Management of common bile duct stones: controversies and future perspectives

Transcystic Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: When to Bail

BACKGROUND

Transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is a procedure considered in the management of common bile duct stones. In many ways it is superior to alternatives such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); however, surgeons who have limited experience in CBDE are often reluctant to persist in difficult cases with concerns regarding increasing complication rates and waste of theater time. This study aims to provide an evidence-based approach to identify points to aid early abandonment ("bail").

METHODS

Review of all LCBDE performed in a single center from September 2008 to September 2022 was performed. Statistical analysis was performed on success and failure groups, with relevant undesirable outcomes chosen for further analysis to identify factors to be used as a guide to bail.

RESULTS

A total of 952 patients were identified for analysis. Females represented 63.8% (609) of the cohort. Success was reported in 89.2% (849) of procedures. Those in whom the cystic duct could not be cannulated with the choledochoscope, those that progressed to choledochotomy, those with a prolonged operative time, and those who had adverse outcomes were selected as undesired outcomes. Factors of age, higher ASA, preoperative ERCP, and those with preoperatively identified stones or larger stones at operation were associated with higher rates of an undesired outcome.

CONCLUSION

Older and more comorbid patients, those who underwent preoperative ERCP, and those with preoperatively or operatively identified large stones are factors that should prompt those surgeons who are developing their LCBDE experience to consider bailing early.

The Diagnostic Yield of Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in the Setting of Acute Pancreaticobiliary Disease - A Single Center Experience

PURPOSE

To discern whether preceding ultrasound (US) results, patient demographics and biochemical markers can be implemented as predictors of an abnormal Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) study in the context of acute pancreaticobiliary disease.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed assessing US results, age, gender, elevated lipase and biliary enzymes for consecutive patients who underwent an urgent MRCP following an initial US for acute pancreaticobiliary disease between January 2017-December 2018. Multivariable binary logistic regression models were constructed to assess for predictors of clinically significant MRCPs, and discrepant US/MRCP results.

RESULTS

A total of 155 patients (mean age 56, 111 females) were included. Age (OR 1.03, P < 0.05), hyperlipasemia (OR 5.33, P < 0.05) and a positive US (OR 40.75, P < 0.05) were found to be independent predictors for a subsequent abnormal MRCP. Contrarily, gender and elevated biliary enzymes were not reliable predictors of an abnormal MRCP, or significant MRCP/US discrepancies. Of 66 cases (43%) of discordant US/MRCPs, half had clinically significant discrepant findings such as newly discovered choledocholithiasis and pancreaticobiliary neoplasia. Age was the sole predictor for a significant US/MRCP discrepancy, with 2% increase in the odds of a significant discrepancy per year of increase in age.

CONCLUSION

An abnormal US, hyperlipasemia and increased age serve as predictors for a subsequent abnormal MRCP, as opposed to gender and biliary enzyme elevation. Age was the sole predictor of a significant US/MRCP discrepancy that provided new information which significantly impacted subsequent management. In the remaining cases, however, MRCP proved useful in reaffirming the clinical diagnosis and avoiding further investigations.

Factors That Predict the Success of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis: A 10-Year Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) can be performed to treat choledocholithiasis at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to identify factors that predict the success of LCBDE.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective audit was performed on patients who underwent LCBDE for the management of choledocholithiasis at Northern Health between 2008 and 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 513 patients were identified with an overall success rate of 90.8%. Most LCBDE were done through a transcystic approach with the remainder through a choledochotomy. When comparing patients with a successful operation to those that were unsuccessful, univariate analysis demonstrated significant differences in preoperative white cell count and number of duct stones found. Age and elevated nonbilirubin liver function tests were found to be significant factors associated with the failure of LCBDE on multivariate analysis. The likelihood of a failed operation in those with multiple stones was observed to be almost halved compared with patients with single stone although this did not reach significance [odds ratio (OR): 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-1.01, P=0.055]. Multivariate analysis indicated that unsuccessful procedures (OR: 10.13, 95% CI: 4.34-23.65, P<0.001) and multiple duct stones (OR: 3.79, 95% CI: 1.66-8.67, P=0.002) were associated with an increased risk of severe complications.

CONCLUSIONS

A single impacted stone may be more difficult to remove, however complications were more likely to be associated with multiple duct stones. With no other clinically relevant predictive factors, and because of the high success of the procedure and the low morbidity, LCBDE remains an option for all patients with choledocholithiasis.

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.

A predictive nomogram to identify factors influencing the success of a concomitant laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Single-staged laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) offers clear benefits in terms of cost and shorter hospitalization stays. However, a failed LCBDE requiring conversion to open surgery is associated with increased morbidity. This study reviewed the factors determining success of LCBDE, and created a predictive nomogram to stratify patients for the procedure.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 109 patients who underwent LCBDE was performed. A nomogram was developed from factors significantly associated with conversion to open surgery and validated.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients underwent a successful LCBDE, while 47 patients required a conversion to open CBDE. The presence of underlying cholangitis (crude OR 2.70, 95% CI: 1.12-6.56, p = 0.017), together with its subsequent interventions, seemed to adversely increase the rate of conversion to open surgery. The predictive factors included in the nomogram for a failed laparoscopic CBDE included prior antibiotic use (adjusted OR (AOR) 2.98, 95% CI: 1.17-7.57, p = 0.022), previous ERCP (AOR 4.99, 95% CI: 2.02-12.36, p = 0.001) and abnormal biliary anatomy (AOR 9.37, 95% CI: 2.18-40.20, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is useful for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. However, patients who were predicted to have an elevated risk for open conversion might not be ideal candidates for the procedure.

Laparoendoscopic rendezvous may be an effective alternative to a failed preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis

Background:

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), remains the standard way of management for patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV), a combined procedure for removing the gallbladder laparoscopically and clearing the common bile duct (CBD) endoscopically at the same time, could be an attractive alternative. The aim of this study was to compare LERV with classic ERCP in patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

Methods:

886 patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis were treated either with the LERV technique (90 patients), or with the 2-stage approach, which includes preoperative ERCP followed by LC (796 patients). The primary endpoint was any difference in the success of CBD cannulation and clearance; secondary endpoints were the detection of differences in morbidity (especially post-ERCP pancreatitis [PEP]), and the feasibility of the two approaches.

Results:

Successful cannulation of the CBD was more frequent with conventional ERCP compared with the LERV technique (89.8% vs. 75.5%, P=0.0001). LERV appears to be as effective as conventional ERCP for complete CBD clearance (85.5% vs. 82.8%, P<0.1). None of the patients in the LERV group had an episode of clinical PEP, whereas in the conventional ERCP group there were 23 episodes of PEP and one death. The median amylase level was higher in patients undergoing conventional ERCP group compared to patients in LERV group.

Conclusion:

Classic ERCP has a higher rate of successful CBD cannulation and a similar rate of CBD clearance compared to LERV.

Rules and technical tricks in extremely difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomies

We remind you of some technical artifices required in order to resolve difficult cases, such as: antegrade laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), subtotal laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) and the “stairs” clipping of the cystic duct. Also we acknowledge the closing of the cystic duct. We analyzed the medical records of 15251 laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed during 1994-2015, with emphasis on: surgical technique, conversion rate, hemorrhage, postoperative bile leaking, iatrogenic MBD injuries and mortality. We divided the cases in 5 study groups, group 1 (1994-2004) N= 5138, group 2 (2005-2015) N= 10113, group 3 (fundus first cholecystectomies, N=2348), group 4 (retrograde cholecystectomies, N=12889) and group 5 (subtotal laparoscopic cholecystectomy-SLC, N=14) which we compared regarding the main parameters. We prefer to perform a “step by step” clipping each time the length of the clip does not cover all the circumference of the cystic duct. This artifices, is a simple laparoscopic gesture easy to perform and has the advantage of avoiding a large excessive and risky laparoscopic dissection in the vicinity of the main biliary duct. More seldom we appeal to the suture of the cystic stump using the intra-corporeal knots or a simple stump ligation with an extracorporeal preformed not. We did not encounter any late or early complications following the implementation of this technical laparoscopic artifice. Laborious laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed by a well-trained surgical team ensure the premises of a good performance even while adopting laparoscopic ingenious and difficile gestures that also respect the intra-operatory rules and principals.

Advances of recurrent risk factors and management of choledocholithiasis

Gallstone disease is a common and frequently occurring disease in human, and it is the main disease among the digestive system diseases. The incidence of gallstone disease in western countries is about 5%-22%, and common bile duct stones (CBDS) accounts for 8%-20%. CBDS easily lead to biliary obstruction, secondary cholangitis, pancreatitis, and obstructive jaundice, even endanger life. Therefore, it needs timely treatment once diagnosed. The recurrence of choledocholithiasis after bile duct stones clearance involves complicated factors and cannot be completely elaborated by a single factor. The risk factors for recurrence of choledocholithiasis include bacteria, biliary structure, endoscopic and surgical treatment, and inflammation. The modalities for management of choledocholithiasis are endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), laparoscopic or open common bile duct exploration, dissolving solutions, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL), percutaneous radiological interventions, electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) and laser lithotripsy. We compare the different benefits between surgery and ERCP. And finally, we make a summary of the current strategy for reducing the recurrence of CBDS and future perspectives for CBDS management.

Laparoscopic Bile Duct Clearance Without Choledochoscopy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been proven to be a safe, efficient, and cost-effective option for the management of common bile duct (CBD) stones. There are two guiding methods during LCBDE: fluoroscopic or choledochoscopic. Most surgeons prefer the use of flexible choledochoscopy at LCBDE, but it is a fragile, delicate, and expensive instrument. The aim of this work was to report our experience in fluoroscopically guided LCBDE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients who underwent LCBDE in the Mansoura Gastroenterology surgical center between March 2007 and September 2014 was performed. Patients with gallstones and concomitant CBD stones were included. After the initial assessment, all patients fulfilling the criteria of enrollment underwent magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and only patients with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography evidence of CBD stones were included. Choledochoscopy was not used in any patient, and we depended on fluoroscopic guidance for CBD stone retrieval in all LCBDE.

RESULTS

A total of 290 patients were assessed for LCBDE: 76 patients were excluded; 11 patients were not completed laparoscopically due to negative intraoperative cholangiography (n=7) and conversion to laparotomy (n=4); the remaining 203 patients were analyzed. LCBDE failed in 16 of the 203 (7.9%) cases, with a success rate of 92.1%. The median operative time was 79 minutes, and the median hospital stay was 2.4 days. Complications were bile leakage (n=4), mild pancreatitis (n=2), wound infection (n=2), port hernia (n=1), and internal hemorrhage (n=1).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with published studies using choledochoscopy at LCBDE, we found comparable results in terms of the success/failure rate, the morbidity and mortality, the operative time, and the length of hospital stay. LCBDE under fluoroscopic guidance may be as safe and efficient as with choledochoscopic guidance.

Predictor factors for choledocholithiasis

Background

The choledocolithiasis has an incidence of 8-20% in patients with cholecystolithiasis. The preoperative diagnosis guides the interventional treatment on the bile duct

Aim

To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the laboratory markers and imaging studies for choledocholithiasis preoperatively.

Methods

The study comprised 254 patients divided into two groups: the control group (207 patients), patients without choledocholithiasis intraoperatively and cases group (47 patients), that enrolled the patients with choledocholithiasis intra-operatively. Were evaluated the laboratory markers, image exams and intra-operative diagnostic aspects.

Results

The sample was homogeneous for age and gender. It was observed that 47% of the cases the patients did not show comorbidities. Hospitalization showes in cases group acute pancreatitis in12.8%, jaundice in 30%, fever in 30% and pain in the right hypochondrium in 95%. By comparing them, was observed that fever and jaundice were the signs and symptoms with statistical significance. Patients with choledocholithiasis had transaminases, alkaline phosphatase, gamma-glutamyl transferase and higher bilirubin with statistical significance (p<0.001). In regard to imaging studies, ultrasound was fairly accurate for cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Changes in canalicular and transaminase enzymes are suggestive for preoperative choledocholithiasis; GGT showed better sensitivity and alkaline phosphatase greater specificity; ultrasonography and nuclear magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography showed high specificity.

Establishing benchmarks for the management of elevated liver enzymes and/or dilated biliary trees in an urban safety net hospital: analysis of 915 subjects

BACKGROUND

The push for public reporting of outcomes necessitates relevant benchmarks for disease states across different settings. This study establishes benchmarks for choledocholithiasis management in a safety net hospital setting.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients admitted to our acute care surgery service with biochemical evidence of choledocholithiasis who underwent same-admission cholecystectomy (CCY) between July 2012 and December 2013.

RESULTS

During this 18-month period, 915 patients were admitted with biochemical evidence of choledocholithiasis. Descriptive statistics for the cohort are provided, which include a 51% rate of obesity and 95% rate of pathologic cholecystitis. Conversion rates of 4% and complication rates of 6% were found. The majority had a CCY without biliary imaging (n = 630, 68.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Relevant benchmarks are characterized, and results of a practice pattern of omitting pre- or intraoperative biliary tree imaging are described. These findings serve as a first benchmark of choledocholithiasis management for urban safety net hospitals.

Endoscopic ultrasound versus magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) are tests used in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones in patients suspected of having common bile duct stones prior to undergoing invasive treatment. There has been no systematic review of the accuracy of EUS and MRCP in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones using appropriate reference standards.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the accuracy of EUS and MRCP for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS, and Clinicaltrials.gov until September 2012. We searched the references of included studies to identify further studies and of systematic reviews identified from various databases (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), Medion, and ARIF (Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility)). We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for EUS or MRCP. We only accepted studies that confirmed the presence of common bile duct stones by extraction of the stones (irrespective of whether this was done by surgical or endoscopic methods) for a positive test, and absence of common bile duct stones by surgical or endoscopic negative exploration of the common bile duct or symptom free follow-up for at least six months for a negative test, as the reference standard in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. We included participants with or without prior diagnosis of cholelithiasis; with or without symptoms and complications of common bile duct stones, with or without prior treatment for common bile duct stones; and before or after cholecystectomy. At least two authors independently screened abstracts and selected studies for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected the data from each study. We used the bivariate model to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 18 studies involving 2366 participants (976 participants with common bile duct stones and 1390 participants without common bile duct stones). Eleven studies evaluated EUS alone, and five studies evaluated MRCP alone. Two studies evaluated both tests. Most studies included patients who were suspected of having common bile duct stones based on abnormal liver function tests; abnormal transabdominal ultrasound; symptoms such as obstructive jaundice, cholangitis, or pancreatitis; or a combination of the above. The proportion of participants who had undergone cholecystectomy varied across studies. Not one of the studies was of high methodological quality. For EUS, the sensitivities ranged between 0.75 and 1.00 and the specificities ranged between 0.85 and 1.00. The summary sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) and specificity (95% CI) of the 13 studies that evaluated EUS (1537 participants; 686 cases and 851 participants without common bile duct stones) were 0.95 (95% CI 0.91 to 0.97) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.99). For MRCP, the sensitivities ranged between 0.77 and 1.00 and the specificities ranged between 0.73 and 0.99. The summary sensitivity and specificity of the seven studies that evaluated MRCP (996 participants; 361 cases and 635 participants without common bile duct stones) were 0.93 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.96) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.98). There was no evidence of a difference in sensitivity or specificity between EUS and MRCP (P value = 0.5). From the included studies, at the median pre-test probability of common bile duct stones of 41% the post-test probabilities (with 95% CI) associated with positive and negative EUS test results were 0.96 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.98) and 0.03 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.06). At the same pre-test probability, the post-test probabilities associated with positive and negative MRCP test results were 0.94 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.97) and 0.05 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.09).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both EUS and MRCP have high diagnostic accuracy for detection of common bile duct stones. People with positive EUS or MRCP should undergo endoscopic or surgical extraction of common bile duct stones and those with negative EUS or MRCP do not need further invasive tests. However, if the symptoms persist, further investigations will be indicated. The two tests are similar in terms of diagnostic accuracy and the choice of which test to use will be informed by availability and contra-indications to each test. However, it should be noted that the results are based on studies of poor methodological quality and so the results should be interpreted with caution. Further studies that are of high methodological quality are necessary to determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS and MRCP for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

Ultrasound versus liver function tests for diagnosis of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound and liver function tests (serum bilirubin and serum alkaline phosphatase) are used as screening tests for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. There has been no systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and liver function tests.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the accuracy of ultrasound versus liver function tests for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS, and Clinicaltrials.gov to September 2012. We searched the references of included studies to identify further studies and systematic reviews identified from various databases (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment, Medion, and ARIF (Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility)). We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for ultrasound, serum bilirubin, or serum alkaline phosphatase. We only accepted studies that confirmed the presence of common bile duct stones by extraction of the stones (irrespective of whether this was done by surgical or endoscopic methods) for a positive test result, and absence of common bile duct stones by surgical or endoscopic negative exploration of the common bile duct, or symptom-free follow-up for at least six months for a negative test result as the reference standard in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. We included participants with or without prior diagnosis of cholelithiasis; with or without symptoms and complications of common bile duct stones, with or without prior treatment for common bile duct stones; and before or after cholecystectomy. At least two authors screened abstracts and selected studies for inclusion independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected data from each study. Where meta-analysis was possible, we used the bivariate model to summarise sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies including 523 participants reported the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound. One studies (262 participants) compared the accuracy of ultrasound, serum bilirubin and serum alkaline phosphatase in the same participants. All the studies included people with symptoms. One study included only participants without previous cholecystectomy but this information was not available from the remaining studies. All the studies were of poor methodological quality. The sensitivities for ultrasound ranged from 0.32 to 1.00, and the specificities ranged from 0.77 to 0.97. The summary sensitivity was 0.73 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.90) and the specificity was 0.91 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.95). At the median pre-test probability of common bile duct stones of 0.408, the post-test probability (95% CI) associated with positive ultrasound tests was 0.85 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.91), and negative ultrasound tests was 0.17 (95% CI 0.08 to 0.33).The single study of liver function tests reported diagnostic accuracy at two cut-offs for bilirubin (greater than 22.23 μmol/L and greater than twice the normal limit) and two cut-offs for alkaline phosphatase (greater than 125 IU/L and greater than twice the normal limit). This study also assessed ultrasound and reported higher sensitivities for bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase at both cut-offs but the specificities of the markers were higher at only the greater than twice the normal limit cut-off. The sensitivity for ultrasound was 0.32 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.54), bilirubin (cut-off greater than 22.23 μmol/L) was 0.84 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.95), and alkaline phosphatase (cut-off greater than 125 IU/L) was 0.92 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.99). The specificity for ultrasound was 0.95 (95% CI 0.91 to 0.97), bilirubin (cut-off greater than 22.23 μmol/L) was 0.91 (95% CI 0.86 to 0.94), and alkaline phosphatase (cut-off greater than 125 IU/L) was 0.79 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.84). No study reported the diagnostic accuracy of a combination of bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase, or combinations with ultrasound.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Many people may have common bile duct stones in spite of having a negative ultrasound or liver function test. Such people may have to be re-tested with other modalities if the clinical suspicion of common bile duct stones is very high because of their symptoms. False-positive results are also possible and further non-invasive testing is recommended to confirm common bile duct stones to avoid the risks of invasive testing.It should be noted that these results were based on few studies of poor methodological quality and the results for ultrasound varied considerably between studies. Therefore, the results should be interpreted with caution. Further studies of high methodological quality are necessary to determine the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound and liver function tests.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus intraoperative cholangiography for diagnosis of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) are tests used in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. There has been no systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of ERCP and IOC.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the accuracy of ERCP and IOC for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS, and Clinicaltrials.gov to September 2012. To identify additional studies, we searched the references of included studies and systematic reviews identified from various databases (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE)), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), Medion, and ARIF (Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility)). We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for ERCP or IOC. We only accepted studies that confirmed the presence of common bile duct stones by extraction of the stones (irrespective of whether this was done by surgical or endoscopic methods) for a positive test, and absence of common bile duct stones by surgical or endoscopic negative exploration of the common bile duct, or symptom-free follow-up for at least six months for a negative test as the reference standard in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. We included participants with or without prior diagnosis of cholelithiasis; with or without symptoms and complications of common bile duct stones; with or without prior treatment for common bile duct stones; and before or after cholecystectomy. At least two authors screened abstracts and selected studies for inclusion independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected data from each study. We used the bivariate model to summarise the sensitivity and specificity of the tests.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five studies including 318 participants (180 participants with and 138 participants without common bile duct stones) that reported the diagnostic accuracy of ERCP and five studies including 654 participants (125 participants with and 529 participants without common bile duct stones) that reported the diagnostic accuracy of IOC. Most studies included people with symptoms (participants with jaundice or pancreatitis) suspected of having common bile duct stones based on blood tests, ultrasound, or both, prior to the performance of ERCP or IOC. Most studies included participants who had not previously undergone removal of the gallbladder (cholecystectomy). None of the included studies was of high methodological quality as evaluated by the QUADAS-2 tool (quality assessment tool for diagnostic accuracy studies). The sensitivities of ERCP ranged between 0.67 and 0.94 and the specificities ranged between 0.92 and 1.00. For ERCP, the summary sensitivity was 0.83 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.90) and specificity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). The sensitivities of IOC ranged between 0.75 and 1.00 and the specificities ranged between 0.96 and 1.00. For IOC, the summary sensitivity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.00) and specificity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.00). For ERCP, at the median pre-test probability of common bile duct stones of 0.35 estimated from the included studies (i.e., 35% of people suspected of having common bile duct stones were confirmed to have gallstones by the reference standard), the post-test probabilities associated with positive test results was 0.97 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99) and negative test results was 0.09 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.14). For IOC, at the median pre-test probability of common bile duct stones of 0.35, the post-test probabilities associated with positive test results was 0.98 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.00) and negative test results was 0.01 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.10). There was weak evidence of a difference in sensitivity (P value = 0.05) with IOC showing higher sensitivity than ERCP. There was no evidence of a difference in specificity (P value = 0.7) with both tests having similar specificity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although the sensitivity of IOC appeared to be better than that of ERCP, this finding may be unreliable because none of the studies compared both tests in the same study populations and most of the studies were methodologically flawed. It appears that both tests were fairly accurate in guiding further invasive treatment as most people diagnosed with common bile duct stones by these tests had common bile duct stones. Some people may have common bile duct stones in spite of having a negative ERCP or IOC result. Such people may have to be re-tested if the clinical suspicion of common bile duct stones is very high because of their symptoms or persistently abnormal liver function tests. However, the results should be interpreted with caution given the limited quantity and quality of the evidence.

Common bile duct exploration in an elderly Asian population

Common bile duct exploration (CBDE) is an accepted treatment for choledocholithiasis. This procedure is not well studied in the elderly population. Here we evaluate the results of CBDE in elderly patients (>70 years) and compare the open (group A) with the laparoscopic group (group B). A retrospective review was performed of elderly patients with proven common bile duct (CBD) stones who underwent CBDE from January 2005 to December 2009. There were 55 patients in group A and 33 patients in group B. Mean age was 77.6 years (70-91 years). Both groups had similar demographics, liver function tests, and stone size-12 mm (range, 5-28 mm). Patients who had empyema (n = 9), acute cholecystitis (n = 15), and those who had had emergency surgery (n = 28) were more likely to be in group A (P < 0.05). The mean length of stay for group A was 11.7 ± 7.3 days; for group B, 5.2 ± 6.3 days; the complication rate was higher in group A (group A, 38.2%; group B, 8.5%; P = 0.072). The overall complication and mortality rate was 29.5% and 3.4%, respectively. CBDE can be performed safely in the elderly with accepted morbidity and mortality. The laparoscopic approach is feasible and safe in elective setting even in the elderly.

Does laparoscopic approach impair T-tube-related sinus-tract formation?

PURPOSE

Postoperative morbidity after bile duct exploration with T-tube insertion is mainly related to tube removal and incomplete sinus-tract formation leading to serious complications. Laparoscopic surgery reduces abdominal adhesion formation and diminishes tissue trauma and inflammatory response to surgery, which is essential for sinus-tract formation. This study evaluates if complication rate of T-tube removal is increased after laparoscopic bile duct exploration.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and January 2011, 94 patients underwent a T-tube insertion following choledocolithotomy (44 and 50 patients in the laparoscopic and open surgery group, respectively). Epidemiological data, preoperative characteristics, day of tube removal, and morbidity rates were analyzed.

RESULTS

Global T-tube removal-related biliary complication rate was 14.9% (18.2% in the laparoscopic group vs. 12% in the open surgery group). Although the day of T-tube removal was significantly delayed, there was a slight increased incidence of biliary peritonitis requiring reintervention in the laparoscopic surgery group (6.9% vs. 2%).

CONCLUSIONS

We reveal that T-tube removal is associated with significant morbidity. There was no statistical difference between the laparoscopic and the open surgery group, although global biliary complications after tube removal were slightly increased and bile spillage was worse delimited when T-tube was inserted laparoscopically. Laparoscopic approach may diminish inflammatory response and adherence development and impair, and therefore sinus-tract formation.

Common bile duct stones: analysis of the videolaparoscopic surgical treatment

CONTEXT

About 9% of the Brazilian population has gallstones and the incidence increases significantly with aging. The choledocholithiasis is found around 15% of these patients, and a third to half of these cases presented as asymptomatic. Once the lithiasis in the common bile duct is characterized through intraoperative cholangiography, the laparoscopic surgical exploration can be done through the transcystic way or directly through choledochotomy.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the results and outcomes of the laparoscopic treatment of common bile duct lithiasis.

METHODS

Seventy consecutive patients were evaluated. They prospectively underwent the treatment of the lithiasis in the common bile duct and the exploration ways were compared according to the following parameters: criteria on their indication, success in the clearance, surgical complications. It was verified that about ½ of the choledocholithiasis carriers did not show any expression of predictive factors (clinical antecedents of jaundice and/or acute pancreatitis, compatible sonographic data and the pertaining lab tests). The laparoscopic exploration through the transcystic way is favored when there are no criteria for the practice of primary choledochotomy, which are: lithiasis in the proximal bile duct, large (over 8 mm) or numerous calculi (multiple calculosis).

RESULTS

The transcystic way was employed in about 50% of the casuistic and the choledochotomy in about 30%. A high success rate (around 80%) was achieved in the clearance of the common bile duct stones through laparoscopic exploration. The transcystic way, performed without fluoroscopy or choledochoscopy, attained a low rate of success (around 45%), being 10% of those by transpapilar pushing of calculi less than 3 mm. The exploration through choledochotomy, either primary or secondary, if the latter was performed after the transcystic route failure, showed high success rate (around 95%). When the indication to choledochotomy was primary, the necessity for choledochoscopy through choledochotomy to help in the removal of the calculi was 55%. However, when choledochotomy was performed secondarily, in situations where the common bile duct diameter was larger than 6 mm, the use of choledochoscopy with the same purpose involved about 20% of the cases. There was no mortality in this series.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct was related to a low rate of morbidity. Therefore, the use of laparoscopy for the treatment of the lithiasis in the common bile duct depends on the criteria for the choice of the best access, making it a safe procedure with very good results.

Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis: interim analysis of a controlled randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Although the ideal management of cholecysto-choledocholi-thiasis is controversial, the 2-stage approach [endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), sphincterotomy, and common bile duct (CBD) clearance followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy] remains the standard way of management worldwide. One-stage approach using the so-called laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV) technique offers some advantages, mainly by reducing the hospital stay and the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the LERV 1-stage approach with the standard 2-stage approach consisting of preoperative ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis.

SETTING

Controlled randomized trial, University/Teaching Hospital.

METHODS

: Patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiasis were randomized either to LERV or to the 2-stage approach. Both elective and emergency cases were included in the study. Primary endpoint was to detect difference in overall hospital stay, whereas secondary endpoints were (i) to detect differences in morbidity (especially post-ERCP pancreatitis) and (ii) success of CBD clearance. This is an interim analysis of the first 100 randomized patients.

RESULTS

Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LERV group; median 4 (2-19) days versus 5.5 (3-22) days, P = 0.0004. There was no difference in morbidity and success of CBD clearance between the 2 groups. Post-ERCP amylase value was found significantly lower in the LERV group: median 65 (16-1159) versus 91 (30-1846), P = 0.02.

CONCLUSIONS

Interim analysis of the results suggests the superiority of the LERV technique in terms of hospital stay and post-ERCP hyperamylasemia.

Major biliary complications in 2,714 cases of laparoscopic cholecystectomy without intraoperative cholangiography: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The ongoing debate between routine and selective users of intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has not yet come to an end. Routine users argue that IOC decreases the rate of biliary complications such as bile duct injury, biliary leak and missed common bile duct (CBD) stones, a claim that selective users do not fully support. On the other hand, a third policy that was adopted by many other centers is performing LC without IOC. In this retrospective study, we are exploring the results of a relatively large multicenter series of LC without IOC regarding major biliary complications.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of LC cases operated by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, without resorting to IOC, in four surgical units of university hospitals in Egypt during a 6-year period (January 2004 through December 2009). Excluded from the study were cases with positive predictors of CBD stones, namely, sonographically detected CBD dilatation and/or CBD stones, elevated bilirubin and/or alkaline phosphatase, persistent biliary pancreatitis, cholangitis, and those who had preoperative magnetic resonance cholangiography.

RESULTS

Of the 2,955 cases of LC reviewed, 241 were excluded, leaving 2,714 cases enrolled in the study. Fifty-five cases (2%) were converted to open surgery. Five cases (0.18%) had major bile duct injuries requiring surgical repair. Postoperative bile leakage was encountered in seven cases (0.26%). Missed CBD stones were reported in six cases (0.22%). There was no perioperative mortality in the present study.

CONCLUSION

LC can be performed safely without the use of IOC, with acceptable low rates of biliary complications provided that proper detection of patients with silent CBD stones is done and facilities for pre- and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography are available.

Role of ERCP in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the evaluation of choledocholithiasis in sickle cell anemia

AIM: To evaluate the role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for choledocholithiasis in patients with sickle cell anemia (SCA) in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS: Two hundred and twenty four patients (144 male, 80 female; mean age, 22.4 years; range, 5-70 years) with SCA underwent ERCP as part of their evaluation for cholestatic jaundice (CJ). The indications for ERCP were: CJ only in 97, CJ and dilated bile ducts on ultrasound in 103, and CJ and common bile duct (CBD) stones on ultrasound in 42.

RESULTS: In total, CBD stones were found in 88 (39.3%) patients and there was evidence of recent stone passage in 16. Fifteen were post-LC patients. These had endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone extraction. The remaining 73 had endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone extraction followed by LC without an intraoperative cholangiogram.

CONCLUSION: In patients with SCA and cholelithiasis, ERCP is valuable whether preoperative or postoperative, and in none was there a need to perform intraoperative cholangiography. Sequential endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone extraction followed by LC is beneficial in these patients. Endoscopic sphincterotomy may also prove to be useful in these patients as it may prevent the future development of biliary sludge and bile duct stones.

Common bile duct stones - their presentation, diagnosis and management

Common Bile duct stones (CBD) continue to pose a significant problem both to the patient and the Surgeon. They increase the morbidity of a patient undergoing Cholecystectomy from less than 5% to as much as 20% and almost zero mortality to as high as 30%. Recent times have thrown up a fair share of controversy in the management of this condition both due to technological innovations and costreduction-pressures. The aim in CBD stone disease, as in any benign disease is to discover a therapeutic algorithm with minimal morbidity, no mortality and at reasonable cost. This can be achieved only by a thorough understanding of the disease and also the available diagnostic and treatment modalities.This article dicusses the diagnosis, investigation and therapy of Common Bile Duct Stones (CBD) and gives a therapeutic algorithm.

Laparoscopic bile duct exploration: results of 160 consecutive cases with 2-year follow up

BACKGROUND

Despite numerous reports showing the advantages of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), many general surgeons, particularly those working outside of nonspecialist units, continue to rely heavily on endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with sphincterotomy (ERCP) to manage bile duct stones (BDS). This article investigates the performance of LCBDE when adopted as the preferred first-line management of both suspected and incidental BDS by general surgeons in a regional setting.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of all patients in whom LCBDE was attempted by a regional general surgical unit. The unit policy was to preferentially treat all incidental and suspected BDS (except in ascending cholangitis or severe pancreatitis) by LCBDE, with ERCP used only if unsuccessful. In addition to chart review, formal prospective follow up by telephone interview was carried out.

RESULTS

A total of 160 consecutive patients with BDS (mean age 66.9 years, 65% suspected and 35% incidental) underwent attempted LCBDE between January 2000 and July 2005. Successful clearance was achieved in 84.3% according to chart review. However, four additional cases of retained choledocholithiasis shown by late telephone interview (median interval 2.5 years) yielded a more accurate clearance rate of 81.8%. Major morbidity occurred in 13.8%, including biliary leak in 7.5% and one late biliary stricture (0.6%). Median length of hospital stay was 4.8 days. In-hospital mortality was 0.6%.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration remains an effective, efficient and safe first-line treatment of BDS even when carried out in regional nonspecialist units. In spite of the wide availability of ERCP, general surgeons should be encouraged to continue performing LCBDE in order to optimise patient care and maintain important surgical skills.