Laparoscopic management after failed endoscopic stone removal in nondilated common bile duct

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure is preferred for selected elderly individuals with choledocholithiasis

Background

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure (LCBDE-PC) exhibits more benefits than other surgeries for patients with choledocholithiasis. It remains unclear whether it is feasible for and beneficial to elderly individuals. This study aimed to clarify and stratify elderly patients who would benefit from LCBDE-PC.

Methods

A retrospective study of 1240 patients with choledocholithiasis who underwent laparoscopic procedures between 2011 and 2019 was conducted. Patients were divided into the young group (<65 years old, n = 708) and the elderly group (≥65 years old, n = 532). Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure was successfully performed in 90.20% of the elderly and 94.20% of the young. No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding reoperation, postoperative bile leakage, residual stones, drainage removal, and postoperative mortality. Compared with the young, the elderly had longer postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.035) and delayed postoperative eating time (p = 0.036) in the matched cohort. Independent risk factors for failed LCBDE-PC were preoperative pancreatitis (p = 0.018), year of the surgeon's experience (p = 0.008), preoperative C-reactive protein level (p = 0.034), preoperative total bilirubin (p = 0.021), impacted common bile duct (CBD) stones (p = 0.006), blood loss (p = 0.001), and edema of the CBD (p = 0.001). A novel nomogram for predicting failed LCBDE-PC in elderly individuals exhibited a sufficient discriminative ability according to the estimated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.869 (95% CI: 0.817-0.921, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure is safe, feasible, and effective for elderly individuals with choledocholithiasis. Elderly patients with a high risk of failed LCBDE-PC should be cautious of undergoing LCBDE-PC.

Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Clearance, is It Feasible and Safe After Failed Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography?

Introduction: Concomitant gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones is a common problem, and there is still no consensus on the best approach in the management. Options include preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with CBD exploration, and LC with postoperative ERCP. Each option has its own limitations and complications. In this article, we assessed the feasibility of laparoscopic surgical clearance of the CBD after a failed ERCP, reasons for failure of endoscopic clearance in our cohort. We will discuss the management options after ERCP failure, the challenges, and the outcomes. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all the cases of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) performed in our hospital between April 2006 and January 2019. Two hundred cases were performed, 178 cases as a primary procedure while 22 were performed as a secondary procedure after failed ERCP. We have previously published data on the case series (PMID 33140155) and here explored the cases performed after failed ERCP as a secondary procedure. We analyzed demographics of patients, preoperative investigations, ERCP trials, and reasons for ERCP failure, operative approach, duration of operation, conversion rate, complications, and outcomes. Results: Twenty-two patients underwent a laparoscopic CBD clearance after failed ERCP. Sixteen of these were in the first 5 years of the study. Multiple attempts of ERCP were made in 7 patients (31.8%) and a single attempt in 15 patients. In 8 patients (32%), the duct was not accessible (failed cannulation) due to a variety of reasons. Nine patients had impacted stones larger than 1 cm, 4 patients had Mirrizi syndrome with concomitant large CBD stones, and 1 patient failed endoscopic clearance because of the large number of stones in the CBD. CBD clearance was successful in 19 patients (88%), 8 were completed by a transcystic approach and 14 by a transcholedochal approach. Postoperative length of stay was 12 (+10) days. One patient had an unplanned readmission within 30 days. One patient required reoperation for bleeding. Three patients developed recurrent stones and 1 developed a subsequent stricture. No mortalities were recorded. Conclusion: LCBDE is feasible and appears safe as a secondary procedure after failed ERCP. The new technologies and the advancement of surgical techniques will continue to improve success and reduce morbidity.

Biliary balloon dilator impaction in a non-dilated bile duct with anatomical variations: a case report

BACKGROUND

While techniques for extracting large stones from dilated bile ducts are increasing, options for small stones impacted in non-dilated bile ducts are limited.

CASE PRESENTATION

We report the case of an impacted biliary balloon dilator in a choledocholithiasis patient with a non-dilated bile duct and multiple anatomical variations, including low insertion of the cystic duct. After unsuccessful attempts with a stone extraction basket and balloon, a biliary balloon dilator with a sharp catheter tip was advanced into the bile duct. The balloon could not be removed from the bile duct even when deflated. The duodenoscope fell back into the stomach, causing the shaft of the dilator to break near the ampulla. We then removed the broken tip with a snare, which caused the balloon sheath to separate from the shaft and remain in the bile duct. Finally, we removed the sheath with rat-tooth forceps, leading to successful extraction of the stone-and-balloon complex.

CONCLUSIONS

The exceedingly rare possibility of balloon impaction should be kept in mind when using biliary balloon dilators in non-dilated bile ducts.

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.

The Efficiency of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration in Endoscopic Retrograde-Cholangiopancreatography-Limited Setting in a Peripheral University Hospital

Background: The aim of this study is to evaluate complications and costs in patients treated with laparoscopic and open method for common bile duct (CBD) stones. Secondary aim is to compare the effectiveness, safety, and outcomes of these methods. In addition, it is aimed to review the feasibility of laparoscopic method in rural areas. Methods: Seventy-one patients were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups as open and laparoscopic surgical method. These groups were analyzed comparatively in terms of complications and costs. Subgroups were formed from patients who underwent T-tube drainage, primary closure, and biliary anastomosis as choledochotomy management. As a secondary outcome, these three subgroups were investigated in terms of complications and cost. Results: The cost was lower in open method compared to laparoscopic method (484$, 707$, P = .002). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between groups (P = .257). While the mean hospital stay was longer in the open group, the operation time was shorter (P = .002, P = .03). The mean length of hospital stay in the T-tube group was significantly higher than the primary closure (P = .001). The cost in the T-tube group was significantly higher than the primary closure and biliary anastomosis groups. Conclusion: Laparoscopic CBD exploration by experienced surgeons in endoscopic retrograde-cholangiopancreatography-limited settings is an effective and safe method in the treatment of choledocholithiasis. This procedure should not be limited to reference centers and should be performed safely in rural areas by well-trained surgeons.

Appraisal of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Explorations Using Balloon-Assisted Stone Extraction Method: Seventeen Years Experiences

Background: Balloon-assisted stone extraction (BASE) can be applied to remove the common bile duct (CBD) stones during laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE). This study aimed to analyze the efficacy of BASE. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients with CBD stone who underwent LCBDE using BASE from 2001 to 2017 was conducted. The outcomes of BASE and potential factor for failure of technique were also evaluated. Results: A total of 163 patients underwent LCBDE using BASE were enrolled. Success rate of BASE was 88.3% (144/163) and 19 (11.7%) patients with failed BASE underwent basket for lithotripsy additionally. The reason for aborting BASE were stone impaction (n = 6), small stone (n = 4), migration into intrahepatic duct (IHD) (n = 3), and others (n = 6). The overall success rate of stone clearance was 98.2% (160/163). The mean CBD diameter was 15.8 mm (range 7-34 mm), and the largest stone size was 13.8 mm (range 3-36 mm). The overall rate of complication related with procedure was 4.9% (8/163), including bile leakage in 2 patients (1.2%), bleeding in 2 patients (1.2%), and pancreatitis in 4 patients (2.4%). There was no procedure-related mortality. Conclusions: BASE for CBD stone is safe and effective technique for the treatment of CBD stones.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for elderly patients with choledocholithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been becoming more and more popular in patients with symptomatic choledocholithiasis. However, the safety and effectiveness of LCBDE in elderly patients with choledocholithiasis is still uncertain. This meta-analysis is aimed to appraise the safety and feasibility of LCBDE for elderly patients with choledocholithiasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Studies comparing elderly patients and younger patients who underwent LCBDE for common bile duct stone were reviewed and collected from the PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Primary outcomes were stone clearance rate, overall complication rate, and mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were operative time, conversion rate, pulmonary complication, bile leakage, reoperation, residual stone rate, and recurrent stone rate.

RESULTS

Nine studies, including two prospective studies and seven retrospective studies, met the inclusion criteria. There were 2004 patients in this meta-analysis, including 693 elderly patients and 1311 younger patients. There was no statistically significant difference between elderly patients and younger patients regarding stone clearance rate (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.42-1.26; p = 0.25), overall complication rate (OR 1.31; 95% CI 0.94-1.82; p = 0.12), and mortality rate (OR 2.80; 95% CI 0.82-9.53; p = 0.10). Similarly, the operative time, conversion rate, bile leakage, reoperation, residual stone rate, and recurrent stone rate showed no significant difference between two groups (p > 0.05). While elderly patients showed high risk for pulmonary complication (OR 4.41; 95% CI 1.78-10.93; p = 0.001) compared with younger patients.

CONCLUSION

Although there is associated with higher pulmonary complication, LCBDE is still considered as a safe and effective treatment for elderly patients with choledocholithiasis.

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.