Surgery for common bile duct stones--a lost surgical skill; still worthwhile in the minimally invasive century? Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2015;400:119-127. [PMID: 25366358 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-014-1254-y]

The "Basket-in-Catheter" technique: facilitating transcystic bile duct exploration and optimising the management of suspected ductal stones

The 'Basket-in-Catheter' (BIC) technique facilitates basket-only laparoscopic transcystic exploration (LTCE), increasing its success rate. Using the cholangiography catheter as a sheath is easier and safer than inserting the wire basket-alone. This study evaluates its benefits in confirmed and suspected ductal stones. Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients with pre-operative or operative suspicion of bile duct stones or with positive and equivocal intraoperative cholangiographies (IOC) who had LTCE attempted using blind basket trawling, without choledochoscopy, were reviewed. The incidence and outcomes of blind basket LTCEs attempted before and after introducing the BIC technique, whether or not stones were retrieved, were analysed. Blind basket LTCE was attempted in 732 patients. Of 377 (51.5%) patients undergoing successful stone retrieval, only 62% had pre-operative clinical and radiological risk factors for ductal stones, 25% had operative risk factors and 13% had silent stones discovered on IOC. Another 355 patients (48.5%) had negative trawling, although one half had pre-operative risk factors for ductal stones and 47.6% had operative risk factors, e.g. cystic duct stones or dilatation. This cohort had equivocal cholangiography in 25.9%. Following basket trawling, repeat IOC confirmed resolution of abnormalities. As no stones were retrieved, these were not considered duct explorations. The BIC technique facilitates safe and speedy bile duct clearance when stones are confirmed, avoiding choledochotomies, without significant complications. BIC duct trawling is also beneficial in patients with suspected ductal stones, helping to resolve equivocal IOCs. It helps surgeons to acquire and consolidate ductal exploration skills.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

REGISTRATION NUMBER AND AGENCY

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

Incidence and management of choledocholithiasis on routine intraoperative cholangiogram: a 5-year tertiary centre experience

BACKGROUND

The incidence of choledocholithiasis on routine intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) during cholecystectomy is approximately 12%. Cholecystectomy without IOC may lead to undiagnosed choledocholithiasis placing patients at risk of complications such as pancreatitis or cholangitis. This study aims to determine the incidence of choledocholithiasis intraoperatively as well as the associated risk factors and the methods of management.

METHODS

A retrospective observational analysis of all laparoscopic cholecystectomies with IOC at the Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service from 1 January 2016 to 2 December 2021 was carried out. Patient demographics, operative data and cholangiogram findings were collected from electronic medical systems.

RESULTS

A total of 3904 cholecystectomies were carried out over the study period. 3520 (90.1%) had an IOC, and 474 (13.4%) had positive IOC findings. 158 (33.3%) of the cases were managed intraoperatively with hyoscine butylbromide with or without intravenous glucagon followed by biliary tree flushing alone, 183 (38.6%) received transcystic bile duct exploration (TCBDE) with a success rate of 83% and 167 (35.2%) received endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Choledocholithiasis was incidental in 44 (9.28%) patients.

CONCLUSION

Incidental choledocholithiasis during routine IOC is not uncommon. Management predominantly includes intraoperative TCBDE or postoperatively via an ERCP. This study has not found reliable preoperative factors to predict choledocholithiasis based on preoperative clinical, radiological and biochemical factors. A small proportion of patients received preoperative endoscopic intervention, and the decision-making process requires further investigation.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Comparison of intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treating gallstones and common bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (LC-IntraERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC-LCBDE) to determine which one-stage therapeutic strategy provides better outcomes for patients with gallstones and common bile duct stones.

METHODS

Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched to identify eligible articles from the database inception to September 2020. The revised Cochrane risk of bias tools for randomized trials (RoB-2) and non-randomized interventions (ROBINS-I) was used to assess the quality of the included studies. The overall quality of evidence was assessed through the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. The primary outcomes consisted of surgical success, retained stones, and overall postoperative complications, while secondary outcomes included postoperative bleeding, postoperative pancreatitis, postoperative bile leakage, conversion to laparotomy, and operative time.

RESULTS

Eight studies (four RCTs and four Non-RCTs with high quality) with 2948 patients were included. No significant difference was seen between the two groups regarding surgical success, overall postoperative complications, conversion to laparotomy, and operative time. The meta-analysis demonstrated that in the LC-IntraERCP group, the rate of retained stones (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.28-0.91) and postoperative bile leakage were lower (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09-0.69), while in the LC-LCBDE group, postoperative bleeding (OR 5.24, 95% CI 1.65-16.65) and postoperative pancreatitis (OR 4.80, 95% CI 2.35-9.78) decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

LC-IntraERCP and LC-LCBDE exhibited similar efficacies when surgical success rate, overall postoperative complications, conversion to laparotomy, and operative time were compared. However, LC-IntraERCP is probably to be more effective in terms of lowering the rate of retained stones.

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

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

Simultaneous surgical treatment tactics of acute destructive cholecystitis combined with choledocholithiasis: A case report

•

Acute destructive cholecystitis complicated by choledocholithiasis in elderly patients.

•

A one-stage operation in acute cholecystitis when complicated by choledocholithiasis.

•

Performance of LCE after ERCP with EPST in acute cholecystitis when complicated by choledocholithiasis.

Introduction

The widespread development of minimally invasive treatment methods have expanded the choices and options available to surgeons to manage patients suffering from cholelithiasis and its complications, including choledocholithiasis. As new surgical strategies are developed and become widely available, there is an ongoing debate as to which surgical strategies are optimal for the management of acute cholecystitis and concomitant choledocholithiasis. The treatment of patients in this category should be carried out according to clear criteria, taking into consideration the patient's condition, concomitant diseases, the size of calculi in the common bile duct as well as the resources of the medical institution.

Case presentation

We present the clinical case of a 65-year-old female with cholelithiasis, acute gangrenous cholecystitis, choledocholithiasis, and obstructive jaundice. She was treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic papillosphincterotomy (EPST) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCE) in a one-stage operation.

Discussion

Several sources recommended performing LCE after ERCP with EPST in acute cholecystitis when complicated by choledocholithiasis to reduce the conversion rate and the risk of recholedocholithiasis.

Conclusion

Simultaneous resolution of acute destructive cholecystitis complicated by choledocholithiasis in a one-stage operation is accompanied by a decrease in emotional and psychological trauma, also leads to early rehabilitation of patients and, thereby, reduces overall postoperative disability and morbidity.

Laparoscopic Transcystic Versus Transductal Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic transcystic (TC) and transductal (TD) common bile duct (CBD) exploration.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN Register, and bibliographic reference lists. CBD clearance rate, perioperative complications, and biliary complications were defined as the primary outcome parameters. Procedure time, length of hospital stay, conversion to open procedure were the secondary outcomes. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

We identified 30 studies reporting a total of 4073 patients comparing outcomes of laparoscopic TC (n = 2176) and TD (N = 1897) CBD exploration. The TC approach was associated with significantly lower overall complications (RD: -0.07, P = 0.001), biliary complications (RD: -0.05, P = 0.0003), and blood loss (MD: -16.20, P = 0.02) compared to TD approach. Moreover, the TC approach significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD: -2.62, P < 0.00001) and procedure time (MD: -12.73, P = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference in rate of CBD clearance (RD: 0.00, P = 0.77) and conversion to open procedure (RD: 0.00, P = 0.86) between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic TC CBD exploration is safe and reduces overall morbidity and biliary complications compared to the TD approach. Moreover, it is associated with significantly shorter length of hospital stay and procedure time. High-quality randomised trials may provide stronger evidence with respect to impact of the cystic duct/CBD diameter, number or size of CBD stones, or cystic duct anatomy on the comparative outcomes of TC and TD approaches.

Surgery in biliary lithiasis: from the traditional "open" approach to laparoscopy and the "rendezvous" technique

BACKGROUND

According to the current literature, biliary lithiasis is a worldwide-diffused condition that affects almost 20% of the general population. The rate of common bile duct stones (CBDS) in patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis is estimated to be 10% to 33%, depending on patient's age. Compared to stones in the gallbladder, the natural history of secondary CBDS is still not completely understood. It is not clear whether an asymptomatic choledocholithiasis requires treatment or not. For many years, open cholecystectomy with choledochotomy and/or surgical sphincterotomy and cleaning of the bile duct were the gold standard to treat both pathologies. Development of both endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic surgery, together with improvements in diagnostic procedures, influenced new approaches to the management of CBDS in association with gallstones.

DATA SOURCES

We decided to systematically review the literature in order to identify all the current therapeutic options for CBDS. A systematic literature search was performed independently by two authors using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central.

RESULTS

The therapeutic approach nowadays varies greatly according to the availability of experience and expertise in each center, and includes open or laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, various combinations of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and ERCP and combined laparoendoscopic rendezvous.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy is currently preferred in the majority of hospitals worldwide, the optimal treatment for concomitant gallstones and CBDS is still under debate, and greatly varies among different centers.

Laparoendoscopic Rendezvous for Concomitant Cholecystocholedocholithiasis: A Successful Modality Even in the Most Difficult Presentations Including Pregnancy

Background. Laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV) technique is emerging as an attractive treatment option for concomitant cholecystocholedocholithiasis. In this paper, we report our experience in performing the LERV technique in patients with unusual presentations in terms of anatomical difficulty, pregnancy, multiple comorbid diseases, and postlaparotomy. We aim to highlight the effectiveness of the LERV technique in some clinical situations where conventional methods would fail or carry high risks in adequately managing concomitant cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Methods. Four patients diagnosed to have concomitant cholecystocholedocholithiasis with associated difficult presentation or comorbid diseases were treated using the LERV technique. One patient presented with difficult anatomy where ERCP failed at initial attempts. Another patient was pregnant (first trimester). A third patient had complex comorbid diseases (bronchial asthma, hypertension, congestive heart failure, and end-stage renal disease on regular hemodialysis). A fourth patient had previous laparotomy and sigmoidectomy for diverticular disease and had severe hospital phobia. Results. All patients tolerated the LERV technique very well; no intraoperative occurrence was reported. The mean operative time was 86.3 ± 17.2 minutes; mean time of the endoscopic part was 29.4 ± 3.57 minutes. The mean blood loss was 44.3 ± 18.2 mL (range 20–85). Residual stone, postoperative complications, postoperative morbidity, and postoperative mortality were 0 (0%). Postoperative short hospital stay was reported in all patients, average 3 days (range 2–4). Conclusion. LERV procedure is a safe and effective treatment option for the management of concomitant cholecystocholedocholithiasis, even in difficult situations where other methods would fail or carry high risks, or in patients presenting with severe comorbid diseases or pregnancy. This procedure may emerge as an attractive alternative option for high-risk patients. A patient's wishes may also influence the selection of this procedure. More scientific studies recruiting more patients should be done in order to standardize the LERV procedure.

A survey of European-African surgeons' management of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones can be managed by either endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). The aim of this survey was to document the management of CBD stones by European-African HPB Association (E-AHPBA) members.

METHODS

All 331 members of the E-AHPBA were invited by personal email to participate to an online survey.

RESULTS

Ninety-three (28%) surgeons replied within 2 months. Responding surgeons were attending surgeons (84%), working as HPB surgeons (75%) in academic hospitals (73%). In patients with clinically suspected CBD stones, MRCP was the preferred diagnostic test for 61% of respondents. LCBDE was the preferred therapeutic strategy for 11 (12%) respondents only. Previous gastric surgery was an absolute contraindication to ERCP for 47% of respondents. Absence of CBD dilation was considered an absolute contraindication for LCBDE in 24% of respondents. Yearly caseload exceeded 10 patients for only 30% of 56 centers performing LCBDE. The transcystic approach was preferred by 39% of surgeons performing LCBDE. There was considerable variation amongst respondents with regard to type and duration of drainage, bile duct closure technique and follow-up after LCBDE.

CONCLUSION

Indications for single-stage LCBDE are not standardized and do not appear well established across E-AHPBA members.

Single-session laparoscopic cholecystectomy and ERCP: a valid option for the management of choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The option for performing ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for the management of choledocholithiasis in the same operative session is often overlooked. We compared the success, safety, and cost of ERCP and LC when performed in either a single session or in separate sessions.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a U.S. tertiary care hospital. We identified patients undergoing ERCP and LC between April 2011 and August 2014 in either a single operative session (n = 33) or in 2 separate sessions within a 30-day period (n = 80). Technical success, total anesthesia duration, operative time, length of hospitalization, cost of care, and morbidity and mortality were evaluated.

RESULTS

Bile duct clearance was achieved in all patients at ERCP in the same-session cohort. The separate versus single-session groups, respectively, did not differ in terms of total procedure times (mean ± SD = 142 ± 64 vs 142 ± 58 min; t test, P =.98), anesthesia duration (251 ± 64 vs 225 ± 69 min; P =.06), or overall cost (49.3 ± 24.5 vs 42.3 ± 23.2 ×1000 USD; P =.167), but hospitalization was longer in the separate-sessions group (6.2 ± 3.3 vs 4.8 ± 2.6 days; P =.03). The rates of adverse events were similarly low (7% vs 2%, P =.70).

CONCLUSIONS

Performing single-session ERCP and LC is safe, effective, economically viable, and reduces hospital stay compared with performing ERCP and LC during separate sessions.

Intraoperative ERCP for management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The Surgical Management of Concomitant Gallbladder and Common Bile Duct Stones

Background. The management of choledocholithiasis has evolved from open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) to therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Each entails a degree of difficulty. Aim. To review 5-year results of bile duct exploration in an UGI unit. Methods. Common bile duct explorations (CBDEs) performed between January 2008 and January 2013 were identified from a prospectively collected clinical audit system and results reviewed retrospectively. Results. 216 CBDEs were performed, 119 (55%) as an emergency and 52 (24%) following failed ERCP. Open CBDE (OCBDE) was performed primarily in 34/216 (16%) patients and attempted laparoscopically in 182 (84%). Fifty nine (32%) Laparoscopic CBDEs (LCBDEs) were converted to OCBDE. Of the remaining 123 LCBDEs, 51 (41%) primary choledochotomies and 72 (59%) primary transcystic CBDEs (TC-CBDEs) were performed. Forty nine (68%) TC-CBDEs were considered successful and 23 (32%) failed. Fifteen failed TC-CBDEs were converted to a successful laparoscopic choledochotomy. Ductal clearance was achieved in 187/216 (87%) patients and retained stones were identified in 20/123 (16%) LCBDEs. Complications occurred in 52/216 (24%) patients. There were 8/216 (4%) bile leaks requiring further intervention. Postoperative ERCP was carried out in 32/216 (15%) patients and 9/216 (4%) required relaparoscopy/laparotomy. No patient died. Conclusions. Successful management of choledocholithiasis requires a breadth of laparoscopic and endoscopic expertise.