Long-term results of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration by choledochotomy for choledocholithiasis: 15-year experience from a single center

Primary Closure Versus T-Tube Drainage on Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is a critical procedure for managing choledocholithiasis, with primary closure (PC) and T-tube drainage (TTD) as common methods for common bile duct closure. However, the substantial number of new studies comparing PC and TTD underscores the need for an updated meta-analysis. Therefore, this study aims to compare surgery-related outcomes in PC and TTD for biliary duct closure following LCBDE. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases on June 20, 2024. Mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled for continuous and binary outcomes, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. Statistical analysis was performed using Software R, version 4.3.3. Results: A total of 31 studies comprising 4432 patients were included. A total of 2301 (51.9%) were submitted to PC and 2131 (48.1%) were submitted to TTD. The mean age of patients ranged from 39 to 69.8 years and 44.3% were male. Compared with TTD, PC significantly reduced retained stones (odds ratio [OR] 0.57; 95% CI 0.35-0.93; P = .02; I2 = 0%), biliary peritonitis (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.08-0.60; P < .01; I2 = 0%), operative time (MD -21.07 minutes; 95% CI -27.68-14.46; P <. 01; I2 = 97%) and postoperative hospital stay (MD -2.20 days; 95% CI -2.80-1.60; P <. 01; I2 = 96%). However, there were no significant differences between the groups in recurrent stones (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.32-1.02; P = .06; I2 = 0%), bile leakage (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.65-1.23; P = .49; I2 = 0%), bile duct stricture (OR 2.08; 95% CI 0.36-12.11; P = .42; I2 = 0%), pneumonia (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.66-2.88; P = .39; I2 = 0%), and pancreatitis (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.29-1.38; P = .25; I2 = 0%). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, PC was associated with decreased retained stones, biliary peritonitis, operative time, and postoperative hospital stay. However, no significant differences were observed for the other outcomes. These findings underscore PC as a safe and reliable method for bile duct closure following LCBDE.

Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis in elderly patients: A comparative single-centre study

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is an alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. However, its use in elderly patients has been limited, often avoided due to concerns about associated morbidity. This study aims to evaluate the success rate and outcomes of LCBDE in elderly patients.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients with a confirmed diagnosis of choledocholithiasis via intraoperative cholangiography who underwent LCBDE from January 2009 to December 2022. Demographic, clinical, intraoperative, and postoperative data were collected. Patients were divided into two groups: those aged ≥70 years and those aged <70 years. Additionally, a subgroup analysis was performed on patients aged ≥80 years.

RESULTS

A total of 330 patients were included (<70 years = 168; ≥70 years = 162). The success rate of LCBDE in patients aged ≥70 years was similar to that in patients aged <70 years (95.7% vs. 97%; p = 0.514). No statistically significant differences were found in intraoperative outcomes, short-term complications, or mortality between the two groups. These results were consistent in the subgroup analysis of patients aged ≥80 years (n = 67) compared with those aged <70 years.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is a safe and effective procedure for patients aged ≥70 years and could be considered a first-line therapeutic option for this group.

Laparoscopic primary suture of the common bile duct in patients with common bile duct stones: a comparative analysis of two suturing methods in terms of safety, efficacy, and convenience with 16-month follow-up

BACKGROUND

Primary suturing of the common bile duct (CBD) is increasingly used in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for selected patients, though the optimal suturing method remains unclear. This study compares the efficacy of continuous versus interrupted sutures for primary CBD closure in patients with CBD stones.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients with CBD stones who underwent primary CBD closure at Yancheng First People's Hospital from October 2022 to December 2023. Data included demographics, hospital stay, complications, and follow-up outcomes. Of these, 69 received continuous sutures, and 51 received interrupted sutures.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found in age, gender, body mass index (BMI), CBD diameter, preoperative bilirubin levels, or stone residuals between groups. The incidence of postoperative fever, bile leakage, electrolyte disturbances, bleeding, wound infection, and CBD stricture was similar. Continuous suturing required less operative time than interrupted suturing (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Both continuous and interrupted suturing techniques are safe and effective for CBD closure in selected patients, though continuous suturing is more time-efficient.

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.

A comparative study of laparoscopic choledocholithotomy with primary suture and T-tube drainage

To investigate the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic choledocholithotomy with one-stage suture. The clinical data of 68 patients who underwent laparoscopic choledocholithotomy in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 29 patients underwent laparoscopic primary closure (PC group) and 39 underwent T-tube drainage (T-tube group). All patients were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis by B-ultrasound, CT or MRCP. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, pain index, incidence of shoulder and back pain, postoperative satisfaction, postoperative bowel function recovery time, hospitalization time and expenses, and operation-related complications in the 2 groups were compared. 29 cases in PC group were successfully operated, and 39 cases in the T-tube drainage group (T-tube group) were successfully operated. The average operation time, postoperative bowel function recovery time, postoperative pain index, hospitalization time and expenses in PC group were significantly shorter or lower than those in T-tube group (P < .05) and the patient satisfaction in PC group was significantly higher than that in T-tube group (P < .05). In addition, the intraoperative blood loss and the incidence of surgical complications were similar between the 2 groups (P > .05). After laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, primary suture of common bile duct is a safe and effective treatment method, but the incidence of bile leakage is high, and clinical indications for surgery should be strictly controlled.

Evaluation of the ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator in patients undergoing common bile duct exploration

PURPOSE

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) surgical risk calculator is a risk stratification tool to help predict risks of postoperative complications, which is important for informed decision-making. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the calculator in predicting postoperative complications in patients undergoing common bile duct (CBD) exploration.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was completed for 305 patients that underwent open and laparoscopic CBD exploration at a single institution from 2010 to 2018. Patient demographics and preoperative risk factors were entered into the calculator, and the predicted complication risks were compared with observed complication rates. Brier score, C-statistic, and Hosmer-Lemeshow regression analysis were used to assess discrimination and calibration.

RESULTS

The observed rate exceeded the predicted rate for any complication (35.1% vs. 21%), return to operating room (5.9% vs. 3.6%), death (3.3% vs. 1%), and sepsis (3% vs. 2.4%). The model performed best in predicting serious complication (Brier 0.087, C-statistic 0.818, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.695), surgical site infection (Brier 0.068, C-statistic 0.670, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.292), discharge to rehabilitation facility (Brier 0.041, C-statistic 0.907, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.638), and death (Brier 0.028, C-statistic 0.898, Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.004). In multivariable analysis, there was no statistically significant predicted complication type that affected the type of surgery.

CONCLUSION

The calculator was accurate in predicting serious complication, surgical site infection, discharge to rehabilitation facility, and death. However, the model displayed poor predictive ability in all other complications that were analyzed.

Recurrence of common bile duct stones after choledocholithotomy in elderly patients: risk factor analysis and clinical prediction model development

Background

The reasons for the recurrence of common bile duct stones (CBDS) in elderly patients after choledocholithotomy are still unclear. This study aims to establish a prediction model for CBDS recurrence by identifying risk factors.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1804 elderly patients aged 65 years and above who were diagnosed to have CBDS and were admitted to Nanjing First Hospital between January 1, 2010, and January 1, 2021. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, 706 patients were selected for the final analysis. The patients were assigned to two groups according to the presence or absence of CBDS recurrence, and their clinical data were then statistically analyzed. Subsequently, a prediction model and nomogram were developed, evaluating effectiveness using the concordance index (C-index).

Results

Of the 706 elderly patients, 62 patients experienced CBDS recurrence after surgery, resulting in a recurrence rate of 8.8%. The multivariate Cox analysis showed that prior history of cholecystectomy (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.931, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.051-3.547, p = 0.034), white blood cell (WBC) count ≥11.0 × 109/L (HR = 2.923, 95% CI: 1.723-4.957, p < 0.001), preoperative total bilirubin (TBIL) level ≥ 36.5 mmol/L (HR = 2.172, 95% CI: 1.296-3.639, p = 0.003), number of stones ≥2 (HR = 2.093, 95% CI: 1.592-5.294, p = 0.001), maximum stone diameter ≥ 0.85 cm (HR = 1.940, 95% CI: 1.090-3.452, p = 0.024), and T-tube drainage (HR = 2.718, 95% CI: 1.230-6.010, p = 0.013) were independent risk factors of CBDS recurrence in elderly patients after choledocholithotomy. A postoperative CBDS recurrence prediction model was constructed with a C-index value of 0.758 (95% CI: 0.698-0.818) and internal validation value of 0.758 (95% CI: 0.641-0.875).

Conclusion

A history of cholecystectomy, WBC count ≥11.0 × 109/L, preoperative TBIL level ≥ 36.5 mmol/L, number of stones ≥2, maximum stone diameter ≥ 0.85 cm, and T-tube drainage are the independent risk factors of CBDS recurrence after choledocholithotomy in elderly patients. Our developed prediction model for CBDS recurrence has good predictive ability and can help predict the prognosis of patients with CBDS.

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.

Primary suture for patients of bile duct stones after laparoscopic biliary tract exploration: a retrospective cohort study

There are still many physicians who are reluctant to use primary biliary suture in Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for fear of more complications. We compare and analyze the clinical effectiveness of bile duct primary suture with three laparoscopic ports and indwelling T-tube drainage (with four laparoscopic ports) in patients with choledocholithiasis after LCBDE. Clinical data of 135 patients with common bile duct (CBD) stone were compared, including general conditions, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, hospitalization costs, postoperative follow-up and other indicators. Forty-eight patients underwent primary suture of bile duct (group A) and 87 were treated with external T-tube drainage (group B). There were no significant differences between the two groups neither relating to the age, gender, BMI, diameter of CBD, number of stones, preoperative bilirubin value, number of previous surgeries in preoperative, nor the operation time, residual stones, the number of cases converted from laparoscopic conversion to laparotomy. The postoperative complications like fever, bleeding, incision infection, bile duct stricture has no differences between two group. The incidence of bile leakage (p = 0.008) and postoperative electrolyte disturbance (p = 0.001) were slightly lower in group A. There were fewer postoperative complications in group A vs group B (p = 0.04). Patients in group A experienced shorter postoperative hospital stay (p < 0.001), earlier postoperative extubation (p < 0.001), lower total hospitalization costs (p = 0.03), and earlier postoperative recovery (p = 0.000). Primary suture of CBD is a safe and effective method for some patients after LCBDE.

Comparison of Repeated Recurrence of Common Bile Duct Stones and Occurrence of Hepatolithiasis After Synchronous Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Combined with Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration or with Endoscopic Sphincterotomy: a 10-Year Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment options for gallstones together with common bile duct stones (CBDS) remain controversial. The aim of this study was to further compare the recurrence rate of stones after synchronous laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (SLCL) and synchronous laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (SLCE) and to determine which option is more effective in reducing the rate of repeated recurrence of CBDS and the incidence rate of hepatolithiasis.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated the clinical data of patients who underwent SLCL or SLCE at our hepatobiliary center between August 2012 and August 2020. The primary and secondary endpoints of this study were the recurrence of CBDS and the occurrence of hepatolithiasis, respectively.

RESULTS

In total, 1005 patients were enrolled in this study, including 431 patients in the SLCL group and 574 patients in the SLCE group. SLCL was associated with a significantly decreased rate of CBDS recurrence (4.18% vs. 7.84%, P = 0.018), repeated CBDS recurrence (0.70% vs. 3.00%, P = 0.010), and incidence of hepatolithiasis (0.00% vs. 1.05%, P = 0.040). Compared with SLCE, SLCL was an independent protective predictor of the recurrence of CBDS (relative risk, 0.505; 95% confidence interval, 0.286-0.891; P = 0.018) and repeated recurrence of CBDS (relative risk, 0.226; 95% confidence interval, 0.066-0.777; P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

SLCL is an optimal treatment option to SLCE for patients with gallstones combined with CBDS.

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

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

[Modern minimally invasive technologies for the treatment of cholelithiasis]

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

The Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy and Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Single-Step Treatment of Pediatric Cholelithiasis and Choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

In recent years, complicated biliary tract diseases are increasingly diagnosed in children. Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LCBDE) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy has gained popularity in children. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of LCBDE in children and compare them with the treatment outcomes of previously used endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS

From January 2000 to January 2022, a total of 84 children (78.5% female) underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a median follow-up of 11.4 (IQR 8, 14) years. Of these, 6 children underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) + ERCP and 14 children underwent LCBDE for choledochiothiasis. The primary end point of the study was the success of treatment in terms of the incidence of complications, recurrence rate, and rate of reoperation. Secondary endpoints were stone characteristics, presenting symptoms, duration of surgery, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

The majority of patients were female in both groups (83.5% vs. 85.7%), mostly overweight with a median BMI of 27.9 kg/m² and 27.4 kg/m², respectively. Obstructive jaundice, colicky pain, acute pancreatitis, and obstruction of the papilla were the most common symptoms in both groups. The majority of patients (68%) had one stone, whereas two or more stones were found in 32% of patients. The median diameter of the common bile duct was 9 mm in both groups. The procedure was successfully completed in all patients in the ERCP group. In the group of patients treated with LCBDE, endoscopic extraction of the stone with a Dormia basket was successfully performed in ten patients (71.4%), while in the remaining four patients (28.6%) the stones were fragmented with a laser because extraction with the Dormia basket was not possible. The median operative time was 79 min in the LCBDE group (IQR 68, 98), while it was slightly longer in the ERCP group, 85 min (IQR 74, 105) (p = 0.125). The length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LCBDE group (2 vs. 4 days, p = 0.011). No complications occurred in the LCBDE group, while two (40%) complications occurred in the ERCP group: pancreatitis and cholangitis (p = 0.078). During the follow-up period, no conversions, papillotomies, or recurrences were recorded in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Exploration of the common bile duct and removal of stones by LCBDE is safe and feasible in pediatric patients for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Through this procedure, choledocholithiasis and cholelithiasis can be treated in a single procedure without papillotomy or fluoroscopy. Compared with LC + ERCP, LCBDE is associated with a shorter hospital stay. The incidence of complications was rather low but not statistically significant.

Comparative study of three common bile duct closure techniques after choledocholithotomy: safety and efficacy

PURPOSE

T-tube drainage, primary closure, and biliary stenting are the common bile duct closure methods. There is great debate on the optimal duct closure technique after common bile duct exploration. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of the three commonest common bile duct closure methods after common bile duct exploration for common bile duct stone for future generalization.

METHODS

In this analysis, 211 patients with common bile duct stone underwent common bile duct exploration from January 2016 to December 2020. The patients were divided according to common bile duct closure techniques into three groups, including the T-tube drainage group (63 patients), primary duct closure group (61 patients), and antegrade biliary stenting group (87 patients).

RESULTS

The incidence of overall biliary complications and bile leak were statistically significantly lower in the biliary stenting group than in the other two groups. Also, hospital stays, drain carried time, return to normal activity, re-intervention, and re-admission rates were statistically significantly lower in the biliary stenting group than in the other two groups. There were no statistically significant differences regarding operative and choledochotomy time, retained and recurrent stone, stricture, biliary peritonitis, cholangitis, and the cost among the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We state that the biliary stenting procedure should be the preferred first option for common bile duct closure after common bile duct exploration when compared with T-tube drainage and primary duct closure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov PRS (Approval No. NCT04264299).

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.

Comparison of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration with Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Common Bile Duct Stones After Cholecystectomy

Background: Few studies have focused on the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones after cholecystectomy, for which optimal treatment options remain unclear. Aims: To compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for CBD stone treatment after cholecystectomy. Materials and Methods: A total of 201 patients were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study, of whom 134 with ≤3 stones and a maximum stone diameter of <15 mm were classified as subgroup 1, and 67 with >3 stones or a maximum stone diameter of ≥15 mm were classified as subgroup 2. Perioperative characteristics were also analyzed. Results: ERCP subgroup 1 exhibited a shorter operative time (P < .001), postoperative hospital stay (P < .001), and lower incidence of bile leakage (P = .034) than LCBDE subgroup 1. ERCP subgroup 2 exhibited a shorter operative time (P < .001) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < .001) than LCBDE subgroup 2. However, LCBDE subgroup 2 exhibited a greater rate of complete stone removal (P = .044) and a lower incidence of acute pancreatitis (P = .037) than ERCP subgroup 2. Conclusions: For treatment of CBD stones after cholecystectomy, ERCP was superior in cases involving ≤3 stones and a maximum stone diameter of <15 mm. Among those with >3 stones or maximum stone diameter of ≥15 mm, LCBDE demonstrated certain advantages.

Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis

Although the feasibility of T-tube drainage after emergency laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been reported, the safety and effectiveness of primary closure (PC) after LCBDE in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis (AC) remain uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of PC after LCBDE in patients with non-severe AC. Consecutive choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe AC who were treated with a laparoscopic approach at our institution between January 2014 and March 2021 were enrolled. These patients were divided into two groups (PC group and T-tube group) based on the way of closure of the common bile duct. The baseline characteristics and perioperative data between the two groups were compared. A total of 230 patients who underwent LCBDE met the inclusion criteria, and there were 94 patients in the PC group and 126 patients in the T-tube group. Baseline data were balanced between the two groups, except that there was less acute cholecystitis in the PC group than in the T-tube group (P = 0.027). Compared to the T-tube group, the PC group had a shorter operation time (P < 0.001), less estimated blood loss (P < 0.001), less use of electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) (P = 0.001), shorter time of drainage removal (P < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.001) and residual stones (P = 0.029). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion (4.3 vs. 4.4%, P = 1.000), intraoperative transfusion (0.0 vs. 0.7%, P = 1.000), use of basket (71.2 vs. 69.9%, P = 0.816), postoperative bleeding (1.1 vs. 0.7%, P = 1.000), biliary leakage (4.3 vs. 3.7%, P = 1.000), incision infection (1.1 vs. 2.2%, P = 0.649), pneumonia (2.1 vs. 1.4%, P = 1.000), or cholangitis (1.1 vs. 2.9%, P = 0.651). No postoperative mortality occurred in either group. During the follow-up period, no biliary stricture occurred in the two groups, and two patients in the T-tube group were found to have stone recurrence. PC after LCBDE in choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe AC shows superior clinical outcomes to T-tube drainage in terms of the operation time, estimated blood loss, time of drainage removal, postoperative hospital stay, and residual stones. PC is a safe and feasible treatment for choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe AC after LCBDE.

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.

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for the patients with difficult biliary stones: 8 years of experiences at a single institution and literature review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has gained wide popularity for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. However, it remains unclear whether LCBDE is a better alternative option for the patients with difficult biliary stones. Thus, the aim of the present study was to explore the safety and efficacy of LCBDE for these patients by retrospectively analyzing our data and combing with literature review.

METHODS

Between September 2011 and February 2019, 1064 consecutive patients who underwent LCBDE at Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital were reviewed. The clinical data of patients with difficult biliary stones were selected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Of these patients, 334 cases were confirmed with difficult biliary stones, and the overall complete stone clearance rate was 98.8% (330/334). 34 cases (10.2%) were performed with laser lithotripsy. A total of 296 patients (88.6%) underwent primary closure of common bile duct, and T-tube drainage was indwelled in 38 patients (11.4%). No bile duct injury, bleeding, perforation and surgery-related deaths were observed. The overall morbidity rate was 6.6%. 16 cases (4.8%) occurred in bile leakage with primary closure procedure, and all of them were managed successfully with conservative therapy. The median follow-up period was 9 months with stone recurrence occurring in 9 patients (2.7%). There was no evidence of bile duct stricture in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study suggests that LCBED is a considerable safe and effective option for the patients with difficult biliary stones. A randomized clinical trial is needed to further evaluate the benefit of LCBDE in this subgroup.

Medium and long-term complications difference between laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration versus endoscopic sphincterotomy against choledocholithiasis: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct stone (CBDS) is typically manifested with abdominal pain, chills, fever, and jaundice. Laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) are currently the main minimally invasive methods for the treatment of CBDS. However, there are few studies about the differences of medium and long-term complication after EST or LTCBDE. Therefore, we will conduct a meta-analysis and systematic review to systematically evaluate the difference of medium and long-term complications between EST and LTCBDE against CBDS.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials of EST or LTCBDE against CBDS will be searched in several English and Chinese databases with the following vocabularies: "laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration," "endoscopic sphincterotomy," "choledocholithiasis," "common bile duct stone" until December, 2020. Two reviewers will independently conduct the literature extraction, risk of bias assessment, and statistical analysis.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The study will help to systematically evaluate the difference of medium and long-term complication between EST and LTCBDE against CBDS.

OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER

DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/5U7SA.

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.

Can T-tube drainage be replaced by primary suture technique in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is considered the best treatment and has the advantages of being minimally invasive for common bile duct (CBD) stones, the choice of T-tube drainage (TTD) or primary duct closure (PDC) after LCBDE is still controversial. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare the superiority of PDC versus TTD after LCBDE for choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

All potential studies which compare the surgical effects between PDC with TTD were electronically searched for in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library databases up to November 2019. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

In total, six randomized controlled trials with 604 patients (307 in the PDC group and 297 in the TTD group) were included in the current meta-analysis. As compared with the TTD group, the pooled data showed that PDC group had shorter operating time (WMD = -24.30; 95% CI = -27.02 to -21.59; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%; p < 0.88), less medical expenditure (WMD = -2255.73; 95% CI = -3330.59 to -1180.86; p < 0.0001; I² = 96%; p < 0.00001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (OR = -2.88; 95% CI = -3.22 to -2.54; p < 0.00001; I² = 60%; p < 0.03), and lower postoperative complications (OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.78; p = 0.77; I² = 0%; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups concerning bile leakage (OR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36 to 1.53; p = 0.42; I² = 0%; p = 0.90) and retained stones (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.36 to 2.52; p < 0.93; I² = 0%; p < 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE with PDC should be performed as a priority alternative compared with TTD for choledocholithiasis.

Puncture and discission with a needle: A new method for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

This study aimed to describe a novel puncture and discission with a needle (PDN) method facilitating laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE).The clinical data of 81 patients with cholelithiasis or choledocholithiasis who underwent LCBDE with PDN between January, 2017 and December, 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Time for puncture and discission of the bile duct, blood loss, postoperative complications (such as bile leakage, common bile duct [CBD] strictures, and recurrence of choledocholithiasis), and postoperative hospital stay were recorded to evaluate the safety of the method.PDN was performed in all 81 patients with a 100% surgical success rate. Surgery went smoothly. Neither mortality nor complications associated with PDN (portal vein injury or biliary leakage) were observed. The mean time for puncture and discission of the CBD was 2.4 minutes and the maximum blood loss was 100 mL. CBD strictures or recurrence of choledocholithiasis were not noted after 12 to 24 months of follow-up.LCBDE with PDN is a novel method and has the advantages of reliability, convenience, and efficiency without additional costs or complications.

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.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Choledocholithiasis recurrence following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

INTRODUCTION

Choledocholithiasis may be treated following an endoscopic approach or by laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Stone recurrence following endoscopic management has been extensively investigated. We analyze the risk factors associated with stone recurrence following LCBDE.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LCBDE from February 2004 to July 2016 were examined in an univariate and multivariate analysis to assess the association of stone recurrence with the following variables: gender; age; hepatopathy; dyslipidemia, obesity or diabetes mellitus; previous abdominal surgery; presence of cholecystitis, cholangitis or pancreatitis; preoperative liver function tests, number of retrieved stones; method of common bile duct clearance and closure; presence of impacted or intrahepatic stones; conversion to open surgery and postoperative morbidity.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients were included. Recurrence rate for choledocholithiasis was 14.1% with a mean time to recurrence of 38.18 month. Age was the only independent risk factor for stone recurrence at univariate and multivariate analysis. No patient aged under 55 years developed new common bile duct stones, and 86.4% of the recurrences occurred in patients aged above 65.

CONCLUSIONS

Age is the only independent risk factor associated to choledocholithiasis recurrence following LCBDE. Different mechanism in common bile duct stone development may be present for younger and older patients.

Single-stage approach for the management of choledocolithiasis with concomitant cholelithiasis. Implementation of a protocol in a secondary hospital

BACKGROUND

Current evidence shows that single-stage treatment of concomitant choledocholithiasis and cholelithiasis is as effective and safe as two-stage treatment. However, several studies suggest that single-stage approach requires shorter hospitalization time and is more cost-effective than the two-stage approach, even though it requires considerable training. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of a protocol for managing concomitant choledocholithiasis and cholelithiasis using single-stage treatment.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis who were treated with the single-stage treatment - transcystic instrumentation, choledocotomy or intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) - between September 2010 and June 2017 was assessed. The primary outcomes were complications, hospital stay, operative time and recurrence rate.

RESULTS

164 patients were enrolled. 141 (86%) were operated laparoscopically. Preoperatively diagnosed stones were not found by intraoperative imaging or disappeared after "flushing" in 38 patients (23.2%). Surgical approach was transcystic in 45 patients (27.41%), choledochotomy in 74 (45.1%), intraoperative ERCP in 4 (2.4%), and bilioenteric derivation in 3 (1.8%). Mean hospitalization stay was 4.4 days. Mean operative time was 166 min 27 patients (16.5%) had complications and 1 patient was exitus (0.6%). Recurrence rate was 1.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-stage approach is a safe and effective management option for concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocolithiasis. Furthermore, a significant number of common bile duct stones pass spontaneously to duodenum or can benefit from a transcystic approach, with presumable low morbidity and cost-efficiency.

Impact of preoperative management in patients older than 80 years requiring cholecystectomy

Backgrounds/Aims

Elderly patients aged >80 yr have high morbidity and mortality rates after biliary surgery, especially in emergency operations. We conducted this study to determine the effect of preoperative management on the outcome of elderly patients undergoing cholecystectomy.

Methods

The medical records of 452 elderly (≥80 yr old) patients who underwent cholecystectomy from January 1997 to December 2015 were reviewed retrospectively. We divided the patients into 2 groups: intervention (preoperative biliary drainage) and non-intervention groups. We evaluated the effects of preoperative management on the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score and perioperative outcomes.

Results

Among the preoperative biliary drainage intervention group (n=286), 48 patients (51.7%) were diagnosed as having gallbladder stone combined with common bile duct stone. On admission, the proportion of patients with ASA score ≥3 and WBC counts were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the non-intervention group (p<0.05). The preoperative hospital stay was longer in the intervention group; however, operation-related factors such as operation type, time, conversion rate, complications, and mortality showed no difference between groups.

Conclusions

With proper preoperative evaluations and preoperative biliary drainage, cholecystectomy can be a safe treatment option for elderly patients with cholelithiasis.

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.

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.

Recurrent common bile duct stones as a late complication of endoscopic sphincterotomy

Background

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) has become well established as a modality for the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS), especially in the setting of associated cholangitis. Our study aims to determine the rate of long term morbidity of recurrent CBDS post ES.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent ERCP and ES (ERCP+ES) was undertaken on a prospectively maintained database from 1998 to 2012 at the Northern Hospital, Melbourne. Primary CBDS were defined as those detected at least 6 months after complete clearance of the CBD. Prior cholecystectomy was a requirement for inclusion and patients with primary CBD stones in the setting of an intact sphincter were excluded.

Results

A total of 1148 patients underwent ERCP, of which 573 had an ES. Fifty-one patients underwent an ES prior to developing primary CBDS (8.9%). The time to recurrence ranged from 6 months to 15 years (mean 3.3 years). The number of procedures per patient ranged from 2 to 11, with 51% requiring 3 or more ERCPs. Factors associated with primary CBDS recurrence included a dilated CBD > 12 mm, stricture of the major papilla post ES to 2 - 5 mm and presence of the ampulla within or on the edge of a duodenal diverticulum.

Conclusion

The results demonstrate that ERCP + ES has an inherent long-term complication of recurrent primary CBDS formation. While this can be managed with repeat ERCP, the advent of laparoscopic bile duct exploration should lead us to re-examine the role of ERCP + ES in younger patients.

Inpatient Choledocholithiasis Requiring ERCP and Cholecystectomy: Outcomes of a Combined Single Inpatient Procedure Versus Separate-Session Procedures

OBJECTIVES

Separate-session endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the usual method for management of inpatient choledocholithiasis. Our goal was to compare single operative-session LC and ERCP to a multi-session approach for both the same hospitalization and within 30 days after; there is limited data comparing the three groups.

METHODS

A retrospective review on inpatients with choledocholithiasis that underwent ERCP and LC was performed. Single operative-session ERCP + LC (SOS group) and separate hospitalization ERCP + LC (DH group) were compared against the control cohort: separate-session ERCP + LC performed during the same hospitalization (SH group).

RESULTS

Among the 214 cases, 37 (17%) had LC + ERCP performed under a single operative session (SOS), 130 (60.7%) cases had LC + ERCP performed in separate operative sessions during the same hospitalization (SH), and 47 (22%) cases had LC + ERCP performed in different hospitalizations, within 30 days (DH). There was no statistically significant difference in efficacy or adverse events. The SOS group had a statistically significant mean shorter length of hospital stay as compared to the SH and DH groups (5.46 vs 7.15 vs 9.38; p = 0.05 and 0.02). There was a statistically significant reduction in the total cost of care in the SOS group versus the SH group ($59,221 vs $75, 808; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

The SOS approach is safe, efficacious, and cost-efficient when compared to separate operative sessions. This approach can be considered in situations where it is preferable for the patient to undergo a single session of anesthesia, without compromising technical success and safety.

Strategies of minimally invasive treatment for intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones

Cholelithiasis is a kind of common and multiple diseases. In recent years, traditional laparotomy has been challenged by a minimally invasive surgery. Through literature review, the therapeutic method, effect, and complications of minimally invasive treatment of intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones by combining our practical experience were summarized as follows. (1) For intrahepatic bile duct stones, the operation may be selected by laparoscopic liver resection, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), or percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy. (2) For concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones, the surgical approach can be selected as follows: laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) or endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation, LC plus laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration, LC plus LCBDE, and T-tube drainage or primary suture. (3) For concomitant intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones, laparoscopic liver resection, choledochoscopy through the hepatic duct orifice on the hepatectomy cross section, LCBDE, EST, and percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy could be used. According to the abovementioned principle, the minimally invasive treatment approach combined with the surgical technique and equipment condition will be significant in improving the therapeutic effect and avoiding the postoperative complications or hidden dangers of intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus laparoscopic exploration for common bile duct stones in post-cholecystectomy patients: a retrospective study

Background and Objective

Common bile duct (CBD) stones are common in patients even after cholecystectomy. Besides endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP), laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is also applied. This study aims to compare clinical indications, therapeutic benefits and complications for these two managements.

Methods

From October 2012 to February 2015, 1072 consecutive patients were diagnosed as choledocholithiasis in our single hospital. Post-cholecystectomy patients who underwent ERCP or LCBDE were included. Clinical data were analyzed, such as success rate, complications, procedure duration, postoperative hospital stay, total cost and recurrence of ductal stones. Prior ERCP, previous biliary anatomic alteration surgeries and lost to follow up were the excluding criteria.

Results

141 patients were included according to the criteria, and 87 cases underwent ERCP and 54 cases underwent LCBDE. Age and sex distribution of patients were comparable between the two groups. The success rate for CBD stones clearance was 97.7% in the ERCP group, compared with 87.0% in the LCBDE group (p=0.03). The mean procedure duration was also significantly shorter in ERCP group (52.0±15.8 vs. 102.9±40.1 min; p<0.001). Postoperative hospital stay was similar (5.5±2.6 vs. 5.9±2.3 days; p=0.40). And no significant difference for postoperative complications (3.4% vs. 11.1%; p=0.15), total cost ($3787.1±1061.5 vs. $3983.54±1257.1, p=0.32), and the rate of bile duct stones recurrence (6.9% vs. 7.4%, p=1.00).

Conclusions

For clearing CBD stones in patients after cholecystectomy, ERCP was more efficient and might be the first choice, while LCBDE might be beneficial for patients with large stones.

Comparative Study of Three Bile Duct Closure Methods Following Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

There are three choledochotomy closure methods available following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: T-tube insertion, antegrade stenting, and primary choledochorrhaphy. We reviewed the experience of 12 years at our center searching for the optimal closure technique.

METHODS

We analyzed retrospectively 146 patients that underwent one of the three closure methods from February 2004 to March 2016. Hospital stay, need for readmission, incidence of early and long-term complications, and biliary leakage development and their clinical impact were determined for each technique.

RESULTS

Hospital stay was more prolonged, and need for readmission was higher in the T-tube group. Nine patients of the T-tube group (17.3%), 5 patients (8.6%) of the antegrade stenting group, and 1 patient of the primary suture group (2.8%) developed Dindo-Clavien ≥3 complications (P = .076). The incidence of biliary leakage was 3.8%, 8.6%, and 16.7% for the T-tube group, antegrade stenting group, and primary suture group, respectively. There was no grade C biliary fistula in the primary suture group, and all grade B leaks in these patients were only due to prolonged duration. The T-tube removal caused adverse events in 21.1% of the patients, and complications directly related with stents occurred in 9.6%.

CONCLUSION

Antegrade stents or T-tube insertion do not provide any added value for choledochotomy closure but are charged with specific morbidity. On the contrary, despite biliary leaks being more frequent after primary suture, they are of little clinical consequence and may be managed on an outpatient basis.

Retrospective Clinical Study of the Effects of T-Tube Placement for Bile Duct Stricture

Background

T-tube placement in the common bile duct (CBD) is a surgical alternative to bile duct reconstruction in cholecystectomy for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis, or gallstones. The aim of this retrospective clinical study was to investigate the incidence of late complications of T-tube placement.

Material/Methods

Retrospective review identified 35 patients who had T-tube placement during cholecystectomy. Clinical data were collected on surgical indications, patient demographics, and clinical symptoms. Ultrasound (US) was used measure the diameter of the common bile duct (CBD), intrahepatic ducts, and presence or absence of stones in the CBD. Data from laboratory investigations included the aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index (APRI), which was used as a non-invasive method to evaluate both cholestasis and liver fibrosis.

Results

Of the 35 patients included in the study, 33 (94.3%) underwent open cholecystectomy, CBD exploration, and T-tube placement due to cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. The remaining two patients (5.7%) underwent primary CBD repair and T-tube placement secondary to CBD injury. The mean follow-up period after T-tube placement was 69 months. In patients with T-tube placement, the CBD diameters ranged from 4–21 mm, were normal in 20 patients (57.1%), dilated in 15 patients (42.9%), with the mean CBD diameter being 8.91±4.82 mm. No residual or recurrent CBD calculus and no clinical or laboratory evidence of cholangitis or cholestasis were found.

Conclusions

A retrospective clinical study at a single surgical center, showed that T-tube placement during open cholecystectomy and CBD exploration was a safe procedure that did not result in late complications.

Appropriate Patient Selection Is Essential for the Success of Primary Closure After Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is being increasingly used for management of common bile duct (CBD) stones. Primary CBD closure has been reported to have better short-term outcomes compared to T-tube placement. However, primary CBD closure cannot be performed in all patients.

AIM

This study aims to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of LCBDE with primary CBD closure in appropriately selected patients and compare them with T-tube drainage.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing LCBDE in our department from June 2011 to October 2014 was performed. Primary closure was performed in 52 patients (group A), and a T-tube was placed in 33 patients (group B). Patient demographics, intraoperative findings, postoperative stay, complications, and long-term follow-up data were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

The mean operating time was much longer in group A compared to group B (113.92 vs. 95.92 min, p = 0.032). The overall complication rate (9.6 vs. 6.3%, p = 0.701) and hospital stay (4 vs. 5.11 days, p = 0.088) were similar in both groups. No patient required conversion to the open procedure. Bile leakage was more frequent in group A (5.78 vs. 0%, p = 0.279), but this was not statistically significant. All three patients with bile leakage were treated successfully by conservative measures and gradual drain withdrawal. On long-term follow-up, recurrent stones were detected in two patients in group A. No patient was found to develop CBD stricture.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE and primary CBD closure has excellent short- and long-term outcomes when performed in appropriately selected patients.

Five hundred consecutive laparoscopic common bile duct explorations: 5-year experience at a single institution

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has gained wide popularity in the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Bile leakage remains a major cause of postoperative morbidity. The aim of this study was to report 5-year results of 500 LCBDEs and identify risk factors associated with bile leakage.

METHODS

Five hundred consecutive LCBDEs performed in one institution from September 2011 to June 2016 were reviewed. Patients' clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Univariable and multivariable analysis of bile leakage was performed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

We found stones (n = 388) or bile sludge (n = 71) in 459 patients (92%) on exploration, leaving 41 patients (8%) without stones. Operative time was 128 min in the first 250 LCBDEs, and this decreased to 103 min in the second 250 LCBDEs (P = 0.0004). Four hundred and eight (82%) procedures were completed with primary closure after choledochotomy; the rate of primary closure increased significantly in the second 250 patients compared with the first (88 vs 76%; P = 0.0005), whereas T-tube placement (2 vs 6%; P = 0.0225) and transcystic approach (7 vs 12%; P = 0.0464) decreased, respectively. Stone clearance was successful in 495 patients (99%). Overall morbidity was 5%, and bile leakage occurred in 17 patients (3.4%). Two patients died from bile leakage. The median follow-up was 24 months with stone recurrence occurred in two patients and bile duct stricture in one patient. Univariable analysis identified diameter of the common bile duct (CBD), stone clearance, and T-tube insertion as risk factors related to bile leakage. Multivariable analysis taking these three factors into account identified non-dilated CBD (risk ratio (RR) = 9.87; P = 0.007) and failure in stone clearance (RR = 11.88; P = 0.024) as significant risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Bile leakage following LCBDE is associated with diameter of the CBD and stone clearance. LCBDE would be safer in proficient laparoscopic surgeons with a careful selection of patients.

Ultrathin choledochoscope improves outcomes in the treatment of gallstones and suspected choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and simultaneous laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) using an ultrathin choledochoscope with LC followed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERC) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) when indicated.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients seen between 2004 and 2014 and treated with LC+LTCBDE or LC for gallstones and suspected choledocholithiasis. Postoperative complications and surgical outcomes were compared using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, or chi-square test.

RESULTS

115 patients underwent successful LC+LTCBDE and 112 LC; follow-up data was available for 103 and 106 patients, respectively. Seventeen patients (16.5%) in the LC+LTCBDE group and 10 (28.6%) in the LC+ERC+ES group developed complications (P = 0.114). The LC+LTCBDE group had a significantly higher rate of satisfactory biliary function outcomes than the LC+ERC+ES group (98.1% vs. 85.7%, respectively) (P = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-step LC+LTCBDE using an ultrathin choledochoscope may provide better outcomes in patients with gallstones and suspected choledocholithiasis.

Post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: Risk factors and predictors of severity

AIM

To detect risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and investigate the predictors of its severity.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study of all patients who underwent ERCP. Pre-ERCP data, intraoperative data, and post-ERCP data were collected.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 996 patients. Their mean age at presentation was 58.42 (± 14.72) years, and there were 454 male and 442 female patients. Overall, PEP occurred in 102 (10.2%) patients of the study population; eighty (78.4%) cases were of mild to moderate degree, while severe pancreatitis occurred in 22 (21.6%) patients. No hospital mortality was reported for any of PEP patients during the study duration. Age less than 35 years (P = 0.001, OR = 0.035), narrower common bile duct (CBD) diameter (P = 0.0001) and increased number of pancreatic cannulations (P = 0.0001) were independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP.

CONCLUSION

PEP is the most frequent and devastating complication after ERCP. Age less than 35 years, narrower median CBD diameter and increased number of pancreatic cannulations are independent risk factors for the occurrence of PEP. Patients with these risk factors are candidates for prophylactic and preventive measures against PEP.