstone disease. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) are being increasingly used for managing choledocholithiasis and cholecystolithiasis. We report a case of a Hem-o-lok clip that was dropped into the common bile duct (CBD) after LC and surgical common bile duct exploration (CBDE). An 84-year-old man presented with right upper quadrant pain and jaundice for 2 months, and chills and hyperpyrexia for 1 day. The patient had received ERCP and surgical CBDE at a local hospital 3 years previously. The patient first received ERCP and endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD). When laboratory tests were normal, the patient then received LCBDE. During exploration, stones and a Hem-o-lok clip in the CBD were removed. The patient made good progress after LCBDE + T-tube placement and was discharged from hospital. The findings from this case suggest the following: 1) an appropriate therapy method should be considered for certain gallstone diseases, especially for choledocholithiasis and cholecystolithiasis; and 2) a Hem-o-lok clip should be carefully used during laparoscopic or robot-assisted surgery and the Hem-o-lok clip should not be in close proximity to the incision on the CBD.

Association Between Juxtapapillary Duodenal Diverticula and Risk of Choledocholithiasis: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Studies have suggested that the presence of juxtapapillary duodenal diverticula (JDD) could be a predisposing factor for choledocholithiasis. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted with the aims to summarize all available evidence to better characterize the risk.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and EMBASE database from inception to January 2018. Cross-sectional studies that reported odd ratios (OR) comparing the risk of choledocholithiasis among individuals with JDD versus individuals without JDD were included. Pooled OR and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effect, generic inverse variance method.

RESULTS

Of 527 retrieved articles, 11 studies met our eligibility criteria and were included in analysis. We found a significant association between the presence of JDD and choledocholithiasis with the pooled OR of 2.30 (95% CI, 1.84-2.86). The statistical heterogeneity was moderate with an I² of 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

A significantly increased risk of choledocholithiasis among individuals with JDD was observed in this study.

Clinical analysis of treatment strategies to cholecystocholedocholithiasis patients with previous subtotal or total gastrectomy: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Previous gastrectomy can lead to an increased incidence of cholecystocholedocholithiasis (CCL) and increased morbidity rate. However, the appropriate treatment strategy for patients with CCL and a history of gastrectomy remains unclear.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with CCL and a history of gastrectomy who underwent either one-stage laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration with stone clearance and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) or two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by LC (ERCP+LC) from May 2010 to March 2018.

Results

The success rate of ERCP for CBD stone clearance was 81.2% in patients with a history of Billroth I gastrectomy and 23.7% in patients with a history of Billroth II or Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy [χ² = 97.67, P < 0.001, risk ratio (RR) = 3.43]. The success rate of second-step LC after successful ERCP for removal of CBD stones and the success rate of LCBDE+LC after ERCP treatment failure were 96.8 and 87.7%, respectively, in patients with preoperative intra-abdominal adhesion evaluation scores of ≤3 points. These success rates were 28.6 and 27.6%, respectively, in patients with scores of > 3 points (χ² = 59.70, P < 0.001, RR = 3.38 and χ² = 53.41, P < 0.001, RR = 3.27, respectively).

Conclusions

Based on the results of this study, ERCP+LC seems to be an attractive strategy for treatment of CCL in patients with a history of Billroth I gastrectomy, and LCBDE+LC appears to be suitable for patients with a history of Billroth II or Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy. Preoperative evaluation of intra-abdominal adhesions helps to reduce the conversion rate of laparoscopic surgery.

Comparing a single-staged laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration versus a two-staged endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

With the advent of minimally invasive surgery, the limits of surgery have been stretched by questioning the more usual, established 2-stage approach for choledocholithiasis with an initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in favor of the single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to compare the related benefits, difficulties, and outcomes of these 2 methods at a single institution.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 128 patients satisfying the inclusion criteria was divided into 2 groups (n = 68 for the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy and n = 60 for the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy) between 2014 and 2017. Patient data including age, sex, duration of the operation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay were reviewed.

RESULTS

The group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy had 24 men and 44 women (mean age 52 years), and the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy had 16 men and 44 women (mean age 47 years). Statistically significant results were found in the clearance range (100% in the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus 75% in the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy), a shorter total duration of hospitalization for the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (4.1 days vs 8.4 days) (P < .05), but a great incidence of biliary leakage in the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Duration of surgery was not different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a single-stage procedure that has many advantages over endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy if appropriate experience and when expertise is available.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of 4 Combinations of Laparoscopic and Intraoperative Techniques for Management of Gallstone Disease With Biliary Duct Calculi: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Importance

Several techniques are used for surgical treatment of gallstone disease with biliary duct calculi, but the safety and efficacy of these approaches have not been compared.

Objectives

To compare the efficacy and safety of 4 surgical approaches to gallstone disease with biliary duct calculi.

Data Sources

MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI-Web of Science databases, articles published between 1950 and 2017 and searched from August 12, 2017, to September 14, 2017. Search terms used were LCBDE, LC, preoperative, ERCP, postoperative, period, cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic, retrograde, rendezvous, intraoperative, one-stage, two-stage, single-stage, gallstone, gallstones, calculi, stone, therapy, treatment, therapeutics, surgery, surgical, procedures, clinical trials as topic, random, and allocation in several logical combinations.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials comparing at least 2 of the following strategies: preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (PreERCP) plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC); LC with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCDBE); LC plus intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (IntraERCP); and LC plus postoperative ERCP (PostERCP).

Data Extraction and Synthesis

A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was performed. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to show the probability that each approach would be the best for each outcome.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes were the safety to efficacy ratio using overall mortality and morbidity rates as the main indicators of safety and the success rate as an indicator of efficacy. Secondary outcomes were acute pancreatitis, biliary leak, overall bleeding, operative time, length of hospital stay, total cost, and readmission rate.

Results

The 20 trials comprised 2489 patients (and 2489 procedures). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus IntraERCP had the highest probability of being the most successful (SUCRA, 87.2%) and safest (SUCRA, 69.7%) with respect to morbidity. All approaches had similar results regarding overall mortality. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus LCBDE was the most successful for avoiding overall bleeding (SUCRA, 83.3%) and for the shortest operative time (SUCRA, 90.2%) and least total cost (SUCRA, 98.9%). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus IntraERCP was the best approach for length of hospital stay (SUCRA, 92.7%). Inconsistency was found in operative time (indirect estimate, 19.05; 95% CI, 2.44-35.66; P = .02) and total cost (indirect estimate, 17.06; 95% CI, 3.56-107.21; P = .04). Heterogeneity was observed for success rate (τ, 0.8), operative time (τ, >1), length of stay (τ, >1), and total cost (τ, >1).

Conclusions and Relevance

The combined LC and IntraERCP approach had the greatest odds to be the safest and appears to be the most successful. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus LBCDE appears to reduce the risk of acute pancreatitis but may be associated with a higher risk of biliary leak.

Transcystic versus traditional laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: its advantages and a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The best approach for treating common bile duct stones remains a matter of debate. Traditional laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) can cause adverse events such as stenosis of the bile duct. Moreover, with advances in technology and surgical skills, the use of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) is gradually rising.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety, feasibility, and short-term clinical benefits of LTCBDE and LCBDE through matched cases.

METHODS

Web of science, Cochrane, PubMed, and CNKI were searched systematically to identify studies published between January 2007 and December 2017 that compared LTCBDE and LCBDE without a restriction of languages. This meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies matched the selection criteria, including 1561 cases of LTCBDE and 1500 cases of LCBDE. There was no obvious difference in stone clearance (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.84-2.47; P = 0.18). However, LTCBDE had a shorter operative time (MD - 17.72, 95% CI - 19.42 to - 16.02; P < 0.00001) and shorter hospital stay (MD - 2.20, 95% CI - 2.32 to - 2.08; P < 0.00001). Besides, the LTCBDE group showed significantly better results for blood loss (MD - 7.61, 95% CI - 8.85 to - 6.37; P < 0.00001) and postoperative complications (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19-0.41; P < 0.00001). In addition, LTCBDE was more cost efficient (MD - 2.51, 95% CI - 2.72 to - 2.30; P < 0.00001). Further, we calculated the absolute mean of operative time (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 97.56:117.81 min), hospital stay (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 5.22:8.91 days), hospital expenses (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 8646.121:11848.31 RMB), blood loss (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 29.3:52.0 ml), the rate of CBD stone clearance (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 92.8:95.0%), and postoperative complications (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 6.7:14.6%) in both groups to obtain more convincing results.

CONCLUSIONS

The stone clearance of LTCBDE was equal to that of LCBDE, and LTCBDE demonstrated a shorter operative time, lower blood loss, and other advantages. Thus, the surgical procedure of laparoscopic transcystic choledochotomy is feasible and safe.

Various approaches of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus primary duct closure for choledocholithiasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones may occur in up to 3%-14.7% of all patients with cholecystectomy. Various approaches of laparoscopic CBD exploration plus primary duct closure (PDC) are the most commonly used and the best methods to treat CBD stone. This systematic review was to compare the effectiveness and safety of the various approaches of laparoscopic CBD exploration plus PDC for choledocholithiasis.

DATA SOURCES

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (NRCTs) (case-control studies or cohort studies) were searched from Cochrane library (until Issue 2, 2015), Web of Science (1980-January 2016), PubMed (1966-January 2016), and Baidu search engine. After independent quality assessment and data extraction, meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.1 software.

RESULTS

Four RCTs and 18 NRCTs were included. When compared with choledochotomy exploration (CE) plus T-tube drainage (TTD) (CE + TTD), CE plus PDC (CE + PDC) and CE + PDC with biliary drainage (BD) (CE + PDC + BD) had a lower rate of postoperative biliary peritonitis (OR = 0.22; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.88; P < 0.05; OR = 0.27; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.84; P < 0.05; respectively) where T-tubes were removed more than 3 weeks. The operative time of CE + PDC was significantly shorter (WMD = -24.82; 95% CI: -27.48, -22.16; P < 0.01) than that of CE + TTD in RCTs. Cystic duct exploration (CDE) plus PDC (CDE + PDC) has a lower rate of postoperative complications (OR = 0.39; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.67; P < 0.01) when compared with CE + PDC. Confluence part micro-incision exploration (CME) plus PDC (CME + PDC) has a lower rate of postoperative bile leakage (OR = 0.17; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.74; P < 0.05) when compared with CE + PDC.

CONCLUSION

PDC with other various approaches are better than TTD in the treatment of choledocholithiasis.