A 23 year experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

Feasibility and outcome of transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration as first-line treatment for common bile duct stones: a retrospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

For treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS), guidelines recommend a one-stage approach, including laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (intraERCP). Studies show favourable outcomes with transcystic LCBDE (tLCBDE), but this technique is not widely adopted. The use of tLCBDE may be limited by several factors, but to what degree is unknown. The aim of this study is to examine the feasibility and, secondarily, outcomes of tLCBDE for patients undergoing removal of CBDS and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) when tLCBDE is the first-line treatment.

METHOD

A retrospective cross-sectional study including patients with removal of CBDS and LC at Horsens Regional Hospital during June 2017-March 2022. We classified patients into three groups: tLCBDE, preoperative ERCP (preERCP), and other procedures. The reasons for not performing tLCBDE were registered from medical charts. In the tLCBDE and the preERCP group, we registered clearance rate, postoperative complications, and subsequent ERCP.

RESULTS

In total, 229 patients received a procedure due to CBDS, of which 73% were emergency procedures. The groups were as follows: 179 (78%) tLCBDE, 25 (11%) preERCP, and 25 (11%) other procedures. preERCP was chosen due to the patient being unfit for emergency surgery, tLCBDE not being technically possible, and other reasons. Other procedures were chosen, because tLCBDE was not technically possible, lack of equipment or qualified surgeon, and other reasons. In the tLCBDE group, 94% of patients with CBDS were cleared, 5.6% had a complication of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3, and 3.9% patients needed a subsequent ERCP.

CONCLUSION

tLCBDE is feasible, safe, and effective treatment which can be performed in the majority of patients with CBDS and should be considered an equivalent to ERCP or choledochotomy as first-line treatment of patients with CBDS. As some patients require ERCP or choledochotomy, tLCBDE should not be the sole treatment available.

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.

Systematic review on the use of artificial intelligence to identify anatomical structures during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a tool towards the future

PURPOSE

Bile duct injury (BDI) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is a dreaded complication. Artificial intelligence (AI) has recently been introduced in surgery. This systematic review aims to investigate whether AI can guide surgeons in identifying anatomical structures to facilitate safer dissection during LC.

METHODS

Following PROSPERO registration CRD-42023478754, a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic search of MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, and Web of Science databases was conducted.

RESULTS

Out of 2304 articles identified, twenty-five were included in the analysis. The mean average precision for biliary structures detection reported in the included studies reaches 98%. The mean intersection over union ranges from 0.5 to 0.7, and the mean Dice/F1 spatial correlation index was greater than 0.7/1. AI system provided a change in the annotations in 27% of the cases, and 70% of these shifts were considered safer changes. The contribution to preventing BDI was reported at 3.65/4.

CONCLUSIONS

Although studies on the use of AI during LC are few and very heterogeneous, AI has the potential to identify anatomical structures, thereby guiding surgeons towards safer LC procedures.

Short-Term Efficacy of LCBDE+LC Versus ERCP/EST+LC in the Treatment of Cholelithiasis Combined with Common Bile Duct Stones: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Minimally invasive treatments for cholelithiasis have gained popularity. The complexity of diagnosing and treating choledocholithiasis offers multiple surgical options, including laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and/or endoscopic sphincterotomy plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/EST+LC). Objective: To compare outcomes in patients with typical signs, symptoms, laboratory, and imaging features of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones, we retrospectively analyzed the short-term outcomes of LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC. Methods: We analyzed 318 patients with gallbladder stones treated between January 2022 and May 2024. Of these, 152 underwent LCBDE+LC, and 166 underwent ERCP/EST+LC. We compared patients' baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and short-term complications between the two groups. The primary outcome was the effectiveness of choledochal stone removal, while secondary outcomes included length of stay, hospitalization costs, and patient satisfaction. Results: Patients' baseline characteristics were similar between the LCBDE+LC and ERCP/EST+LC groups. Stone clearance rates were comparable (97.37% versus 95.18%, P = .306), with a slight advantage in the LCBDE+LC group. The length of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the LCBDE+LC group (6.49 ± 1.18 days versus 6.77 ± 1.11 days, P < .05). The LCBDE+LC group also had lower total hospitalization costs ($5188.78 ± 861.26 versus $6498.76 ± 1190.58 P < .01). Additionally, the incidence of pancreatitis was lower in the LCBDE+LC group (0.66% versus 6.02%, P < .01). There were no significant differences between the groups in other short-term complications such as abdominal infection, cholangitis, biliary bleeding, or bile leakage. Postoperative follow-up indicated higher patient satisfaction and acceptance in the LCBDE+LC group (SSQ-8, 85.84 ± 4.31 points versus 81.20 ± 4.54 points, P < .01). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that the LCBDE+LC holds promise as a safe and efficacious approach for the management of cholelithiasis combined with common bile duct stones. However, further prospective clinical trials are essential to corroborate these results and confirm their broader applicability.

Comparison of the efficacy of LTCBDE and LCBDE for common bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The choice of surgical methods for common bile duct stones (CBDS) is controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE).

Methods

Relevant literature published before March 30, 2023 in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane was searched to screen studies comparing LTCBDE and LCBDE. RevMan 5.4 was used for meta-analysis of fixed-effects and random-effects models.

Results

A total of 21 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 3065 patients in the LTCBDE group and 2,453 patients in the LCBDE group. CBDS clearance was 95.4% (2,682/2,812) in LTCBDE group and 94.7% (1,810/1,911) in LCBDE group (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.36, 2.48, P < 0.0001; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.56). In LTCBDE group, operative time(MD = -34.60, 95% CI: -46.05, -23, 15, P < 0.00001 I 2 = 96%, P < 0.00001), postoperative hospital stay (MD = -2.92, 95% CI: -3.62, -2.21, P < 0.00001; I 2 = 92%, P < 0.00001), postoperative complications (OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.38, 0.58, P < 0.0001; I 2 = 26%, P = 0.15), residual stone(OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.34, 0.66, P < 0.0001; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.56), bile leak (OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.55, P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%,P = 0.52), mortality (OR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.88, P = 0.04; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.71) and recurrent stones(OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.74, P = 0.007; I 2 = 5%, P = 0.38) were better than LCBDE group. There was no difference in pancreatitis (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.52, 2.16. P = 0.86; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.98) and biliary stricture(OR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.08, 1.09, P = 0.07; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.57).

Conclusions

LTCBDE is safe, efficient, and of great clinical significance, and is worth promoting to some patients.

Structured learning and mentoring: shortening the learning curve in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND

Technological advances have made the laparoscopy procedure popular for simultaneous cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration. We aimed to assess the implementation of a structured mentorship program for training in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). We explored the effectiveness thereof in facilitating the learning of LCBDE as a single-stage treatment of common bile duct stones (CBD) with gallbladder in situ.

METHODS

The surgical databases of a mentor (experienced in LCBDE) and a mentee (new to LCBDE) were analyzed. The analysis retrospectively compared the mentor's first 100 cases (MF) with the mentee's first 100 (MEF) cases, and the mentor's last 100 cases (ML) with the mentee's initial cases. Data included demographics, technical details, and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 300 patients underwent LCBDE. For MF vs. MEF (both n = 100), MF had a lower transcystic approach rate (5% vs. 70%; p < 0.001) than MEF. Postoperative median hospital stay was significantly shorter in the MEF group compared to the MF group (2 vs 5, p < 0.001). No mortality or significant complications were observed in either group. For ML (n = 100) vs. MEF, the ML group had a higher transcystic rate (87% vs. 70%; p = 0.005). No differences in mortality or conversion were observed between the groups. Bile leak was lower in the ML (3% vs. 6%, p = 0.498) group than the MEF group. Postoperative median hospital stay did not significantly differ between the ML and MEF group (1 vs 2 days, p = 0.952).

CONCLUSIONS

Structured mentorship significantly influenced the successful adoption of LCBDE by the mentee, shortening the learning curve to provide outcomes in the first 100 cases, comparable to highly experienced centers. These results support the implementation of structured training and continuous mentoring to facilitate the learning curve of laparoscopic bile duct exploration.

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.

Endoscopic Characterization of Giant Choledocholithiasis and Its Correlation With Primary Choledocholithiasis

INTRODUCTION

Gallstone disease is extremely prevalent in Western society, and the prevalence of common bile duct (CBD) stones with concomitant cholelithiasis increases significantly in the elderly. Different variants influence the treatment of this pathological entity, such as the origin of the stones, their location and quantity, comorbidities of the patient, impaction, and size of the lithos, the latter being an independent predictive factor. In most situations, choledocholithiasis can be resolved with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); however, in complex cases, such as giant choledocholithiasis (GC), advanced surgical, endoscopic, and percutaneous techniques are required to remove gallstones. The main objective was to determine if there is a correlation between GC and primary choledocholithiasis (PC). The secondary objective consisted of describing the endoscopic characterization of GC.

METHODS

 The present study is a cross-sectional and single-center study. The study population consisted of patients of the Institute for Social Security and Services for State Workers (ISSSTE by its acronym in Spanish) Regional Hospital, León, Guanajuato, belonging directly to this center or referred, who required medical attention by the General Surgery/Endoscopy Service with the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, during the period between January 2017 and December 2022. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used as the normality test. Quantitative variables were reported as mean and standard deviation if the data distribution was normal, in contrast with the expression of data in the median and interquartile range if an abnormal distribution was found. Moreover, the qualitative variables are reported in frequencies or percentages. The Chi-square test was performed as the independence test. The significance level was a 95% confidence interval (p-value 0.05). The effect size was calculated with the odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

 Out of a total of 177 patients, 33 corresponded to PC (18.6%), and 144 belonged to the secondary choledocholithiasis (SC) group (81.4%). Likewise, regarding the dimensions of the lithos, 59 patients (33.3%) presented GC and 118 (66.7%) presented non-GC. Among the 59 patients with GC, 36 were female (61%) and 23 were male (39%). Regarding age, the distribution was as follows: mean 62 ± 12 years, with a minimum value of 29 and a maximum of 88 years. The non-parametric test used to determine the existence or not of a correlation between the variables was Pearson's Chi-square, whose value was 60.509, with a p < 0.001, demonstrating the presence of a correlation between PC and GC. The effect size was corroborated and defined with the OR, whose value was 39.6 (confidence interval (CI) 11.308-139.069).

CONCLUSIONS

 There is a significant correlation between GC and PC, and it was found that mechanical lithotripsy was the most performed initial extraction method for GC; furthermore, a higher rate of complete endoscopic resolution was found, as well as no complications related to the procedure, which contrasts with the literature. It would be interesting to use the information revealed in the present study as a landmark in future research in this regard.

Upfront Laparoscopic Management of Common Bile Duct Stones: What Are the Risk Factors of Failure?

BACKGROUND

Treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS) includes laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with either laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or perioperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The main objective of this study was to identify predictive factors for the failure of upfront and exclusive surgical treatment by LCBDE.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective study on patients with CBDS and operated for LC between 2007 and 2019. The use of intra- or postoperative endoscopy for CBD clearance within 6 months after surgery was considered as failure of LCBDE. Predictors for the failure of LCBDE were investigated and outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Among 222 operated patients, LCBDE was successfully performed in 173 patients (78%) and 49 (22%) required ERCP with sphincterotomy (intraoperative (n=29) or postoperative (n=20)). Independent risk factors for surgical failure were male sex (OR: 2.525 (1.111-5.738); p=0.027), anesthesia induction time ≥ 4 p.m. (OR: 4.858 (1.731-13.631); p=0.003), pediculitis (OR: 4.147 (1.177-14.606); p=0.027), and thin CDB < 4mm (OR: 11.951 (3.562-40.097), p< 0.0001). Age, ASA score, cystic anatomy, presence of cholecystitis, and the surgeon's experience were not identified as predictors for surgical failure. A general anesthesia number >1 (6% vs. 33%; p < 0.0001), length of initial stay (6 [1-42] vs. 8 [2-27], p=0.012), total length of hospitalization (6 [1-45] vs. 9 [2-27]; p=0.010), and the rate of emergency readmissions (3.5% vs. 12.2%; p=0.027) were significantly higher in the LCBDE failure group.

CONCLUSIONS

Upfront LCBDE for CBDS was associated with improved outcomes compared to intra-/postoperative ERCP recourse. Male sex, pediculitis, thin CBD, and surgery later than 4 p.m were associated with LCBDE failure and the need for endoscopic treatment.

REGISTRATION NUMBER AND AGENCY

The present retrospective study was approved by our local ethics committee and was declared on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04467710).

A Retrospective Study on the Three-Port Technique of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration for the Management of Cholelithiasis and Choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is convenient in treating cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis due to its advantage of accelerated recovery. This retrospective study aimed to summarize the experience of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis treatment via three-port approach of LCBDE in Eastern China.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis between July 2019 and October 2021 were included. Patients who received LC+LCBDE+primary suturing of the common bile duct (CBD) via a three-port approach were assigned to the LCBDE-P group, and those who received LC+LCBDE+T-tube drainage of CBD comprised the LCBDE-T group. The measurement data were compared between the two groups. P-values <0.05 indicated statistical significance.

RESULTS

A total of 88 patients were divided into two groups: LCBDE-P (n=50) and LCBDE-T (n=38). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that LCBDE-P is associated with a shorter length of stay (OR=0.115, 95% CI: 0.040-0.329, P<0.001) and lower hospitalization costs (OR=0.120, 95% CI: 0.041-0.357, P<0.001). No significant differences between the two groups were detected in the operation time, intraoperative hemorrhage, clearance rate of CBD stones, postoperative liver function, and postoperative complications (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

The three-port approach of LCBDE is a safe and feasible strategy for managing cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Compared to LCBDE-T, LCBDE-P reduces the length of hospital stay and medical costs during hospitalization.

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.

Learning Curve of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review

Background: Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with cholecystectomy has superior outcomes over two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram with interval cholecystectomy. With decreasing trend of LCBDE, this study aims to summarize the literature on learning curve (LC) in LCBDE. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for articles from inception to June 3, 2022 (PROSPERO Ref No: CRD42022328451). Basic clinical demographics were collected. Poisson means (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) was used to determine the number of cases required to surmount the LC (NLC). Results: Eight articles (n = 2071 patients) reported LC outcomes in LCBDE with mean study period of 5.9 ± 2.8 years. Majority of studies (62.5%) used arbitrary methods of LC analysis. Most common outcomes reported were complications (any or major) (75%), open conversion (75%), length of stay (62.5%), and operating time (50%). Mean CBD diameter was 11.3 ± 4.8 mm (n = 1122 patients). Incidence of acute cholecystitis, acute cholangitis, and acute pancreatitis were 13.9% (n = 232/1668), 7.8% (n = 128/1629), and 13.7% (n = 229/1668), respectively. Pooled analysis of all the included studies showed NLC of 78.8 cases (95% CI: 71.9-86.3). Studies that used cumulative sum control chart analysis, nonarbitrary methods, and arbitrary-based LC had NLC of 152.0 (95% CI: 135.4-170.1), 108.0 (95% CI: 96.6-120.4), and 49.7 (95% CI: 42.0-58.3) cases, respectively. NLC was 37.0 cases (95% CI: 29.1-46.5) for single surgeon LC, and 99.8 cases (95% CI: 90.2-110.0) for institutional LC. Conclusion: Studies reporting NLC in LCBDE are heterogeneous. Further studies should use nonarbitrary methods of analysis for patient-reported outcome measures and procedure-specific morbidity.

Comparison between Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) and Clavien-Dindo Classification for laparoscopic single-stage treatment of choledocholithiasis with concomitant cholelithiasis

PURPOSE

The Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) are both widely used methods for reporting postoperative complications. Several studies have compared the CCI® with the CDC in evaluating postoperative complications of major abdominal surgery. However, there are no published reports comparing both indexes in single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with cholecystectomy (LCBDE) for the treatment of common bile duct stones. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of the CCI® and the CDC in evaluating the complications of LCBDE.

METHODS

In total, 249 patients were included. Spearman's rank test was used to calculate the correlation coefficient between CCI® and CDC with length of postoperative stay (LOS), reoperation, readmission, and mortality rates. Student t-test and Fisher's exact test were used to study, if higher ASA, age, larger surgical time, history of previous abdominal surgery, preoperative ERCP, and intraoperative cholangitis finding were associated with higher CDC grade or higher CCI® score.

RESULTS

Mean CCI® was 5.17 ± 12.8. CCI® ranges overlap among three CDC grades: II (20.90-36.20), IIIa (26.20-34.60), and IIIb (33.70-52.10). Age > 60 years, ASA ≥ III, and intraoperative cholangitis finding were associated with higher CCI® (p = 0.010, p = 0.044, and p = 0.031) but not with CDC ≥ IIIa (p = 0.158, p = 0.209, and p = 0.062). In patients with complications, LOS presented a significantly higher correlation with CCI® than with CDC (p = 0.044).

CONCLUSION

In LCBDE, the CCI® assesses better the magnitude of postoperative complications in patients older than 60 years, with a high ASA as well as in those who present intraoperative cholangitis. In addition, the CCI® correlates better with LOS in patients with complications.

Comparison of one-step laparoscopy and two-step endolaparoscopy in the treatment of secondary choledocholithiasis: A multicenter retrospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

There are two minimally invasive ways of treating cholecystolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis, but there remains some controversy regarding which technique is better, since they both have advantages and disadvantages. The one-step method involves laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, and primary close (LC + LCBDE + PC), while the two-step procedure consists of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic sphincterotomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP + EST + LC).

OBJECTIVE

This multicenter retrospective study aimed to analyze and compare the effects of the two techniques.

METHODS

The data of patients who underwent either one-step LCBDE + LC + PC or two-step ERCP + EST + LC treatment for gallstones in the gallbladder and bile duct at the Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Shanghai Tongren Hospital, and Taizhou Fourth People's Hospital between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019 were collected, and the preoperative indicators of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The surgical success rate of the one-step laparoscopic group was 96.23% (664/690), the transit abdominal opening rate was 2.03% (14/690), and there were 21 cases of postoperative bile leakage. The success rate of the two-step endolaparoscopic surgery was 78.95% (225/285), the transit opening rate was 2.46% (7/285), and there were 43 postoperative cases of pancreatitis and five of cholangitis. Postoperative cholangitis, pancreatitis, postoperative stone recurrence, postoperative hospitalization, and treatment costs were significantly lower (P< 0.05) in the one-step laparoscopic group than in the two-step endolaparoscopic group. However, the amount of intraoperative bleeding, the postoperative extraction time of the abdominal drainage tube, and the incidence of bile leakage were higher (P< 0.05) in the one-step laparoscopic group than in the two-step endolaparoscopic group.

CONCLUSION

The two methods of treating choledocholithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis that were analyzed in this study were safe and effective, and each method had its own advantages.

Complications of biliary stenting versus T-tube insertion after common bile duct exploration: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Complications following the insertion T-tube or stent after common bile duct exploration (CBDE) remain problematic in nowadays surgical era. Based on our knowledge, we did not find any meta-analysis intentionally evaluating the complications between both groups. At this moment, we aimed to analyze and compare both procedures' complications, efficacy, efficiency, and feasibility.

METHODS

We searched literature from four databases (EuroPMC, PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov) up to June 2022 to compile the randomized controlled trials and pro-/retrospective cohort studies. Review Manager 5.4 was used to statistically analyze each outcome measured between biliary stenting and T-tube insertion.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies with 1,080 patients (534 biliary stents and 546 T-tube) were included for qualitative and quantitative analysis. The pooled risk ratio (RR) of the overall postoperative complications rate was significantly lower in the biliary stent group compared to the T-tube group 0.43 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-0.80, p = 0.007]. In terms of the operation time, length of hospital stay, and readmission rate was also decreased in stenting as biliary drainage over T-tube placement 1.02 minutes [95% CI -1.53, -0.52, p < 0.0001], 1.96 days [95% CI -2.63, -1.29, p < 0.00001], and RR 0.39 [95% CI 0.15-0.97, p = 0.04], respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Stenting as biliary drainage after CBDE was superior to T-tube insertion. A shorter operation time and hospital stay in biliary drainage resulted in a lower overall postoperative complication rate. Other influences, including the complexity and shorter learning curve, might also affect the superiority of biliary stenting.

Multi-institutional expert update on the use of laparoscopic bile duct exploration in the management of choledocholithiasis: Lesson learned from 3950 procedures

BACKGROUND

Recently there has been a growing interest in the laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones with gallbladder in situ (LBDE), which is favoring the expansion of this technique. Our study identified the standardization factors of LBDE and its implementation in the single-stage management of choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

A retrospective multi-institutional study among 17 centers with proven experience in LBDE was performed. A cross-sectional survey consisting of a semi-structured pretested questionnaire was distributed covering the main aspects on the use of LBDE in the management of choledocholithiasis.

RESULTS

A total of 3950 LBDEs were analyzed. The most frequent indication was jaundice (58.8%). LBDEs were performed after failed ERCP in 15.2%. The most common approach used was the transcystic (63.11%). The overall series failure rate of LBDE was 4% and the median rate for each center was 6% (IQR, 4.5-12.5). Median operative time ranged between 60-120 min (70.6%). Overall morbidity rate was 14.6%, with a postoperative bile leak and complications ≥3a rate of 4.5% and 2.5%, respectively. The operative time decreased with experience (P = .03) and length of hospital stay was longer in the presence of a biliary leak (P = .04). Current training of LBDE was defined as poor or very poor by 82.4%.

CONCLUSION

Based on this multicenter survey, LBDE is a safe and effective approach when performed by experienced teams. The generalization of LBDE will be based on developing training programs.

Laparoscopic surgery for gallstones or common bile duct stones: A stably safe and feasible surgical strategy for patients with a history of upper abdominal surgery

Backgrounds/Aims

A history of upper abdominal surgery has been identified as a relative contraindication for laparoscopy. This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) in patients with and without previous upper abdominal surgery.

Methods

In total, 131 patients with previous upper abdominal surgery and 64 without upper abdominal surgery underwent LC or LCBDE between September 2017 and September 2021 at the Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University. Patients with previous upper abdominal surgery were divided into four groups: group A included patients with previous right upper abdominal surgery who underwent LC (n = 17), group B included patients with previous other upper abdominal surgery who underwent LC (n = 66), group C included patients with previous right upper abdominal surgery who underwent LCBDE (n = 30), and group D included patients with previous other upper abdominal surgery who underwent LCBDE (n = 18). Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

The preoperative liver function indexes showed no significant difference between the observation and control groups. For patients who underwent LC, groups A and B had more abdominal adhesions than the control group. One case was converted to open surgery in each of groups A and B. There was no statistical difference in operation time, estimated blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and drainage volume. For patients who underwent LCBDE, groups C and D had more estimated blood loss than the control group (group C, 41.33 ± 50.84 vs. 18.97 ± 13.12 ml, p = 0.026; group D, 66.11 ± 87.46 vs. 18.97 ± 13.12 ml, p = 0.036). Compared with the control group, group C exhibited longer operative time (173.87 ± 60.91 vs. 138.38 ± 57.38 min, p = 0.025), higher drainage volume (296.83 ± 282.97 vs. 150.83 ± 127.04 ml, p = 0.015), and longer postoperative hospital stay (7.97 ± 3.68 vs. 6.17 ± 1.63 days, p = 0.021). There was no mortality in all groups.

Conclusions

LC or LCBDE is a safe and feasible procedure for experienced laparoscopic surgeons to perform on patients with previous upper abdominal surgery.

Tips and Tricks—3 Use Cases of Interdisciplinary Knowledge Transfer in Minimally Invasive Pediatric Surgery

In the pediatric surgical environment, we can enrich our knowledge and improve our skills through interdisciplinary knowledge transfer in exchange with other surgical or even non-surgical disciplines. To demonstrate this, we present in this article three patient cases of method transfer enabling new techniques in minimally invasive pediatric surgery. 1. The somewhat modified application of the AeroStat rigid tip laparoscopic cholangiography catheter during the single-step laparoscopic cholecystectomy facilitates the safe intraoperative cholangiography with common bile duct flushing. 2. A magnetic rod is used during laparoscopic enterotomy to locate and retrieve ingested magnets. 3. Using a patient-specific MRI 3D model representing a syndromic high anorectal malformation improves surgical planning and parental education.

Predictors for stone recurrence after a successful common bile duct surgical exploration for choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Recurrence after common bile duct stone (CBDS) clearance is the major long-term drawback of their management. Its prevalence is significant, and it occurs after all primary therapeutic alternatives. The aim of this study was to determine the predictive factors associated with stone recurrence after surgical common bile duct exploration (CBDE).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study based on patients undergoing CBDE between 2000 and 2018 was conducted. Uni- and multivariate hierarchical regression analyses were performed to assess the independent predictive factors associated with recurrent CBDS in patients with initially successful surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 365 patients underwent successful surgical procedures. After a median follow-up of 43.2 (IQR 84) months, 31 (8.4%) patients were diagnosed with CBD stone recurrence. The median time to recurrence was 30.3 (IQR 38) months. The only variable associated with CBDS recurrence was preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (HR 2.436, 95% CI: 1.031-5.751, P = 0.042)).

CONCLUSION

Patients who undergo preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy and then cholecystectomy with successful common bile duct clearance may be at increased risk for recurrent stone disease compared to those who go straight to surgery.

Delivery of a Laparoscopic Bile Duct Exploration Service as a Primary Treatment Modality for Choledocholithiasis within the NHS Healthcare System

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this paper was to report the experience of one-stage LC and LCBDE service within a medium sized acute NHS healthcare trust to demonstrate the feasibility of this treatment modality in terms of safety, quality and effectiveness inside the limitations of the UK's nationalised healthcare system.

METHODS

All patients undergoing LCBDE at our institution from November 2013 - July 2021 were included in the study. Data were collected from a prospectively maintained institutional database and data points corroborated by electronic patient data on hospital systems.

RESULTS

Three hundred and eleven patients underwent LCBDE. Median age was 68 (range 21-95). Most cases were performed as urgent/emergency (n = 206, 66% vs n = 105, 34% elective). Bile duct stones were diagnosed pre-operatively in 23% of cases (n = 73). Intra-operative diagnosis was made using laparoscopic ultrasound (n = 228, 73%), cholangiogram (n = 44, 14%) or combination of both (n = 31, 10%). Laparoscopic completion rate was 94%. 56% were via choledochotomy and 44% trans-cystic. Incidence of bile leak was 4.2% (n = 13) and the incidence of retained stone within 90 days was 3.9%. Median length of stay was 2 days post-operatively (range 0-62). The rate of mortality was 0.66%.

CONCLUSION

The data from our study shows that LC and LCBDE is a safe, effective service that can be successfully delivered in the NHS. With the developing specialisation of benign biliary units, we believe that this approach to choledocholithiasis is reproducible and achievable nationally and should be considered first-line in the management of this condition.

Conversion to open surgery during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: predictive factors and impact on the perioperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is an effective treatment for choledocholithiasis. The aim of this study was to determine the predictive factors associated with conversion during LCBDE and to assess the implications of conversion on the patients' postoperative course.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study based on patients undergoing LCBDE between 2000 and 2018 was conducted. Uni- and multivariate regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 357 patients underwent LCBDE, and the conversion rate was 14.2%. The main reasons for conversion were lithiasis extraction (21; 41%) and difficult dissection (13; 26%). Independent predictors for conversion were increasing levels of serum bilirubin prior to surgery (OR=4.745, 95% CI: 1.390-16.198; p=0.013), and emergency setting (OR=4.144, 95% CI: 1.449-11.846; p=0.008). Age was independently associated with lower odds of conversion (OR=0.979, 95% CI: 0.960-0.999; p=0.036). Conversion had a negative impact on the patients' postoperative course, including severe complication (21.6% vs. 5.2% p<0.001) and surgical reintervention (11.8% vs. 2.6% p=0.002) rates.

CONCLUSION

Conversion to open surgery during LCBDE was associated with increased postoperative morbidity. Emergency surgery and increasing levels of serum bilirubin previous to surgery independently increase the probability of conversion; however age was independently associated with lower odds of conversion.

Impact of single-stage laparoscopic trans-cystic exploration on hospital procedures, admissions and length-of-stay in common bile duct stone clearance

BACKGROUND

Single-stage approach with bile duct exploration is considered the most efficient and cost-effective method of bile duct clearance. In Australia, apart from centres with subspecialty interests, notably in Brisbane, Queensland, a multi-stage approach with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is used more frequently. We aim to evaluate the impact of single stage laparoscopic trans-cystic exploration (LTCE) versus multi-stage approach for choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study. Medicare Benefits Schedule codings were used to identify patients who had the following procedures between December 2011 and December 2019: laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and ERCP, LC and LTCE, LC and LTCE and ERCP. Primary outcomes were number of hospital procedures, admissions and additive length of stay (aLOS), the cumulative hospital stay from admission to discharge.

RESULTS

Of 607 patients, 204 (34%) patients received a single-stage LTCE, while 403 (66%) patients had a multi-stage approach. In the LTCE group, 82% (168) patients and 93% (190) patients had one procedure and one admission respectively for stone clearance (P = 0.001). The median aLOS was 4 days for LTCE versus 7 days for multi-stage approach (P = 0.001; 95% CI for difference - 3 to -2). In the multi-stage group, 16% (65) patients had three or more procedures and 49% (199) patients required two or more hospital admissions to achieve stone clearance.

CONCLUSION

LTCE for stone clearance can be successfully accomplished with reductions in hospital admissions, number of procedures and length of stay. This has further economic and health resource implications.

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.

Should Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis Be a Specialist-Only Procedure?

Background: Common bile duct exploration (CBDE) is performed uncommonly. Issues surrounding its uptake in the laparoscopic era include perceived difficulty and lack of training. We aim to determine the success of CBDE performed by "specialist" and "nonspecialist" common bile duct (CBD) surgeons to determine whether there is a substantial difference in success and safety. Methods: A 10-year retrospective audit was performed of patients undergoing CBD exploration for choledocholithiasis. Northern Health maintains an on-call available "specialist" CBD surgeon roster to aid with CBDE. Results: Five hundred fifty-one patients were identified, of which 489/551 (88.7%) patients had stones successfully cleared. Specialists had a higher success rate (90.8% versus 82.6%, P = .008), associated with a longer surgical time. Method (transcystic or transductal), approach (laparoscopic or open), and indication for operation were similar between groups. There was no significant difference in complications. To be confident of a surgeon having an 80% success rate, 70 procedures over 10 years were required, however, an "in-control" 50% success rate may only require 1 procedure per year. Conclusion: While specialist CBDE surgeons have improved success rates, nonspecialist general surgeons also have a good and comparable success rate with an equivalent complication rate. With realistic annual targets, nonspecialist CBD surgeons should be encouraged to perform CBDE in centers without specialist support.

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.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for patients with a history of prior biliary surgery: a comparative study with an open approach

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is increasingly being used to treat choledocholithiasis. However, few studies have examined the treatment of recurrent common bile duct stones (CBDS) in patients with a history of prior biliary surgery. The current research aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open common bile duct exploration in patients with a history of prior biliary surgery.

METHODS

Between March 2010 and August 2019, 162 patients with recurrent CBDS after prior biliary surgery who underwent surgical management in our institution were enrolled in this study. The demographic, intraoperative and postoperative data were retrospectively analysed.

RESULTS

Among these 162 patients, 72 underwent laparoscopic approach (LCBDE group), and 90 underwent open surgery (open common bile duct exploration group). The LCBDE group was associated with significantly lower overall complication rate, incision infection rate and blood loss compared to open common bile duct exploration group (all P < 0.05). Moreover, the laparoscopic approach significantly reduced the length of postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05). However, the operative time, stone clearance rate, and stone recurrence rate were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). The conversion rate of the laparoscopic approach was 6.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE is superior to open procedure in terms of blood loss, hospital stay, overall complication and incision infection in patients with a history of prior biliary surgery, and it should be considered as a safe and effective treatment if it is performed by an experienced surgeon.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with gallbladder and common bile duct stones: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE + LC) with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (IO-ERCP + LC) for the treatment of gallbladder and common bile duct (CBD) stones.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane Library from their inception dates to April 2020, for studies that compared the efficacy and safety of LCBDE + LC with those of IO-ERCP + LC in patients with gallbladder and CBD stones. The technical success, morbidity, major morbidity, biliary leak, postoperative pancreatitis, conversion, retained stones, operative time, and postoperative hospital stay were compared between these two approaches.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials involving 860 patients were evaluated. Overall, no significant difference was found between LCBDE + LC and IO-ERCP + LC regarding technical success, morbidity, major morbidity, and the conversion rate. Biliary leak and retained stones were significantly more prevalent in the LCBDE + LC group, while postoperative pancreatitis was significantly more prevalent in the IO-ERCP + LC group.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE + LC and IO-ERCP + LC have similar efficacy and safety in terms of technical success, morbidity, major morbidity, and conversion rate. However, LCBDE + LC is associated with a higher biliary leak rate, lower postoperative pancreatitis rate, and higher rate of retained stones.

Primary Choledocholithiasis 15 Years Postcholecystectomy

Gallstone disease is extremely prevalent in the western society with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) being the standard treatment for patients with symptomatic gallstones. The prevalence of common bile duct (CBD) stones with concomitant gallstones increases with age from 8–15% in patients <60 years of age and up to 60% in the elderly. There have been only a few case reports of postcholecystectomy bile duct stones occurring more than 10 years following surgery in the literature. Most of these reports describe the presence of stones within the gallbladder/cystic duct remnant or secondary to migrating surgical clips.

The Safety and Efficacy of Primary Duct Closure without Endoscopic Nasobiliary Drainage after Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

Background

Primary duct closure (PDC) after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely applied for choledocholithiasis. However, there has been controversy over the placement of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) during operation. To date, few studies compare the clinical effect of PDC without and with ENBD. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of PDC without ENBD for choledocholithiasis.

Methods

From January 2016 to December 2018, a total of 164 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled and divided into group A (undergone LCBDE + PDC without ENBD, 81 cases) and group B (undergone LCBDE + PDC with ENBD, 83 cases) in this study. The intraoperative conditions and postoperative complications were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

In group A, the time of operation, postoperative first flatus, extubation, antibiotics, and discharge were shorter than in group B (t = -17.775, p = 0.000; t = -7.649, p = 0.000; t = -5.807, p = 0.000; t = -9.247, p = 0.000; t = -9.322, p = 0.000, respectively). Furthermore, intraoperative blood loss was less (t = -2.199, p = 0.029) and hospital costs were lower (t = -6.685, p = 0.000). However, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the 2 groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

In patients who meet the screening criteria, PDC without ENBD after LCBDE is safe and effective and worthy of clinical application.

Lessons learnt from the first 200 unselected consecutive cases of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct stones at a district general hospital

BACKGROUND

The management of choledocholithiasis evolves with diagnostic imaging and therapeutic technology, facilitating a laparoscopic approach. We review our first 200 cases of laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct, highlighting challenges and lessons learnt.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied the first 200 cases of laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration between 2006 and 2019. The database contains demographics, clinicopathological characteristics, diagnostic modalities, operative techniques, duration and outcomes.

RESULTS

We compared two approaches: transcystic vs. transcholedochal in our 200 cases. Choledocholithiasis was suspected preoperatively in 163 patients. 21 cases found no stones. Of the remainder, 111/179 cases were completed via the transcystic route and the remaining were completed transcholedochally (68/179); 25% of the transcholedochal cases were converted from a transcystic approach. CBD diameter for transcystic route was 8.2 vs. 11.0 mm for transcholedochal. Total clearance rate was 84%. Retained or recurrent stones were noted in 7 patients. Length of stay was 5.8 days, 3.5 days in the transcystic route vs. 9.4 days after transcholedochal clearance. Eight patients required re-operation for bleeding or bile leak. No mortalities were recorded in this cohort, but 2 cases (1%) developed a subsequent CBD stricture.

CONCLUSION

Concomitant laparoscopic common bile duct clearance with cholecystectomy is feasible, safe and effective in a district general hospital, despite constraints of time and resources. The transcystic route has a lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay, and hence our preference of this route for all cases. Advancements in stone management technology will allow wider adoption of this technique, benefitting more patients.

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.

A meta-analysis of indocyanine green fluorescence image-guided laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of indocyanine green fluorescence image-guided laparoscopic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease.

METHODS

Clinical studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and the Web of Science databases. Study-specific effect sizes and their 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were combined to calculate the pooled values, using fixed-effects or random-effects models.

RESULTS

Eleven studies with combined total of 2221 patients were included. Compared to the control group, the indocyanine green fluorescence imaging-guided group experienced shorter operative time (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.30; 95 % CI = -0.45 - -0.15; P < 0.001), shorter biliary anatomy identification time (SMD = -2.34; 95 % CI = -2.58 - -2.10; P < 0.001), lower blood loss (SMD = -0.14; 95 % CI = -0.26 - -0.01; P = 0.035), higher success rate of biliary tract imaging (odds ratio [OR] = 2.37; 95 % CI = 1.09-5.12; P = 0.029), lower rate of conversion to open surgery (OR = 0.10; 95 % CI = 0.04 - 0.28; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.23; 95 % CI = -0.39 - -0.06, P = 0.008), and lower biliary tract imaging costs (SMD = -247.88; 95 % CI, -274.31--221.45, P = 0.000). Postoperative complications did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows that indocyanine green fluorescence biliary tract imaging is a safe and feasible new way for biliary tract identification in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Decision analysis of minimally invasive management options for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

The management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis is controversial with the risks and benefits of one versus two-stage approaches debated. This study aims to perform decision analysis of minimally invasive laparo-endoscopic approaches.

METHODS

An advanced decision tree was constructed to compare pre, intra and post-operative ERCP and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in terms of primary ductal clearance and significant complications for patients intended to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Transition probabilities were calculated from randomised controlled trials following a comprehensive literature search. Model uncertainties were extensively tested through deterministic and probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis. Utility outcomes were 1 and 0.5 for successful primary clearance without and with complications, respectively, and 0 for failure of primary clearance of the duct.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (n = 2697) were included in the analysis. At base case analysis, a laparo-endoscopic rendezvous approach had the highest utility output (0.90; no complication probability: 0.87/complication probability 0.06). Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was ranked second with a utility output 0.87 (no complication probability: 0.82/complication probability 0.10). Pre-operative ERCP utility score was 0.84 (no complication probability: 0.78/ complication probability 0.11) and post-operative ERCP utility score was 0.78 (no complication probability: 0.71/complication probability 0.13). Monte Carlo analysis showed that laparo-endoscopic rendezvous and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration had an equal mean utility output of 0.57 (standard deviation 0.36; variance 0.13; 95% confidence interval 0.00-0.99 versus standard deviation 0.34; variance 0.12; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.98). Laparo-endoscopic rendezvous had a superior treatment selection frequency of 39.93% followed by laparoscopic bile duct exploration (36.11%), pre-operative ERCP (20.67%) and post-operative ERCP (2.99%).

CONCLUSION

One-stage approach to the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis is superior to two-stage, in terms of primary clearance of the duct and risk of operative morbidity. Laparo-endoscopic rendezvous approach could offer marginal additional benefit but more high-quality randomised controlled trials are needed.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations

BACKGROUND

A history of abdominal biliary tract surgery has been identified as a relative contraindication for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), and there are very few reports about laparoscopic procedures in patients with a history of abdominal biliary tract surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes of 227 consecutive patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations at our institution between December 2013 and June 2019. A total of 110 consecutive patients underwent LCBDE, and 117 consecutive patients underwent open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE). Patient demographics and perioperative variables were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The LCBDE group performed significantly better than the OCBDE group with respect to estimated blood loss [30 (5-700) vs. 50 (10-1800) ml; p = 0.041], remnant common bile duct (CBD) stones (17 vs. 28%; p = 0.050), postoperative hospital stay [7 (3-78) vs. 8.5 (4.5-74) days; p = 0.041], and time to oral intake [2.5 (1-7) vs. 3 (2-24) days; p = 0.015]. There were no significant differences in the operation time [170 (60-480) vs. 180 (41-330) minutes; p = 0.067]. A total of 19 patients (17%) in the LCBDE group were converted to open surgery. According to Clavien's classification of complications, the LCBDE group had significantly fewer postoperative complications than the OCBDE group (40 vs. 57; p = 0.045). There was no mortality in either group. Multiple previous operations (≥ 2 times), a history of open surgery, and previous biliary tract surgery (including bile duct or gallbladder + bile duct other than cholecystectomy alone) were risk factors for postoperative adhesion (p = 0.000, p = 0.000, and p = 0.000, respectively).

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is ultimately the least invasive, safest, and the most effective treatment option for patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations and is especially suitable for those with a history of cholecystectomy, few previous operations (< 2 times), or a history of laparoscopic surgery.

Safety and efficacy of emergency laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in elderly patients with complicated acute cholangitis

BACKGROUND

Acute cholangitis (AC) is an acute inflammation of the biliary tract caused by bacterial infection, which occurs due to biliary obstruction primarily because of bile duct stones. We aimed to study the effect of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in the treatment of complicated AC for elderly patients.

METHOD

Elderly patients with complicated AC admitted to our hospital from August 2014 to August 2018 were considered. According to the patients' general conditions and the American Society of Anesthesiologists' (ASA) grade, 98 patients were divided into three groups: ASA grade II, 38 patients; ASA grade III, 33 patients; and ASA grade IV, 27 patients; all patients underwent emergency laparoscopic common bile duct exploration within 8 h of admission. The perioperative data of these patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the three groups in preoperative laboratory test results, except for albumin levels. Conversely, when compared in every group, there were some significant differences in changes between pre- and postoperative laboratory test results, except for albumin levels. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of perioperative data (operation time, blood loss, peritoneal drainage time, postoperative time to flatus, and postoperative hospital stay). Although four patients had postoperative complications, there were no significant differences in the rate of complications between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is a safe, effective, and feasible method for treating complicated AC in elderly patients. It should be actively used in clinical work to rapidly relieve biliary obstruction.

Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration With Primary Closure After Failed Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Without Intraoperative Cholangiography: A Case Series from a Referral Center in Bogota, Colombia

Background: Despite the effectiveness of laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) surgery, no case series details the use and advantages of laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) without use of intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) failure. Therefore, we present a case series regarding our success with LCBDE in managing CBD stones (CBDSs) using laparoscopic technique without IOC. Materials and Methods: We performed a descriptive retrospective observational study. Patients with CBDSs, alone or along with gallbladder stones, were treated through LCBDE with primary CBD closure after failed ERCP. Results: All patients underwent LCBDE with choledocotomy and primary duct closure. Patients with gallbladder stones underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (78%). All procedures were successful, and no conversions occurred. Surgery duration averaged 106 minutes. Intraoperative bleeding averaged 15 cc, and no mortalities occurred. No patients required additional surgery or intensive care unit admission. Hospitalization duration averaged 5 days. Conclusions: Therefore, a laparoscopic approach with primary CBD closure after failed ERCP for complex CBDSs is safe and effective.

Routine near infra-red indocyanine green fluorescent cholangiography versus intraoperative cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a case-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

The aim is to evaluate safety and efficacy of near infra-red (NIR) indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence structural imaging during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) (Group A) and to compare perioperative data, including operative time, with a series of patients who underwent LC with routine traditional intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) (Group B).

METHODS

Forty-four patients with acute or chronic cholecystitis underwent NIR-ICG fluorescent cholangiography during LC. ICG was administered intravenously at different time intervals or by direct gallbladder injection during surgery. Fluorescence intensity and anatomy identification were scored according to a visual analogue scale between 1 (least accurate) and 5 (most accurate). Group B patients (n = 44) were chosen from a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent LC with routine IOC, matched for age, sex, body mass index, and diagnosis with group A patients.

RESULTS

No adverse reactions were recorded. In group A, mean time between intravenous administration of ICG and surgery was 10.7 ± 8.2 (range 2-52) h. Administered doses ranged from 3.5 to 13.5 mg. Fluorescence was present in all cases, scoring ≥ 3 in 41 patients. Mean operative time was 86.9 ± 36.9 (30-180) min in group A and 117.9 ± 43.4 (40-220) min in group B (p = 0.0006). No conversion to open surgery nor bile duct injuries were observed in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

LC with NIR-ICG fluorescent cholangiography is safe and effective for early recognition of anatomical landmarks, reducing operative time as compared to LC with IOC, even when residents were the main operator. NIR-ICG fluorescent cholangiography was effective in patients with acute cholecystitis and in the obese. Data collection into large registries on the results of NIR-ICG fluorescent cholangiography during LC should be encouraged to establish whether this technique might set a new safety standard for LC.

"Rendezvous" Procedure in Children with Cholecysto-Choledocholithiasis

Introduction: Cholecysto-choledocolithiasis is a rare entity in children and its management is still challenging and controversial. The laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV) procedure, consisting of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and simultaneous endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the management of symptomatic choledocholithiasis is well described in adult patients. However, in the literature, few reports about its application in the pediatric population have been recorded. Aim of the Study: The aim of the present study is to report our first successful cases of symptomatic cholecysto-choledocholithiasis LERV treatment. Methods: Two girls suffering of hemolytic disease presented to our third referral center with acute abdominal pain due to cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative data were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Surgery was performed without complications. The girls were dismissed once re-alimentation and re-canalization were achieved and had no other episodes of biliary cholic. Reported advantages of LERV include: a shorter in-hospital stay, a reduction in the number of procedures and anesthesia, and a reduced overall risk of complications. Conclusions: The promising result with our 2 cases suggest that, when performed in highly specialized centers, LERV is a safe procedure, which leads to considerable benefits, despite logistic and organizational difficulties.

Negotiating the Curve of Laparoscopic Hepatopancreaticobiliary Procedures (Basic to Advanced) at a Tertiary Rural Teaching Institute

Background:

We present here our experience of laparoscopic hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgeries at our rural institute and the hurdles we faced overcoming the various challenges.

Aims and Objectives:

The objectives of this study were to assess the feasibility, successful completion, operative time, conversions/requirement of assistance, duration of hospital stay, and postoperative complications on the HPB procedures performed laparoscopically in our surgical unit; and to help young surgeons for smooth navigation through their laparoscopic career.

Materials and Methods:

All the patients admitted under our unit over the past 9 years for elective HPB surgeries operated by a single surgeon were included in this study.

Results:

Total 1304 basic laparoscopic biliary procedures were successfully completed laparoscopically. After getting well versed with the standard procedure, we switched over to difficult cases involving densely adhered gallbladder, frozen Calot's, Mirizzi's syndrome, use of intraoperative cholangiogram, and take down of cholecystoduodenal fistulas. Next step in evolution was doing laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and biliary procedures with decreased number of ports. Five hundred and sixty-eight procedures were advanced HPB surgeries. With time, we also started performing a variety of complex advanced laparoscopic procedures such as cystogastrostomy, hepaticojejunostomy, choledochoduodenostomy, and pancreaticojejunostomy. All these procedures have been discussed with respect to operative duration, conversion rates, blood loss, hospital stay, and complication rates in the initial and later parts of the learning curves and further compared with previous standard large case studies on specific surgeries.

Conclusion:

Several hurdles are met in a new institute, that too, a rural one. The present discussion will help the budding surgeons to identify their deficiencies and chart a way forward in a systematic scientific manner.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus cholecystectomy versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) with preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (pre-ERCP+LC) for cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov until 1 July 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LCBDE+LC versus pre-ERCP+LC were included. The common bile duct (CBD) stone clearance rate, postoperative bile leakage, postoperative pancreatitis, morbidity, mortality, and overall hospital stay were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs involving 1545 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Of the 12 RCTs, seven confirmed and five did not confirm CBD stones preoperatively. The meta-analysis showed a significantly higher CBD stone clearance rate for pre-ERCP+LC than LCBDE+LC. A similar result was found in the subgroup analysis of patients with confirmed CBD stones. A significantly lower postoperative bile leakage rate was found for pre-ERCP+LC than LCBDE+LC in all 12 RCTs and in the subgroup of patients with confirmed CBD stones. However, a significantly higher rate of pancreatitis was found in pre-ERCP+LC and in the subgroup of patients with confirmed CBD stones. LCBDE+LC was superior to pre-ERCP+LC in terms of the overall hospital stay. No significant differences were found in morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-ERCP+LC is associated with a higher CBD stone clearance rate, lower postoperative bile leakage rate, and higher rate of pancreatitis. LCBDE+LC might help to shorten the hospital stay. Further studies on this topic are recommended.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with previous upper abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Although patients with previous upper abdominal surgery are no longer considered as a contraindication in laparoscopic surgery, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for these patients is still controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of LCBDE for patients with previous upper abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Two hundred and seventeen patients with common bile duct stones who underwent LCBDE in our institution from January 2010 to September 2017 were enrolled in the retrospective study. They were divided into two groups: group A, with previous upper abdominal surgery (n = 50) and group B, without previous upper abdominal surgery (n = 167). Patients' demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative outcomes were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Group A exhibited a longer operative time compared to group B (179.7 ± 61.5 vs. 156.0 ± 46.8 min, p = 0.014). There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss (123.9 ± 99.5 vs. 99.5 ± 84.7 mL, p = 0.087), postoperative hospital stay (7.4 ± 2.6 vs. 6.8 ± 2.3 d, p = 0.193), and overall complication rate (8.0 vs. 5.4%, p = 0.732) between the two groups. There was no mortality in both groups. The initial stone clearance rate showed no significant difference between the two groups (98.0 vs. 98.2%, p = 1.000), and the final stone clearance rate was 100% in both groups (p = 1.000). The stone recurrence rate had no significant difference between the two groups (2.0 vs. 2.4%, p = 1.000). The conversion rate was comparable between group A and group B (6.0 vs. 4.8%, p = 0.718).

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE is a safe and feasible procedure for patients with previous upper abdominal surgery. The keys of this procedure are carefully separating the adhesions and clearly exposing the common bile duct, and using a variety of methods to remove the stones.

Success of intraoperative imaging and management of suspected choledocholithiasis without pre-operative bile duct imaging - A case series

Background

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is gaining popularity over endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for the management of common bile duct stones. However, its application has been almost exclusively following preoperative stone confirmation via magnetic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or ERCP. We present our series of LCBDE following detection of common bile duct stones with intraoperative imaging (IOI) alone, in consecutive elective and emergency patients with suspected choledocholithiasis.

Materials and methods

All patients with suspected but unconfirmed choledocholithiasis undergoing LC with intention to proceed to LCBDE between January 2015 and June 2017 were included. LCBDE was performed following the discovery of choledocholithiasis on IOI.

Results

371 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis underwent LC with IOI. CBD stones or obstructing sludge was identified in 107 patients (29%), with sensitivity of 96.2% and specificity of 98.5%. 100 patients, median age 59, went on to have LCBDE as indicated by intraoperative imaging. 76% were performed as emergency cases and conversion to open rate was 2%. There were no mortalities. Bile leak and retained stones occurred in 4% and 3% respectively. 7/100 patients required re-intervention, with re-look laparoscopy (n = 4) and ERCP (n = 3). Median length of stay was 1.5 and 3 days for elective and emergency cases respectively, and 30 readmission rate was 8%.

Discussion and conclusion

Traditionally patients presenting with suspicion of choledocholithiasis undergo preoperative MRCP/EUS and/or ERCP prior to eventual LC. We propose an alternative, more streamlined, pathway of treatment without requiring preoperative cholangiography, applicable to both elective and emergency patients.

•

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is a safe and effective treatment for bile duct stones.

•

Intraoperative cholangiography is sensitive and specific in identification of bile duct stones.

•

Bile duct exploration can be safely performed on the basis on intraoperative imaging alone.

•

Intraoperative imaging provides sufficient information for real time decision making.

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.

Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Is a Safe and Effective Strategy for Elderly Patients

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely used to remove common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, surgery is not considered as the first treatment choice for elderly patients with CBD stones because of the potential risk of postoperative complications. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficiency of LCBDE for elderly patients.

METHODS

From April 2011 to October 2016, 265 consecutive patients underwent LCBDE. We performed a retrospective study and divided these patients into 2 groups. The younger group was younger than 70 years old (n = 179), and the elderly group was 70 years old or older (n = 86). We compared patient demographics, clinical characteristics, intraoperative parameters, postoperative complications, and incidence of recurrent stone between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The elderly patients had higher preoperative morbidity of chronic diseases, such as pulmonary diseases, heart diseases, arterial hypertension, and abdominal operation history ( P < .05). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate to open surgery, total cost, overall complications, and incidence of recurrent stone ( P > .05).

CONCLUSION

LCBDE can also be carried out as a safe and effective approach to remove CBD stones in elderly patients, although they have higher risk of chronic diseases.

Learning curve for performing choledochotomy bile duct exploration with primary closure after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Primary closure after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is a safe and effective approach for treating cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve of performing primary closure after LC+LCBDE.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent primary closure after LC+LCBDE performed by a single surgeon from January 2009 to April 2015 in our institution, and analyzed preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis to evaluate the learning curve for this procedure.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 390 patients. The total postoperative complications rate was 7.2%, including bile leakage in 9 (2.3%) patients and retained common bile duct stone in 3 (0.8%) patients. The CUSUM operating time (OT) learning curve was best modeled by the equation: CUSUM_OT = 312.209 × procedure^0.599 × e^{(-0.011×procedure)} + 122.608 (R² = 0.96). The learning curve was composed of two phases, phase 1 (the initial 54 patients) and phase 2 (the remaining 336 patients). A significant decrease in the OT (116.8 ± 22.4 vs. 93.8 ± 17.8 min; p < 0.001) and complication rate (16.7 vs. 5.7%; p < 0.01) including the rate of bile leakage (7.4 vs. 1.5%; p < 0.01) and retained stone (3.7 vs. 0.3%; p < 0.01) was observed between the two phases. In addition, 20 patients had conversion to open surgery. Impacted stones were independently associated with conversion, as indicated by a multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

The data suggest that the learning curve of this procedure was achieved in approximately 54 cases. An impacted stone was the only risk factor that affected the conversion rate.