Laparoscopic management of CBD stones: an Indian experience

Perioperative Outcomes and Feasibility of Single-Stage Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration (LCBDE) and Cholecystectomy With Internal Endo-Biliary Drainage for Management of Concomitant Cholelithiasis With Choledocholithiasis: A Report From a Tertiary Care Hospital

INTRODUCTION

Managing choledocholithiasis alongside cholelithiasis has seen significant evolution, presenting options such as single-stage cholecystectomy with common bile duct (CBD) exploration, or a two-stage procedure involving endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) performed before or after cholecystectomy. Evidence from Western settings may not fully capture the unique disease burden and demographic characteristics prevalent in developing countries. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is more commonly performed in the Indian subcontinent compared to Western centers due to limited access to advanced procedures and specialized instrumentation for complex ERCP cases. The high cost and the need for extensive armamentarium in managing failed ERCPs make LCBDE a more feasible option in many Indian centers.

METHODS

This prospective study, conducted from August 2019 to July 2020 at King George's Medical University, UP, India, included n = 24 patients diagnosed with choledocholithiasis. The operative procedures performed included laparoscopic CBD exploration and cholecystectomy, along with internal endo-biliary drainage. Perioperative outcomes were assessed, and follow-up data were included to monitor any recurrence until 36 months post-surgery.

RESULTS

The study population had a mean age of 42.2 years, with 83% (n = of the patients being female). Abdominal pain was the predominant symptom, reported by 91.66% of the patients, followed by nausea/vomiting in 79.20% of cases. The mean CBD diameter observed was consistent with existing literature. The mean operating time was 2.02 h, with primary duct closure taking an average of 13.66 min. Mean blood loss during surgery was 136.25 mL. The average hospital stay was 5.54 days, with the majority of drain removals occurring by the third postoperative day. Complications included fever in 25.0% of the patients and bile leakage in n = 3 out of 24 cases (~12.50%). During the follow-up period, one patient (4.17%) experienced a retained stone.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic CBD exploration with primary duct closure and internal biliary drainage appears to be a feasible approach, yielding satisfactory perioperative outcomes. However, further studies are required to firmly establish its superiority over alternative approaches within the Indian context.

[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.

Epidemiological Survey of Different Treatments for Choledocholithiasis in Taiwan: A Nationwide, Population-Based Cohort Analysis

(1) Background: Open, laparoscopic, and endoscopic choledocholithotomy (OC, LC, and EC, respectively) are accepted choledocholithiasis treatment modalities. However, an assessment of the nationwide trends in their outcomes is lacking. This nationwide population-based analysis evaluated treatment outcomes of choledocholithiasis in Taiwan; (2) Methods: A total of 13,139,306 individuals were randomly enrolled from the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) between 2000 to 2013 for cohort analysis. All patients with newly diagnosed choledocholithiasis aged 18 years or older who were treated during the study period were enrolled and allocated to the OC, LC, EC, or combined endoscopy and open choledocholithotomy (CEOC) groups. Age, readmission, retained stone, comorbidities, hospital stay, medical cost, complications, mortality were analyzed; (3) Results: A total of 58,064 individuals met the inclusion criteria, including 46.54%, 1.10%, 47.52%, and 4.85% who underwent OC, LC, EC, and CEOC, respectively. The endpoint characteristics showed that the LC group had higher readmission, longer hospital stay, and higher medical cost. Cox regression analysis showed that the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of complications for EC was 1.259 times higher than that for OC. The adjusted HRs of readmission within 90 days for LC, EC, and CEOC were higher than that of OC. The adjusted HR of retreatment with surgery was higher in LC. The adjusted HR of retreatment with endoscopy was higher in CEOC. The adjusted HR of mortality in EC was 1.603 times that of OC; (4) Conclusions: Different choledocholithiasis treatments lead to different outcomes. However, further studies on other large or national data sets are required to support these findings.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration in Patients With Previous Failed Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

BACKGROUND

The aim was to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (group A) versus primary LCBDE (group B) for the management of gallbladder and common bile duct stones.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive and systematic literature search was performed in several databases, including PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane Library. Meta-analysis of operative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and gallstone clearance rates was conducted using random-effect models.

RESULTS

Six studies including 642 patients (239 in group A and 403 in group B) were included. The operative time was longer in group A (P=0.02). The overall complication, bile leakage, conversion, postoperative hospital stay, and reoperation were comparable in group A and group B. Similarly, no significant difference was present concerning the incidence of stone clearance, residual stone, and recurrent stone (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is an alternative acceptable procedure when removal of common bile duct stones by endoscopic therapy fails.

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.

Laparoscopic Exploration of the Common Bile Duct: A Systematic Review of the Published Evidence Over the Last 10 Years

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic and open surgical interventions are widely implemented as the standard practice in common bile duct exploration. However, the laparoscopic approach has been also reported to have comparative/superior outcomes in this concept. This has created an ongoing debate about the ideal approach to adopt in practice.

METHODS

A systematic review of the published evidence over the last decade that has looked into the outcomes of laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct through transductal and transcystic approaches.

RESULTS

Our systematic review included 36 relevant papers. The majority were based on nonrandomized protocols conducted in single centers with high expertise. The data analysis showed that laparoscopic common bile duct exploration through both approaches was successful in more than 84% of the patients, with an average length of hospital stay of 5.6 days. Conversion to open surgery was reported in 5%-8% of the patients, and the bile leak rates from the more recent studies was 0%-12%, with mortality figures of 0%-1.3%. The outcomes were statistically in favor of the transcystic route when compared to the transductal route from the viewpoints of bile leak rates, mean operative time, duration of hospital stay and morbidity.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, both laparoscopic approaches in common bile duct exploration are safe in patients who are clinically fit to have this intervention. It is associated with a statistically significant lower overall morbidity and shorter duration of hospital stay when compared to open surgery. Relevant up-to-date high-quality randomized trials are unavailable.

Primary closure with knotless barbed suture versus traditional T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a single-center medium-term experience

Objective

Primary closure of the common bile duct (CBD) after laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) is a technical challenge. The present study was performed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of this surgical method.

Methods

This retrospective study of surgical efficacy and safety involved 79 patients who underwent primary CBD closure with a knotless unidirectional barbed suture or traditional T-tube drainage after LCBDE for CBD stones.

Results

The average suturing time, operation time, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly shorter in the primary closure group than T-tube group. There were no significant differences in the mean diameter of the CBD, number of stones, or incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups. No patients developed recurrence of CBD stones during the median follow-up of 21.5 months.

Conclusions

After LCBDE and intraoperative choledochoscopy, primary closure with knotless unidirectional barbed sutures is a safe and effective therapeutic option for patients with cholelithiasis and concurrent CBD stones. This is especially true when the CBD is dilated more than 8 mm.

Surgical (Open and laparoscopic) management of large difficult CBD stones after different sessions of endoscopic failure: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

For complicated common bile duct stones (CBDS) that cannot be extracted by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), management can be safely by open or laparoscopic CBD exploration (CBDE). The study aimed to assess these surgical procedures after endoscopic failure.

METHODS

We analyzed 85 patients underwent surgical management of difficult CBDS after ERCP failure, in the period from 2013 to 2018.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven (78.8%) and 18(21.2%) of our patients underwent single and multiple ERCP sessions respectively. An impacted large stone was the most frequent cause of ERCP failure (60%). Laparoscopic CBDE(LCBDE), open CBDE(OCBDE) and the converted cases were 24.7% (n = 21), 70.6% (n = 60), and 4.7% (n = 4) respectively. Stone clearance rate post LCBDE and OCBDE reached 95.2% and 95% respectively, Eleven (12.9%) of our patients had postoperative complications without mortality. By comparing LCBDE and OCBDE; there was a significant association between the former and longer operative time. On comparing, T-tube and 1ry CBD closure in both OCBDE and LCBDE, there was significantly longer operative time, and post-operative hospital stays in the former. Furthermore, in OCBDE group, choledocoscopy had an independent direction to 1ry CBD repair and significant association with higher stone clearance rate, shorter operative time, and post-operative hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Large difficult CBDS can be managed either by open surgery or laparoscopically with acceptable comparable outcomes with no need for multiple ERCP sessions due to their related morbidities; furthermore, Open choledocoscopy has a good impact on stone clearance rate with direction towards doing primary repair that is better than T-tube regarding operative time and post-operative hospital stay.

Surgical (Open and laparoscopic) management of large difficult CBD stones after different sessions of endoscopic failure: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives

For complicated common bile duct stones (CBDS) that cannot be extracted by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), management can be safely by open or laparoscopic CBD exploration (CBDE). The study aimed to assess these surgical procedures after endoscopic failure.

Methods

We analyzed 85 patients underwent surgical management of difficult CBDS after ERCP failure, in the period from 2013 to 2018.

Results

Sixty-seven (78.8%) and 18(21.2%) of our patients underwent single and multiple ERCP sessions respectively. An impacted large stone was the most frequent cause of ERCP failure (60%). Laparoscopic CBDE(LCBDE), open CBDE(OCBDE) and the converted cases were 24.7% (n = 21), 70.6% (n = 60), and 4.7% (n = 4) respectively. Stone clearance rate post LCBDE and OCBDE reached 95.2% and 95% respectively, Eleven (12.9%) of our patients had postoperative complications without mortality. By comparing LCBDE and OCBDE; there was a significant association between the former and longer operative time. On comparing, T-tube and 1ry CBD closure in both OCBDE and LCBDE, there was significantly longer operative time, and post-operative hospital stays in the former. Furthermore, in OCBDE group, choledocoscopy had an independent direction to 1ry CBD repair and significant association with higher stone clearance rate, shorter operative time, and post-operative hospital stay.

Conclusion

Large difficult CBDS can be managed either by open surgery or laparoscopically with acceptable comparable outcomes with no need for multiple ERCP sessions due to their related morbidities; furthermore, Open choledocoscopy has a good impact on stone clearance rate with direction towards doing primary repair that is better than T-tube regarding operative time and post-operative hospital stay.

Laparoscopic Choledochotomy in a Solitary Common Duct Stone: A Prospective Study

Background

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration has all the advantages of minimal access and is also the most cost effective compared to the other options.

Objective

To study a profile on laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for a single common duct stone.

Methods

A total of 30 consecutive patients with solitary common bile duct stone attending our hospital over a period of one year were enrolled in the study. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was done by transductal route in all the patients.

Results

There were 18 females and 12 males with age ranging from 28 to 75 years. Jaundice was present in 12 (40%) patients. Twenty-four (80%) patients had raised alkaline phosphatase. The mean size of CBD on ultrasound was 11.55 mm. The mean size of calculus was 11.06 mm and was located in the distal CBD in 26 (86.7%) patients. The mean operative time was 158.4 ± 57.89 min. There were 8 (26.6%) conversions to open procedure. T-tube was used in 26 (86.7%) patients. The postoperative complications were hospital acquired chest infection in 3 (10%), surgical site infection in 3 (10%), acute coronary syndrome in one (3.3%), and bile leak after T-tube removal in one (3.3%) patient.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is an effective, safe management of common bile duct stone.

Single-stage procedure for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocolithiasis: a surgical procedures review

While laparoscopic cholecystectomy is generally accepted as the treatment of choice for simple gallbladder stones, in cases in which common bile duct stones are also present, clinical and diagnostic elements, along with intraoperative findings, define the optimal means of treatment. All available options must be accessible to the surgical team which must necessarily be multidisciplinary and include a surgeon, an endoscopist, and a radiologist in order to identify the best option for a truly personalized surgery. This review describes the different techniques and approaches used based on distinctive recommendations and factors, according to the specific cases treated and the results achieved.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a safe and definitive treatment for elderly patients

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stone is one of the most common diseases among elderly people. In recent decades, there are numerous studies regarding the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Elderly patients are often regarded as high-risk patients because they are more likely to present with age-specific deterioration of organ function and coexisting chronic diseases, which may reduce their tolerance of laparoscopic surgery. Although laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis is now widely accepted as the treatment for CBD stone, its appropriateness for the treatment of elderly patients or those with coexisting high-risk patients has not been well established. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to analyze the safety and efficacy of LCBDE in elderly patients.

METHODS

Between January 2012 and November 2015, 376 patients underwent LCBDE in our center. Based on their ages, they were divided into two groups, and a retrospective study was performed. By making comparisons between younger group who were younger than 70 years (n = 253) and elderly group who were 70 years old or older (n = 123), the demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory data, operative parameters and outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Before operation, elderly patients had more coexisting chronic diseases and risk factors, such as arterial hypertension, heart diseases, pulmonary diseases and previous abdominal surgery (P < 0.05). In both groups, LCBDE was equally successful with a high clearance rate (100 % in elderly patients vs. 98.8 % in younger group, P = 0.554). Besides, the operating time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, total costs and overall complication showed no significant difference between two groups (P > 0.05). There was no major bile duct injury or death in either group.

CONCLUSION

Although elderly patients are frequently confronted with coexisting disorders, LCBDE can be considered as a safe and effective technique in choledocholithiasis treatment for elderly patients.

Endoscopic versus laparoscopic treatment for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Background and study aims: Overall, 5 % to 15 % of patients undergoing cholecystectomy for cholelithiasis have concomitant bile duct stones, and the incidence of choledocholithiasis increases with age. There is no clear consensus on the best therapeutic approach (endoscopic versus surgical). Patients and methods: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial was performed to compare three treatment options for patients with choledocholithiasis at the National Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery in Havana, Cuba from November 2007 to November 2011. The patients were randomized in three groups. Group I: patients who underwent intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) to confirm the choledocholithiasis followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) associated with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), group II: patients who underwent preoperative ERCP followed by LC during the same hospital admission and group III: patients who underwent IOC to confirm the choledocholithiasis followed by LC associated with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Results: A total of 300 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis were included in the trial and were randomized. As a result, a total of 134 patients were diagnosed with the presence of choledocholithiasis and treated during the study period. There were no significant differences in success rates of ductal stone clearance, but retained stone, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay were better in group I. Conclusions: Intraoperative ERCP/ES shows a higher rate of common bile duct stones clearance, a shorter hospital stay, and lower morbidity, but further research with a larger study population is necessary to determine the additional benefits of this procedure. The results to date suggests that in appropriate patients, single-stage treatments are the best options.

Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Versus Open Approach in Cirrhotic Patients with Choledocholithiasis: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and benefits of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) compared with open approach (OCBDE) in cirrhotic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2009 and December 2012, a total of 113 cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis underwent common bile duct (CBD) explorations in our department. There were two groups of patients: A:LCBDE (n = 61) and B:OCBDE (n = 52). Patients' demographic characteristics, surgical data, postoperative outcomes, and long-term results were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in the demographic characteristics or preoperative status. The transcystic approach was successfully performed in 52 (46.0%) patients (group A:34, group B:20), whereas choledochotomy was successful in 59 (54.0%) patients (group A:27, group B:32). The differences between group A and group B in terms of surgical time (124.9 ± 34.2 minutes versus 132.6 ± 48.6 minutes, P = .323), stone clearance rate (93.4% versus 94.2%, P > .05), short-term complication rate (9.8% versus 13.4%, P = .547), and recurrent stone rate (6.6% versus 5.8%, P > .05) were not statistically significant. However, group A suffered less blood loss [95 (60-200) mL versus 200 (90-450) mL, P < .001] and shorter length of hospital stay (4.7 ± 2.5 days versus 11.3 ± 3.1 days, P < .001) than group B. In the LCBDE group, 4 (6.6%) patients were converted due to heavy inflammation and severe adhesions. No mortality, biliary injury, or stricture occurred during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE can be safely performed in patients with Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis and choledocholithiasis, with considerable efficiency, minimal short-term complications, and acceptable long-term outcomes. LCBDE has the advantages over open CBD exploration of less bleeding and reduced length of hospital stay.

Intraoperative ERCP for management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

The introduction of minimally invasive techniques in management of biliary problems added new procedures for treating patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis (CCL). This study presents the results of intraoperative ERCP (IOERCP) during LC as a single-session minimally invasive procedure for management of patients who have preoperatively diagnosed CBD stones.

METHODS

The database of patients presented to our center by CCL between October 2007 and December 2015 who were treated by LC and IOERCP was collected and analyzed. CBD stones were diagnosed using clinical data, laboratory tests and abdominal sonogram. MRCP was requested for doubtful cases. In the first cases ERCP was done using rendezvous technique, but in late cases standard ERCP immediately after completion of LC under the same anesthesia was used. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative data were recorded, analyzed and reported. Data reported include success/failure rate, complications, conversion to open surgery, operative details and incidence of residual CBD stones.

RESULTS

The study was conducted on 346 patients who had CCL. The mean age was 34.7 years, and 298 of them were females. The most common presentation was abdominal pain (98.5 %) and jaundice (64.9 %). Fifteen patients were excluded, and IOERCP was not done due to negative IOC results in 10 patients and conversion to open surgery in 5 patients. IOERCP was tried in the remaining 331 patients. The mean operative time was 55 min, and the mean hospital stay was 2.4 days. Major complications had been reported in 13/323 patients (4.0 %). Failure of CBD clearance was reported in 8 patients (2.4 %) with a success rate of 97.6 %. Thirty-day follow-up was possible in 142 patients, and there was a residual CBD stone in one patient and wound infection in another one.

CONCLUSIONS

IOERCP during LC is a safe and effective option for management of CCL.

Role of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in the management of choledocholithiasis

Surgical fraternity has not yet arrived at any consensus for adequate treatment of choledocholithiasis. Sequential treatment in the form of pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered as optimal treatment till date. With refinements in technique and expertise in field of minimal access surgery, many centres in the world have started offering one stage management of choledocholithiasis by LC with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Various modalities have been tried for entering into concurrent common bile duct (CBD) [transcystic (TC) vs transcholedochal (TD)], for confirming stone clearance (intraoperative cholangiogram vs choledochoscopy), and for closure of choledochotomy (T-tube vs biliary stent vs primary closure) during LCBDE. Both TC and TD approaches are safe and effective. TD stone extraction is involved with an increased risk of bile leaks and requires more expertise in intra-corporeal suturing and choledochoscopy. Choice depends on number of stones, size of stone, diameter of cystic duct and CBD. This review article was undertaken to evaluate the role of LCBDE for the management of choledocholithiasis.

Single-stage management with combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the value of a single stage with combined tri-endoscopic (duodenoscopy, laparoscopy and choledochoscopy) approach for patients with concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

Fifty-three patients with combined gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones from February 2014 to April 2015 were randomized assigned to two groups: 29 patients underwent single-stage surgery with combined duodenoscope, laparoscope and choledochoscope (combined tri-endoscopic group), and 29 patients underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy to remove common bile duct stones followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy several days later (control group). The success rate of complete stone removal, procedure-related complication, hospital stay and the cost of hospitalization were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Altogether, 53 patients (29 patients in combined tri-endoscopic group and 24 patients in control group) successfully underwent the surgery and ERCP procedure. Three patients in the control group developed post-ERCP pancreatitis. One case of bile leaking and one case of residual stone were noted in the combined tri-endoscopic group. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to both complete stone removal [96.6 % (28/29) vs. 100 % (24/24)] and procedure-related complication rate [3.4 % (1/29) vs. 12.5 % (3/24)] (p > 0.05). No open surgery was required in either group. There were significant differences between the two groups with regard to hospital stay (6.72 ± 1.3 days vs. 10.91 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.01) and cost of hospitalization (15,724 ± 1613 CNY vs. 19,829 ± 2433 CNY, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The single-stage combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis was just as safe and successful as the control group. In addition, it resulted in a shorter hospital stay and less cost.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has become the standard procedure for most choledocholithiasis patients, the application of this procedure to liver cirrhosis is still in debate. The aim of current study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE in choledocholithiasis patients with compensated liver cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2006 to December 2012, 346 LCBDE performed in our hospital. According to previous defined liver condition, the patients were divided into group A (liver cirrhosis, n=132) and group B (without cirrhosis, n=214). The perioperative data for the 2 groups were retrospectively reviewed and compared.

RESULTS

LCBDE was successfully completed in 326 patients. Conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery was necessary for 20 patients (5.7%) mainly because of hemorrhage (5, 25%) and severe adhesions (8, 40%); a T-tube was placed in 211 patients (64.7%), and primary closure was done in 115 (35.3%). There was significant difference for groups A and B in term of intraoperative blood loss (85 vs. 35 mL; P<0.01). However, the 2 groups showed no significant differences with respect to mean operation time (2.1 vs. 1.9 h; P=0.07), complication rates (10.6% vs. 8.8%; P=0.6), and mean hospital stay (4.2 vs. 4.0 d; P=0.6), conversion rate (5.3% vs. 6.1%; P=0.77), and retained choledocholithiasis rate (8.3% vs. 7.1%; P=0.65). There was no mortality in both the groups.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is a feasible, effective, and safe surgical procedure for choledocholithiasis patients with compensated cirrhosis.

A meta-analysis of single-stage versus two-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of single-stage [laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC)+laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE)] vs. two-stage management [preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)+LC] for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.

METHODS

RCTs that met the inclusion criteria for data extraction were identified from electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Science Citation Index, and the Cochrane Library) up to August 2014. The relevant congressional proceedings were also searched. The primary outcomes were stone clearance from the common bile duct, postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were conversion to other procedures, length of hospital stay, total operative time, and hospitalization charges. The outcomes were calculated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using RevMan 5.2.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs, which included 1130 patients, were identified for analysis in our study. The meta-analysis revealed that the common bile duct stone clearance rate in the single-stage group was higher (OR=1.56, 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.33, P=0.03). The lengths of hospital stay (MD=-1.02, 95% CI: -1.99 to -0.04, P=0.04) and total operative times (MD=-16.78, 95% CI: -27.55 to -6.01, P=0.002) were also shorter in the single-stage group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding postoperative morbidity (OR=1.12, 95% CI: 0.79 to 1.59, P=0.52), mortality (OR=0.29, 95% CI: 0.06 to 1.41, P=0.13) and conversion to other procedures (OR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.82, P=0.62).

CONCLUSION

Single- and two-stage management for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis had similar mortality and complication rates; however, the single-stage strategy was better in terms of stone clearance, hospital stay and total operative time.

Learning curve and outcome of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

The best approach for cholecystocholedocholithiasis remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical aspects, learning curve and outcome of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE).

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with LTCBDE between January 2007 and December 2012 were identified from an institutional database. Data on preoperative investigations, intraoperative and postoperative findings were retrieved retrospectively from the patients' hospital notes.

RESULTS

There were 399 women (56·4 per cent) and 309 men (43·6 per cent), with a median age of 58 (range 18-87) years. Microincision (incision of the cystic duct at the confluence with the common bile duct (CBD) with extension of only 3-5 mm at the lateral margin of the CBD) and lithotripsy were used in the transcystic exploration in 119 patients, and increased the success rate of LTCBDE from 74·2 to 91·0 per cent. The median duration of operation was 85 (i.q.r. 65-120) min and the median postoperative hospital stay was 2 (1-3) days. Retained common bile duct stones were observed in 13 patients, and postoperative complications developed in 27 patients. The cumulative sum duration of operation learning curve comprised two phases; phase 1 included the first 250 patients and phase 2 the remaining 458 patients. Duration of operation and postoperative hospital stay decreased with increasing volume per surgeon. Recurrence of common bile duct stones was diagnosed in 26 patients during a median follow-up of 4 years.

CONCLUSION

LTCBDE with or without microincision and/or lithotripsy is a safe and effective approach.

Laparoscopic Choledocholithotomy With a Novel Articulating Forceps

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration with a novel articulating forceps.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was carried out of 90 patients who underwent laparoscopic transcholedochal CBD exploration for choledocholithiasis between May 2006 and June 2014. Forty-five patients underwent laparoscopic choledocholithotomy using the routine instruments (group A). Forty-five patients underwent laparoscopic choledocholithotomy using the routine instruments plus the novel articulating forceps (group B). The 2 group populations were similar with regard to demographic data and clinical presentations.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic transcholedochal CBD exploration was successful in all 90 patients. The mean diameter of the CBD was 14.42 mm in group A and 14.73 mm in group B (P > .05). The average number of stones extracted per patient was 4.22 in group A and 4.67 in group B (P > .05). The patients in group A had a significantly longer operative time than the patients in group B (109.38 vs 80.49 minutes; P < .01). The intraoperative blood loss was minimal in both groups, and no major complications were observed in either group. The mean hospitalization stay was 6.60 days in group A and 5.58 days in group B (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic transcholedochal CBD exploration with the novel articulating forceps is a safe and effective approach to the management of choledocholithiasis that offers a short operating time and short postoperative hospital stay.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has become the standard procedure for most choledocholithiasis patients, the application of this procedure to liver cirrhosis is still in debate. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE in choledocholithiasis patients with compensated liver cirrhosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2006 to December 2012, 346 LCBDEs were performed in our hospital. According to the previously defined liver condition, the patients were divided into group A (liver cirrhosis, n=132) and group B (without cirrhosis, n=214). The perioperative data for the 2 groups were retrospectively reviewed and compared.

RESULTS

LCBDE was successfully completed in 326 patients. Conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery was necessary for 20 patients (5.7%) mainly because of hemorrhage (5, 25%) and severe adhesions (8, 40%). A T-tube was placed in 211 patients (64.7%), and primary closure was performed in 115 (35.3%) patients. There was a significant difference for groups A and B in terms of intraoperative blood loss (85 vs. 35 mL; P<0.01). However, the 2 groups showed no significant differences with respect to the mean operation time (2.1 vs. 1.9 h; P=0.07), complication rates (10.6% vs. 8.8%; P=0.6), mean hospital stay (4.2 vs. 4.0 d; P=0.6), conversion rate (5.3% vs. 6.1%; P=0.77), and retained choledocholithiasis rate (8.3% vs. 7.1%; P=0.65). There was no mortality in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE is a feasible, effective, and safe surgical procedure for choledocholithiasis patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Comparison between intraoperative cholangiography and choledochoscopy for ductal clearance in laparoscopic CBD exploration: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) is an accepted treatment modality for single stage management of CBD stones in fit patients. A transcholedochal approach is preferred in patients with a dilated CBD and large impacted stones in whom ductal clearance remains problematic. There are very few studies comparing intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) with choledochoscopy to determine ductal clearance in patients undergoing transcholedochal LCBDE. This series represents the first of those comparing the two from Asia.

METHODS

Between April 2009 and October 2012, 150 consecutive patients with CBD stones were enrolled in a prospective randomized study to undergo transcholedochal LCBDE on an intent-to-treat basis. Patients with CBD diameter of less than 9 mm on preoperative imaging were excluded from the study. Out of the 132 eligible patients, 65 patients underwent IOC (Group A), and 67 patients underwent intraoperative choledochoscopy (Group B) to determine CBD clearance.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the two groups in the demographic profile and the preoperative biochemical findings. There was no conversion to open procedures, and complete stone clearance was achieved in all the 132 cases. The mean CBD diameter and the mean number of CBD stones removed were comparable between the two groups. Mean operating time was 170 min in Group A and 140 min in Group B (p < 0.001). There was no difference in complications between the two groups. Nine patients in Group A (13.8%) showed non-passage of contrast into the duodenum on IOC which resolved after administration of i.v. glucagon, suggesting a transient spasm of sphincter of Oddi. Two patients (3%) showed a false-positive result on IOC which had to be resolved with choledochoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study showed that intraoperative choledochoscopy is better than IOC for determining ductal clearance after transcholedochal LCBDE and is less cumbersome and less time-consuming.

Results of treatment of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi by single-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration

INTRODUCTION

Choledocholithiasis is the most common cause of obstructive jaundice. Common bile duct stones are observed in 10-14% of patients diagnosed with gall bladder stones. In the case of gall bladder and common bile duct stones the procedure involves not only performing cholecystectomy but also removing the stones from bile ducts.

AIM

To compare the results of the treatment of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi by one-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration with two other methods: one-stage open cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration, and a two-stage procedure involving endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 2004 and 2011 three groups of 100 patients were treated for obstructive jaundice caused by choledocholithiasis. The first group of 42 patients underwent ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The second group of 23 patients underwent open cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration, whereas the third group of 35 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration. The data were analysed prospectively. The methods were compared according to complete execution, bile duct clearance and complication rate. Complications were analysed according to Clavien's Classification of Surgical Complications. The results were compared using the ANOVA statistical test and Student's t-test in Statistica. Value of p was calculated statistically. A p-value less than 0.05 (p < 0.05) signified that groups differed statistically, whereas a p-value more than 0.05 (p > 0.05) suggested no statistically significant differences between the groups.

RESULTS

The procedure could not be performed in 11.9% of patients in the first group and in 14.3% of patients in the third group. Residual stones were found in 13.5% of the patients in the first group, in 4.3% of the patients in the second group and in 6.7% of the patients in the third group. According to Clavien's classification of complications grade II and III, we can assign the range in the first group at 21.6% for grade II and 0% for grade III, in the second group at 21.4% and 3.6% and in the third group at 6.7% and 3.3% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of all three methods of treatment gives similar results. One-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration is after all the least invasive, safer and more effective procedure.

Primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus T-tube

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is now one of the main methods for treating choledocholithiasis accompanied with cholelithiasis. The objective of our study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic primary closure for the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones compared with T-tube drainage.

METHODS

Patients who underwent CBD stones were studied prospectively from 2002-2012 in a single center. A total of 194 patients were randomly assigned to group A (LCBDE with primary closure) with 101 cases and group B (LCBDE with T-tube drainage) with 93 cases. Intraoperative cholangiography and choledochoscopy were performed in all patients. Patient demographics, intraoperative findings, postoperative stay, complications, and hospital expenses were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no mortality in the two groups. Four patients (3.96%) of group A were converted to open surgery, and three patients (3.23%) in group B. The mean operating time was much shorter in group A than in group B (102.6 ± 15.2 min versus 128.6 ± 20.4 min, P < 0.05). The length of postoperative hospital stay was longer in group B (4.9 ± 3.2 d) than in group A (3.2 ± 2.1 d). The hospital expenses were significantly lower in group A. Three patients experienced postoperative complications, which were related to the usage of the T-tube in group B. The incidences of overall postoperative complications were insignificantly lower in group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic primary closure of CBD is safe and effective for the management of CBD stones, and can be performed routinely as an alternative to T-tube drainage.

Preoperative factors predicting poor outcomes following laparoscopic choledochotomy: a multivariate analysis study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery for common bile duct stones varies procedurally from a transcystic approach to laparoscopic choledochotomy (LC) with or without biliary drainage. However, LC is a difficult procedure with higher documented morbidity than the transcystic approach. We retrospectively investigated risk factors for adverse outcomes of LC.

METHODS

We used logistic regression models to assess 4 categories of adverse outcomes: overall, complications, conversion to open operation and failed surgical clearance. We calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to evaluate diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

We included 201 patients who underwent LC in our analysis. Adverse outcomes occurred in 48 (23.9%) patients, complications occurred in 43 (21.4%), retained stones were observed in 8 (4%), and conversion to laparotomy occurred in 7 (3.5%). Multivariate analysis showed that total bilirubin (BIL) and the presence of medical risk factors (MRFs) were significant predictors of adverse outcomes and complications. We calculated the probability of adverse outcomes (p) using the following formula: logit(p) = 0.977 (MRFs) + 0.014 (BIL) - 2.919. p = EXP (logit(p)) ÷ [1+EXP (logit(p))]. According to their logit(p), all patients were divided into a low-risk group (logit(p) ≤ -1.32, n = 130) and a high-risk group (logit(p) > -1.32, n = 71). Patients in the low-risk group had about a 1 in 10 chance (12 of 130) of adverse outcomes developing. Of the 71 patients in the high-risk group, 36 (50.7%) experienced adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

High BIL and the presence of MRFs could predict adverse outcomes in patients undergoing LC.

Synchronous vs sequential laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis

AIM

To compare synchronous laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and sequential LC combined with EST for treating cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHODS

A total of 150 patients were included and retrospectively studied. Among these, 70 were selected for the synchronous operation, in which the scheme was endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography combined with EST during LC. The other 80 patients were selected for the sequential operation, in which the scheme involved first cutting the papillary muscle under endoscopy and then performing LC. The indexes in the two groups, including the operation time, the success rate, the incidence of complications, and the length of the hospital stay, were observed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the numbers of patients, sex distribution, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, serum bilirubin, γ-glutamyl transpeptidase, mean diameter of common bile duct stones, and previous medical and surgical history (P = 0.54, P = 0.18, P = 0.52, P = 0.22, P = 0.32, P = 0.42, P = 0.68, P = 0.70, P = 0.47 and P = 0.57). There was no significant difference in the surgical operation time between the two groups (112.1 ± 30.8 min vs 104.9 ± 18.2 min). Compared with the sequential operation group, the incidence of pancreatitis was lower (1.4% vs 6.3%), the incidence of hyperamylasemia (1.4% vs 10.0%, P < 0.05) was significantly reduced, and the length of the hospital stay was significantly shortened in the synchronous operation group (3 d vs 4.5 d, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

For treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis, synchronous LC combined with EST reduces incidence of complications, decreases length of hospital stay, simplifies the surgical procedure, and reduces operation time.

A randomized trial comparing the use of endobiliary stent and T-tube for biliary decompression after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

PURPOSE

To compare the use of a biliary stent with T-tube for biliary decompression after laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration.

METHODS

Between September 2004 and March 2008, 60 patients undergoing laparoscopic CBD exploration for CBD stones were randomized to choledochotomy closure over either a biliary stent or a T-tube after CBD clearance. Patients at high risk for surgery and unremitting cholangitis requiring preoperative endoscopic biliary drainage were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 29 and 31 patients in the T-tube and stenting groups, respectively. The 2 groups were comparable with respect to their demographic profile and disease characteristics. Patients in the stent group had a significantly shorter operative time and postoperative stay with an earlier return to normal activity (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Choledochotomy closure over a stent results in a shorter postoperative stay and an earlier return to normal activity compared with closure over a T-tube without any increase in morbidity.

Management of common bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era

There is no consensus regarding the ideal management of concurrent gallbladder and common bile duct (CBD) stones. Currently the treatment protocol involves most commonly a sequential approach consisting of endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy or a single stage laparoscopic procedure, including cholecystectomy and exploration of the CBD. For this article literature search was performed using online search engines, Google, Pubmed, the online Springer link library and the Cochrane Database Systematic Review. Review articles, prospective and retrospective studies which detailed or compared the various treatment strategies for CBD stones were selected and analyzed. This review article aims to provide an insight into the optimal management of CBD stones in different clinical scenarios. Endoscopic sphincterotomy has inherent morbidity and complications like CBD stone recurrence whereas laparoscopic CBD exploration demands considerable expertise which is available only at specialized centres. The clinical presentation of the patient, number of stones, size of CBD, available resources and technical expertise at hand are an important consideration for the ideal management in different scenarios.

Single-stage treatment with intraoperative ERCP: management of patients with possible choledocholithiasis and gallbladder in situ in a non-tertiary Spanish hospital

BACKGROUND

The best way to reduce endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complications is not to perform it if it is unnecessary. Both intraoperative and postoperative ERCP rely on use of intraoperative cholangiography as a final diagnostic test for choledocholithiasis (CLD) whenever clinical data are unable to rule out CLD. Intraoperative ERCP could become a therapeutic option when a previous preoperative ERCP fails. We present our experience with intraoperative ERCP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a descriptive and prospective study of a cohort of 82 patients with moderate risk of CLD. They were operated on by laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC). We performed intraoperative ERCP using the rendezvous technique.

RESULTS

Thirty-six out of 82 patients had an abnormal IOC study. Mean age was 58.7 years (standard deviation, SD 16.6, 25-83 years), and 60.6% were females. Ultrasound study showed that 51.4% of patients had a dilated bile duct. Magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) was performed on three patients (8.3%). The success rate of intraoperative ERCP was 88.2%. Three out of the 36 patients (8.8%) had ERCP complications [2 mild papillary bleeding (5.8%), 1 acute pancreatitis (2.9%)]. The rate of conversion to open surgery was 5% with a surgical complications rate of 4% [one injured duct and two surgical bleeding which required re-operation (2.5%)]. There were no mortalities. Four patients (11.1%) needed post-surgical ERCP, with a residual CLD rate of 5.6% (two patients) in the postoperative period. Mean surgical time was 181 min (SD 60, 75-345 min). Mean hospital stay was 6.2 days (SD 4.7, 2-24 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative ERCP is an option to prevent performing ERCP unnecessarily on patients with moderate risk of CLD not confirmed using appropriate radiological studies. It can resolve the biliary disease in a single step with a similar success rate to standard ERCP, but with low morbidity, especially of acute pancreatitis. The residual CLD rate is also very low.

Intraoperative ERCP: What role does it have in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

In the treatment of patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis (CBDS) detected during intraoperative cholangiography (IOC), or when the preoperative study of a patient at intermediate risk for CBDS cannot be completed due to the lack of imaging techniques required for confirmation, or if they are available and yield contradictory radiological and clinical results, patients can be treated using intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during the laparoscopic treatment or postoperative ERCP if the IOC finds CBDS. The choice of treatment depends on the level of experience and availability of each option at each hospital. Intraoperative ERCP has the advantage of being a single-stage treatment and has a significant success rate, an easy learning curve, low morbidity involving a shorter hospital stay and lower costs than the two-stage treatments (postoperative and preoperative ERCP). Intraoperative ERCP is also a good salvage treatment when preoperative ERCP fails or when total laparoscopic management also fails.

Laparoscopic choledochoduodenostomy for biliary stone disease: a single-center 10-year experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with a dilated common bile duct (CBD) and multiple, primary, or recurrent stones are candidates for choledochoduodenostomy. This article reviews our technique and results of laparoscopic choledochoduodenostomy (LCDD) in patients with CBD stones.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Prospectively maintained data of patients with a dilated CBD and multiple, primary, or recurrent CBD stones who underwent LCDD after laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) at a tertiary-care teaching hospital in New Delhi, India, during a 10-year period from April 2001 to March 2011 were analyzed.

RESULTS

During this period, of 195 patients who underwent LCBDE for CBD stones, 27 patients underwent LCDD. The mean age of patients was 45.7±13.5 years. There were 6 male and 21 female patients. Sixteen (59.2%) patients had jaundice at presentation. Average CBD diameter was 19.6±4.4 mm. On average, 11.5±15.7 stones were removed from the CBD. Mean operative time was 156.3±25.4 minutes. Mean operative blood loss was 143.3±85.5 mL. Average postoperative hospital stay was 6.4±3.8 days. CBD clearance was obtained in all cases. One patient had a bile leak that resolved with conservative treatment. There was no mortality. No patient has had recurrence of symptoms or cholangitis after a follow-up of up to 9 years.

CONCLUSION

LCDD can be safely performed in patients with a large stone burden and recurrent or primary CBD stones. Although it requires advanced laparoscopic skills, the benefits of a single-stage laparoscopic procedure can be extended to these patients safely with good results.

Long-term outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective piecewise linear regression analysis

BACKGROUND

The objectives of this study were to examine longitudinal time trends, to predict thresholds of improvement in each dimension of health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and to identify long-term predictors of HRQoL.

METHODS

This study analyzed 353 laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) patients. Disease-specific Gastrointestinal Quality-of-Life Index (GIQLI) and generic Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36) scores were obtained immediately before surgery, then 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Generalized estimating equations and piecewise linear regression models were used.

RESULTS

The examined population significantly (p<0.05) improved in both SF-36 and GIQLI subscale scores. The HRQoL dimensions were substantially improved the sixth month after surgery and continued improving until they reached a plateau at 54.93 to 73.18 months. The data also showed the following explanatory variables for HRQoL: time, age, gender, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative GIQLI and SF-36 subscale scores.

CONCLUSIONS

As shown by the findings, the HRQoL scores improved substantially by the sixth month after surgery and continued improving until they reached a 4- to 7-year threshold, indicating that change trends in HRQoL dimensions may vary. Although HRQoL scores were substantially improved after cholecystectomy, the improvements were associated with preoperative functional status and demographic characteristics.