Hospital cost categories of one-stage versus two-stage management of common bile duct stones

Moving the needle for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: defining obstacles for the path forward

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is performed very commonly but laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is performed infrequently. We aimed to determine the most significant barriers to performing LCBDE and to identify the highest yield interventions to facilitate adoption.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

A national survey was designed by content experts, who regularly perform LCBDE. The survey was distributed by email to the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma memberships. Non-U.S. surgeon responses were excluded. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the results.

RESULTS

Seven hundred twenty six practicing surgeons responded to the survey, 543 of which were US surgeons who perform laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Only 27% of respondents preferred to manage choledocholithiasis with LCBDE. Their technique of choice was choledochoscopy (70%). Despite this, 36% of surgeons did not have access to a choledochoscope or were unsure if they did. Seventy percent of surgeons who performed LCBDE did not have supplies readily available in a central stocking location. Only 8.5% of surgeons agreed that routine LCBDE would impact their referral relationship with gastroenterology. About half the respondents (47%) considered LCBDE worth the time, but only 25% knew about reimbursement for the procedure. Almost all (85%) of surgeons understood that LCBDE results in shorter length of stay compared to ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a quarter of the surgeons performing cholecystectomy perform LCBDE. Multiple barriers contribute to low LCBDE utilization. Increasing availability of appropriate equipment, a dedicated supply cart, and teaching fluoroscopic LCBDE interventions may address limitations and increase adoption. These efforts may also increase efficiency, minimizing perceived time and skill restraints. Although many surgeons understand LCBDE decreases length of stay, they are unaware of surgeon-specific LCBDE financial benefits. Systematically addressing these barriers may increase LCBDE adoption, improve patient care, and decrease healthcare costs.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is an effective, safe, and less-costly method of treating choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Advancements in laparoscopic techniques led to the adoption of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) as an alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for management of choledocholithiasis (CD). The goal of this study was to describe the initial experience at a safety net hospital with acute care surgeons performing LCBDE for suspected CD. We hypothesized LCBDE would reduce length of stay and hospital costs compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and ERCP performed in the same hospital admission.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case-control study from 2019 to 2023 comparing LCBDE to LC/ERCP among patients diagnosed with CD. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables and Chi-square tests for categorical variables. Data reported as median [interquartile range] or research subjects with condition (percentage).

RESULTS

A total of 110 LCBDE were performed, while 121 subjects underwent LC and ERCP. Patients in the LCBDE group were more likely to be female with a total of 87 female subjects (77.6%) compared to 76 male subjects (62.8%) (95% CI 1.14-3.74). Initial WBC was lower in the LCBDE group at 8.4 [6.9-11.8] compared to the LC/ERCP group at 10.9 [7.9-13.5] (p = 0.0013). Remaining demographics and lab values were similar between the two groups. Patients who underwent LCBDE had a significantly shorter length of stay at 2 days [1-3] compared to those in the LC/ERCP group at 4 days [3-6] (p < 0.001). Hospital charges for the LCBDE group were $46,685 [$38,687-$56,703] compared to $60,537 [$47,527-$71,739] for the LC/ERCP group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is associated with significantly lower hospital costs and shorter length of stay with similar post-operative complication and 30-day readmission rates. Our results show that LCBDE is safe and should be considered as a first-line approach in the management of CD.

A Novel Taxonomy of Intraoperative Cholangiograms in Suspected Choledocholithiasis: A Tool for Advancing Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Outcomes Research

BACKGROUND

Cholangiography for visualization of the biliary tree during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is an important diagnostic roadmap in the context of suspected choledocholithiasis (CDL). The renewed interest in transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) necessitates a general description of the range of CDL presentations. Our aim was to establish a novel classification system of intraoperative cholangiograms (IOCs) to advance research efforts in this field.

METHODS

A novel cholangiogram classification system, featuring 8 distinct presentations of choledocholithiasis, was applied to a data set of 80 preintervention IOCs for suspected choledocholithiasis. The classification system is as follows: A (no common bile duct stones, duodenal filling present, and concern for air bubbles), B (no common bile duct stones, no duodenal filling, and concern for sludge), C1 (stone(s) < 2x size of cystic duct with duodenal filling), C2 (stone(s) < 2x size of cystic duct without duodenal filling), D1 (stone(s) ≥ 2x size of cystic duct with duodenal filling), D2 (stone(s) ≥ 2x size of cystic duct without duodenal filling), E1 (congenital anatomical variant and/or common duct stricture), and E2 (surgically altered biliary anatomy).

RESULTS

Cholangiogram review yielded preintervention classifications for 6 of 8 variants (A-E): A (7.5%), B (3.75%), C1 (23.75%), C2 (42.5%), D1 (15%), and D2 (7.5%). Analysis of cystic duct diameter yielded no significant differences among classification groups, indicating no predominant pattern of cystic duct anatomy within a given classification.

DISCUSSION

An IOC classification system for suspected choledocholithiasis is foundational to answering key clinical questions for transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

Novel technique for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration using flexible videobronchoscope to study on clinical outcomes of single-stage (laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration) versus dual-stage (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy) for cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis - Prospective study in a tertiary care centre (BRACE study - BRonchoscope Assisted Common bile duct Exploration Study)

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to study on clinical outcomes of single-stage (laparoscopic cholecystectomy [LC] and laparoscopic common bile duct [CBD] exploration using flexible videobronchoscope) versus dual-stage (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy) for cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis-prospective study in a tertiary care centre (BRACE STUDY-Bronchoscope-Assisted CBD Exploration [CBDE] Study).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between April 2022 and April 2023, patients who underwent LC with laparoscopic CBDE and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by LC participated in this single-centre prospective research. The Institute Ethics Committee granted its approval after receiving an ethical review. The primary endpoint of the proposed research was the removal of the gall bladder and CBD stones. The secondary outcomes studied were complications using the Clavien-Dindo score, cost-effectiveness, patient satisfaction score and post-procedure duration of hospital stay.

RESULTS

A total of 168 patients were included in the study. The success rate of LC with laparoscopic CBD exploration using a flexible videobronchoscope (Group 1) was significantly higher as compared to ERCP f/b LC (Group 2) (96.4% vs. 84.5%, P value = 0.02). Out of the 84 patients in Group 1, direct choledochotomies were performed on 83 of them. Group 1 had a considerably shorter hospital stay (4.6 ± 2.4 vs. 5.3 ± 6.2 days; P = 0.03). Both the cost ( P = 0.002) and the number of procedures per patient ( P < 0.001) were considerably higher in Group 2. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade 3 and above) were significantly higher in Group 2 ( P = 0.04). Patient satisfaction in Group 1 scored more favourably than those in Group 2 (2.26 ± 0.3 vs. 1.92 ± 0.7; P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

For concurrent gall bladder and CBD stones, single-stage management by LCBDE using a flexible videobronchoscope has a significantly better primary outcome and lower major complications than dual-stage management. The single-stage strategy also has advantages in terms of a shorter hospital stay, the need for fewer procedures, cost efficiency and patient satisfaction.

ERCP findings provide further justification for a "surgery-first" mindset in choledocholithiasis

INTRODUCTION

Choledocholithiasis is most often managed in a two-procedure pathway including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In contrast, a single-stage, surgery-first approach consisting of LC, cholangiogram, and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is associated with reduced hospital stays and equivalent morbidity. Despite this, nationwide referral patterns heavily favor ERCP, obscuring those undergoing ERCP with obstructions amenable to simple intraoperative interventions. We hypothesized that most patients had endoscopic findings consistent with simple sludge or small-to-medium stones, which could have been cleared by basic LCBDE maneuvers.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 294 patients > 18 years old who underwent preoperative ERCP for the management of suspected choledocholithiasis. Exclusion criteria included: failed ERCP, cholangitis, prior cholecystectomy, patient refusal of surgery, or medical conditions precluding surgical candidacy. Stone size was categorized as small (0-4 mm), medium (5-7 mm), and large (≥ 8 mm).

RESULTS

At the time of ERCP, 37 (20.1%) patients had sludge only, 96 (52.2%) had stones only, 42 (22.8%) had sludge and stones, and 9 (4.8%) had no stones. Of the 138 patients with any stones, 37 (26.8%) had small stones, 41 (29.7%) medium, 43 (31.2%) large, and 17 (12.3%) had uncharacterizable stones. Overall, 74.3% of patients had findings of sludge, stones (0-7 mm), or negative ERCP.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients who underwent preoperative ERCP for suspected choledocholithiasis had findings that are amenable to simple intraoperative interventions. In fact, over a quarter of the patients had a negative ERCP, sludge, or small stones which would likely be cleared by flushing/glucagon precluding any further instrumentation. While large stones may require more advanced techniques, this represents a small percentage of patients. Surgery-first management for suspected choledocholithiasis can offer an efficient alternative for the majority of patients.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis 2021

The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology first published evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis in 2010, followed by a revision in 2016. Currently, the revised third edition was published to reflect recent evidence on the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of cholelithiasis conforming to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Following this revision, the present English version of the guidelines was updated and published herein. The clinical questions (CQ) in the previous version were reviewed and rearranged into three newly divided categories: background questions (BQ) dealing with basic background knowledge, CQ, and future research questions (FRQ), which refer to issues that require further accumulation of evidence. Finally, 52 questions (29 BQs, 19 CQs, and 4 FRQs) were adopted to cover the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, complications, and prognosis. Based on a literature search using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases for the period between 1983 and August 2019, along with a manual search of new information reported over the past 5 years, the level of evidence was evaluated for each CQ. The strengths of recommendations were determined using the Delphi method by the committee members considering the body of evidence, including benefits and harms, patient preference, and cost-benefit balance. A comprehensive flowchart was prepared for the diagnosis and treatment of gallbladder stones, common bile duct stones, and intrahepatic stones, respectively. The current revised guidelines are expected to be of great assistance to gastroenterologists and general physicians in making decisions on contemporary clinical management for cholelithiasis patients.

The efficacy and safety of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy for the treatment of difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones: a multicenter retrospective study

PURPOSE

To analyze the benefits of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE + LC) versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and/or endoscopic sphincterotomy following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/EST + LC) for difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones in three hospitals from January 2016 to January 2021 was performed.

RESULTS

ERCP/EST + LC contributed to reducing postoperative drainage time. However, LCBDE + LC showed a higher rate of complete clearance, along with lower postoperative hospital stays, expenses and incidence of postoperative hyperamylasemia, pancreatitis, re-operation and recurrence. In addition, LCBDE + LC showed safe and feasible performance in the elderly and patients with previous upper abdominal surgery.

CONCLUSION

It is an effective and safe method for LCBDE + LC for difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

CHARACTERIZATION OF STRUCTURAL DISORDERS OF THE LIVER DEPENDING ON THE DURATION OF SUBHEPATIC CHOLESTASIS IN PATIENTS OF DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS

OBJECTIVE

The aim: To study structural disorders of the liver depending on the duration of subhepatic cholestasis in patients of different age groups.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Materials and methods: 50 obstructive jaundice patients were subdivided into two groups. Group I (n = 25) consisted of young (18-44-year-old) and middle-aged patients (45-59-year-old), while the Group II (n = 25) included elderly (60-74-year-old) and senile patients (75-90-year-old).

RESULTS

Results: We performed morphological and morphometric studies of 50 liver biopsy specimens taken from patients of different age groups with different duration of obstructive jaundice: less than 7 days, 7-14 days, 14-21 days, 21-28 days, and over 28 days.

CONCLUSION

Conclusions: In patients of the Groups I and II, pathological hepatic changes in the early stages of mechanical jaundice were manifested in the form of he-patocyte dystrophy and hepatitis development. In the Group I patients, manifestations of steatohepatitis, fibrosis and initial signs of liver cirrhosis were noted in the late stages of subhepatic cholestasis. In addition to the above-mentioned changes, Group II patients, in the late stages of mechanical jaundice, presented signs of severe fibrosis and well-shaped liver cirrhosis. Taking into account the above morphological changes in the liver with different duration of subhepatic cholestasis, we consider reasonable to decompress bile ducts in patients of older age groups at earlier stages of mechanical jaundice compared to young and middle-aged patients, thus preventing post-decompression liver dysfunction and the subsequent development of biliary cirrhosis.

Making common duct exploration common-balloon sphincteroplasty as an adjunct to transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) at the time of cholecystectomy has well-established benefits for managing pediatric choledocholithiasis. However, providers increasingly favor ERCP pre-or-post laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC) due to perceived complexity of LCBDE. We refined a stepwise method employing wire-ready balloon dilation of the Sphincter of Oddi. This study compares outcomes of balloon sphincteroplasty (LCBDE+BSP) with standard transcystic LCBDE (LCBDE-STD) and ERCP+LC.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of pediatric patients who underwent LCBDE-STD and LCBDE+BSP since 2018. A report of consecutive choledocholithiasis patients prior to 2018 yielded an ERCP+LC cohort. Age, operative time, complications, and length of stay (LOS) were compared across all groups. Success rate and fluoroscopy time were compared between LCBDE groups.

RESULTS

44 patients were identified (14:LCBDE-STD; 15:LCBDE+BSP; 15:ERCP+LC) . There was no difference in patient age or BMI. Operative time was longer in the LCBDE+BSP group (p =< 0.05). ERCP+LC demonstrated increased LOS (4.36 ± 2.78 vs 1.31 ± 0.93; p =< 0.05) and complications compared to LCBDE groups including three stent placements and one stent migration. LCBDE+BSP had a higher success rate than LCBDE-STD (100% vs 78%; p = 0.06). The three patients who failed LCBDE-STD required postoperative ERCP. Average fluoroscopy time was not significantly impacted by addition of sphincteroplasty.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating LCBDE into standard management of pediatric choledocholithiasis reduces LOS and avoids additional invasive procedures regardless of the specific technique employed. This stepwise approach to wire-ready cholangiography with balloon sphincteroplasty is a viable method for LCBDE that utilizes techniques familiar to pediatric surgeons and provides definitive management under a single anesthetic.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Outcomes following common bile duct exploration versus endoscopic stone extraction before, during and after laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are two methods of retrieving common bile duct (CBD) stones. The best method for CBD stone removal is debatable. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes following LCBDE and/or ERCP, including laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively for patients undergoing LCBDE and/or ERCP at a single centre from 2008 to 2018. Patients were grouped by intention-to-treat (single-stage LCBDE, pre-operative-, intra-operative-, or post-operative ERCP) and eventual plan (surgical or endoscopic). Outcomes included complication rates (minor Clavien-Dindo 1/2, major Clavien-Dindo 3/4, non-biliary complications) and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 671 patients, 578 patients received LCBDE and 93 patients received ERCP as primary care. Endoscopic clearance had significantly higher complications and mortality compared to surgical clearance. On an intention-to-treat basis LCBDE had the lowest minor-, major- and non-biliary complications, and mortality (5.2%, 6.1%, 2.9% and 0.5%, respectively), whilst pre-operative ERCP the worst (39.6%, 27.1%, 29.2% and 8.3%, respectively) (p=<0.001). LCBDE and postERCP had similar major complications and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Surgical clearance of CBD stones was potentially safer than endoscopic clearance. Pre-operative ERCP had the worst outcomes. LCBDE and postERCP are likely to have similar short-term patient outcomes.

The clinical effect of primary duct closure and T-tube drainage: A propensity score matched study

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is considered a safe and effective method for the removal of bile duct stones, selecting primary duct closure (PDC) or T-tube drainage (TTD) following choledochotomy remains controversial. This study aims to explore the clinical effects of PDC and TTD after LCBDE.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 348 patients with choledocholithiasis treated with LCBDE from January 2016 to October 2020. All patients were divided into PDC (225 cases) and TTD (123 cases) groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. We compared operative parameters and outcomes.

RESULTS

After matching (n = 116/group), no significant difference was observed between the two groups (P > 0.05) regarding intra-abdominal infection, incision infection, bile leakage, and retained stones. In terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative exhaust time, postoperative antibiotic use time, and postoperative abdominal drainage time, PDC group was obviously superior to TTD group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Primary closure following LCBDE is considered a safe and effective alternative to T-tube drainage.

Outcomes following balloon sphincteroplasty as an adjunct to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) at the time of cholecystectomy is an efficient pathway for management of choledocholithiasis. Performing this safely under one anesthetic offers advantages over a two-step process with cholecystectomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Despite the proven efficacy of LCBDE, endoscopy continues to be predominantly utilized. Simplifying the intervention may drive LCBDE adoption. To this end, we refined a stepwise intraoperative pathway that utilizes over the wire balloon catheters to dilate the Sphincter of Oddi to facilitate stone passage into the duodenum. To determine the efficacy during the initial adoption phase on a general surgery service, we reviewed our experience with LCBDE balloon sphincteroplasty as part of this pathway.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients who underwent LCBDE with balloon sphincteroplasty at a single tertiary care center over a three-year period. Preoperative demographics, imaging/laboratory results, intra and postoperative outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

Choledocholithiasis was managed with transcystic balloon sphincteroplasty during LCBDE in 28 cases over a three-year period. The cohort included 16 women and 12 men with a mean age of 47 years (range = 19-89). Operative indications included cholecystitis (n = 11, 39%), choledocholithiasis (n = 13, 47%), cholelithiasis (n = 2, 7%), and gallstone pancreatitis (n = 2, 7%). The stones were successfully cleared by the balloon sphincteroplasty technique in 75% of the cases. The average fluoroscopy time during LCBDE was 338 s (± 214). The average operating room time was 173 min (± 35). Mean length of stay was 58 h (± 46). There were no intra- or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Wire ready cholangiography followed by balloon sphincteroplasty with saline/contrast flush is a simple and safe way to clear the common bile duct. This technique is a gateway for further expansion and adoption of LCBDE.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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.

3D Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary repair by absorbable barbed suture is safe and feasible

Background and aim

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), with interval laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), is the most common treatment approach for common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, recent studies show that single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) is safe and feasible. Three-dimensional (3D) laparoscopy enhances depth perception and facilitates intracorporeal suturing. The application of 3D technology for LCBDE is emerging, and we report our case series of 3D LCBDE.

Methods

We audited the 27 consecutive 3D LCBDE performed from July 2017 to January 2020. We have a liberal policy for magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in patients with deranged liver function tests (LFT). All CBD explorations were done through choledochotomy with a 5 mm flexible choledochoscope and primarily repaired with an absorbable barbed suture without a stent or T-tube.

Results

The mean age of patients was 68 (range 44-91) years, and 12 (44%) were male. The indications for surgery were choledocholithiasis 67% (n=18), cholangitis 22% (n=6), and gallstone pancreatitis 11% (n=3). About 67% (n=18) had pre-operative ERCP. About 37% (n=10) had pre-operative biliary stent. Pre-operative MRCP was done in 74% (n=20), and the mean diameter of CBD was 14.5 mm (range 7-30). The median operative time was 160 (range 80-265) min. The operative drain was inserted in 18 patients. One patient each (4%) had a bile leak and a retained stone. There was no open conversion, readmission, or mortality.

Conclusion

3D LCBDE with primary repair by an absorbable barbed suture is safe and feasible.

Relevance for patients

This paper emphasized that one stage LCBDE should be a treatment option which is comparable with two stage ERCP followed by LC to treat CBD stones. In addition, 3D technology and barbed sutures use in LCBDE are safe and useful.

Choledocholithiasis-a new clinical pathway

The incidence of cholecystectomy in children has increased considerably since the early 1990s. Management of gallbladder disease in children must include an awareness of choledocholithiasis treatment strategies. Both endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and common bile duct exploration (open or laparoscopic) are accepted management techniques for choledocholithiasis. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with preoperative or postoperative ERCP is at least a two-procedure process while cholecystectomy with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) can provide definitive treatment in a single procedure under one anesthetic. Despite this, the trend over the last decade continues towards less LCBDE utilization in favor of ERCP. This trend has resulted in decreased familiarity with LCBDE by adult and pediatric surgeons and their trainees. Access to the necessary tools and education on the technical aspects can allow for successful single-stage treatment of choledocholithiasis by surgeons during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This may include a pre-defined stepwise algorithm and understanding of all the equipment and resources necessary to perform a LCBDE. Ultimately, increased understanding of the equipment and procedural steps necessary for LCBDE will result in widened adoption of the technique and thus confer advantages to the patient such as decreased length of stay and fewer required anesthetics.

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.

Evidence-Based Management of Calculous Biliary Disease for the Acute Care Surgeon

Background: Gallstones and cholecystitis are common clinical problems. There is a wide spectrum of disease severity, from rare symptoms of biliary colic to severe cholecystitis with marked gallbladder infection and inflammation that can cause life-threatening sepsis. The care of such patients is similarly varied and multi-disciplinary. Despite the prevalence of cholecystitis, there remain questions about how to manage patients appropriately. Methods: A multi-disciplinary team created institutional cholecystitis guidelines, and supporting evidence was compiled for review. Results: Even in "routine" cholecystitis, patient triage and work-up can be variable, resulting in unnecessary tests and delay to cholecystectomy. Beyond this, there are new treatment options available that may serve special populations particularly well, although the appropriate pattern of emerging endoscopic and percutaneous treatment modalities is not well defined. Conclusions: This review outlines evidence-based management of cholecystitis from diagnosis to treatment with a focused discussion of special populations and emerging therapies.

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.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration; a preferential pathway for elderly patients

Background

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has emerged as a recommended alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for the management of choledocholithiasis. However, its use in the elderly has been limited, and evidence of its safety and efficacy in these patients is yet to be established. This study describes our experience of LCBDE in elderly patients, analysing the safety and efficacy of this technique in comparison to younger patients.

Methods

All patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with LCBDE for choledocholithiasis in our unit between January 2015 and January 2017 were included. Data pertaining to patient demographics, comorbidities, investigations, operative technique and outcomes were analysed. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on age (Group A:<65 years vs Group B: >/ = 65 years) for comparative analysis.

Results

124 patients (Group A: 65, Group B: 59) were included. Group B were more co-morbid and had a higher ASA grade than Group A. However, there was no significant difference between groups in rates of conversion to open or complications, including bile leak (3.1% vs 5.1%, p = 0.67), retained stone (4.6% vs 1.7%, p = 0.62), or complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification (p = 0.78). Re-intervention rates were also similar between groups (7.7% vs 3.4%, p = 0.44 and 3.1% vs 3.4%, p = 1.0 respectively), as was length of stay.

Conclusion

Despite higher frequency of comorbidities and ASA grade, LCBDE in elderly patients is safe and effective, and has similar outcomes to younger patients. Therefore elderly patients with choledocholithiasis should be offered LCBDE as an alternative to ERCP.

Laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for stones in the gallbladder and bile duct

BACKGROUND

The management of gallbladder stones (lithiasis) concomitant with bile duct stones is controversial. The more frequent approach is a two-stage procedure, with endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone removal from the bile duct followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous combines the two techniques in a single-stage operation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone removal followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (the single-stage rendezvous technique) versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (two stages) in people with gallbladder and common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Science Citation Index Expanded Web of Science, and two trials registers (February 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials that enrolled people with concomitant gallbladder and common bile duct stones, regardless of clinical status or diagnostic work-up, and compared laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy procedures in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We excluded other endoscopic or surgical methods of intraoperative clearance of the bile duct, e.g. non-aided intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or laparoscopic choledocholithotomy (surgical incision of the common bile duct for removal of bile duct stones).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised clinical trials with 517 participants (257 underwent a laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous technique versus 260 underwent a sequential approach), which fulfilled our inclusion criteria and provided data for analysis. Trial participants were scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy because of suspected cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. Male/female ratio was 0.7; age of men and women ranged from 21 years to 87 years. The run-in and follow-up periods of the trials ranged from 32 months to 84 months. Overall, the five trials were judged at high risk of bias. Athough all trials measured mortality, there was just one death reported in one trial, in the laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous group (low-quality evidence). The overall morbidity (surgical morbidity plus general morbidity) may be lower with laparoscopic rendezvous (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.20; participants = 434, trials = 4; I² = 28%; low-quality evidence); the effect was a little more certain when a fixed-effect model was used (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.99). There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the two approaches on the failure of primary clearance of the bile duct (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.38; participants = 517; trials = 5; I² = 58%; very low-quality evidence). The effects of either approach on clinical post-operative pancreatitis were unclear (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.12; participants = 517, trials = 5; I² = 24%; low-quality evidence). Hospital stay appeared to be lower in the laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous group by about three days (95% CI 3.51 to 2.50 days shorter; 515 participants in five trials; low-quality evidence). There was very low-quality evidence that suggested longer operative time with laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous (MD 34.07 minutes, 95% CI 11.41 to 56.74; participants = 313; trials = 3; I² = 93%). The Trial Sequential Analyses of operating time and the length of hospital stay indicated that all the trials crossed the conventional boundaries, suggesting that the sample sizes were adequate, with a low risk of random error.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy techniques in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy on mortality and morbidity. The laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous procedure may lead to longer operating times, but it may reduce the length of the hospital stay when compared with preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, no firm conclusions could be drawn because the quality of evidence was low or very low. If confirmed by future trials, these data might re-design the scenario of treatment of this condition, albeit requiring greater organisational effort. Future trials should also address issues such as quality of life and cost analysis.

Percutaneous transcystic balloon dilation for common bile duct stone removal in high-surgical-risk patients with acute cholecystitis and co-existing choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous procedures to treat common bile duct (CBD) stones typically require access via intrahepatic bile ducts. This study aimed to describe the outcomes of a percutaneous transcystic approach that expelled the CBD stones into the duodenum after percutaneous transcystic balloon dilation of the ampulla (PTCBDA) for high-risk patients who present with acute cholecystitis and CBD stones.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with acute cholecystitis and CBD stones who were deemed too high-risk for surgery or general anesthesia and were treated with PTCBDA and CBD stone removal between March 2010 and November 2015 were included for further analysis. Patients underwent emergency percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage under ultrasound. Staged PTCBDA and CBD stone expulsion were performed. Outcomes evaluated included the success rate, causes of failure, and complications.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients met the inclusion criteria. CBD stones were successfully expelled in 16 patients. A second procedure was performed in one patient because of residual stones. The procedure failed in two patients because their stones were large. One patient developed bile peritonitis and underwent percutaneous catheter drainage.

DISCUSSION

Percutaneous transcystic anterograde expulsion of CBD stones may be a feasible and effective method for treating high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis and co-existing CBD stones.

Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with gallbladder stones with common bile duct stones: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

The ideal management of common bile duct (CBD) stones associated with gall stones is a matter of debate. We planned a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration and cholecystectomy (LCBDE) with two-stage preoperative endoscopic stone extraction followed by cholecystectomy (ERCP + LC).

METHODS

We searched the Pubmed/Medline, Web of science, Science citation index, Google scholar and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials electronic databases till June 2017 for all English language randomized trials comparing the two approaches. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program], Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014 and results were expressed as odds ratio for dichotomous variables and mean difference for continuous. p value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed using TSA version 0.9.5.5 (Copenhagen: The Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, 2016). PROSPERO trial registration number is CRD42017074673.

RESULTS

A total of 11 trials were included in the analysis, with a total of 1513 patients (751-LCBDE; 762-ERCP + LC). LCBDE was found to have significantly lower rates of technical failure [OR 0.59, 95% CI (0.38, 0.93), p = 0.02] and shorter hospital stay [MD - 1.63, 95% CI (- 3.23, - 0.03), p = 0.05]. There was no significant difference in mortality [OR 0.37, 95% CI (0.09, 1.51), p = 0.17], morbidity [OR 0.97, 95% CI (0.70, 1.33), p = 0.84], cost [MD - 379.13, 95% CI (- 784.80, 111.2), p = 0.13] or recurrent/retained stones [OR 1.01, 95% CI (0.38, 2.73), p = 0.98]. TSA showed that although the Z-curve crossed the boundaries of conventional significance, the estimated information size is yet to be achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-stage LCBDE is superior to ERCP + LC in terms of technical success and shorter hospital stay in good-risk patients with gallstones and CBD stones, where expertise, operative time and instruments are available.

Single-stage procedure for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocolithiasis: a surgical procedures review

While laparoscopic cholecystectomy is generally accepted as the treatment of choice for simple gallbladder stones, in cases in which common bile duct stones are also present, clinical and diagnostic elements, along with intraoperative findings, define the optimal means of treatment. All available options must be accessible to the surgical team which must necessarily be multidisciplinary and include a surgeon, an endoscopist, and a radiologist in order to identify the best option for a truly personalized surgery. This review describes the different techniques and approaches used based on distinctive recommendations and factors, according to the specific cases treated and the results achieved.

Cost-analysis and effectiveness of one-stage laparoscopic versus two-stage endolaparoscopic management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

One-stage laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) stone clearance and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) for cholecystocholedocholithiasis ( CCL) can be performed with similar short and long-term outcomes than two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiography followed by subsequent LC (ERCP+LC). This study examined retrospectively the outcome and hospital costs of one-stage versus two-stage treatment of CBD stones.

METHODS

From January 1999 and December 2014, 217 consecutive, elective patients underwent one-stage (LCBDE + LC ) or two-stage (ERCP + subsequent LC ) treatment for CBD stones. The data from the one-stage management was collected prospectively, and from the two-stage management retrospectively. The main measure of outcome was hospital costs, with the success of one-stage versus two-stage management, postoperative morbidity and postoperative stay as secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

One-stage laparoscopic transcystic management was the least costly option compared to laparoscopic one-stage transductal approach (TC 5455€ versus TD 9364, p < 0.001) or two-stage management (6913 €, p = 0.02). Overall success rate of primary intervention (including conversions to open surgery) for CBD stone clearance was 96.9%, 97.0% and 98.3% after transcystic one-stage, transductal one-stage and two-stage approach, p = 0.79. Postoperative morbidity was 15.5% versus 7.5%, p = 0.64, and postoperative hospital stay median 2 days (IQR 2-5) versus 4.5 days ( IQR 3-7), p < 0.001 in the one-stage and two-stage management groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that laparoscopic one-stage transcystic management of CCL results in high rate of CBD clearance, fewer procedures per patient, shorter hospital and lower costs than the two-stage management. Therefore the one-stage transcystic management seems to be an attractive strategy for the treatment of CCL depending on local resources and surgical expertise .

Cost-effective Decisions in Detecting Silent Common Bile Duct Gallstones During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine intraoperative ultrasonography (IOUS), cholangiography (IOC), or expectant management without imaging (EM) for investigation of clinically silent common bile duct (CBD) stones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND

The optimal algorithm for the evaluation of clinically silent CBD stones during routine cholecystectomy is unclear.

METHODS

A decision tree model of CBD exploration was developed to determine the optimal diagnostic approach based on preoperative probability of choledocholithiasis. The model was parameterized with meta-analyses of previously published studies. The primary outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from each diagnostic strategy. A secondary outcome was the percentage of missed stones. Costs were from the perspective of the third party payer and sensitivity analyses were performed on all model parameters.

RESULTS

In the base case analysis with a prevalence of stones of 9%, IOUS was the optimal strategy, yielding more QALYs (0.9858 vs 0.9825) at a lower expected cost ($311 vs $574) than EM. IOC yielded more QALYs than EM in the base case (0.9854) but at a much higher cost ($1122). IOUS remained dominant as long as the preoperative probability of stones was above 3%; EM was the optimal strategy if the probability was less than 3%. The percentage of missed stones was 1.5% for IOUS, 1.8% for IOC and 9% for EM.

CONCLUSIONS

In the detection and resultant management of CBD stones for the majority of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, IOUS is cost-effective relative to IOC and EM.

A 23 year experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is as effective as two-stage endo-laparoscopic treatment, but with shorter hospital stay, lower cost and recurrent stone rate. Aim of this paper was to report the authors' experience with LCBDE during LC.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent LCBDE for ductal stones was performed. Recurrent stones were defined as CBD stones detected beyond 6 months from the procedure. Postoperative biliary stricture was defined as a symptomatic reduction of CBD diameter.

RESULTS

Out of 3444 patients who underwent LC, 384 (11%) had CBD stones treated by trans-cystic duct exploration [214 (6%) patients, TCD-CBDE] or choledochotomy [170 (5%) patients, C-CBDE]. For TCD-CBDE and C-CBDE, mean operative time was 127 ± 69 and 191 ± 74 min, respectively. Major morbidity rate was 3% (n = 6) in TCD-CBDE and 6% (n = 11) in C-CBDE. The incidence of residual stones was 5% (n = 20) and complete ductal clearance rate was 95% (n = 364). After long-term follow-up (mean 189 ± 105 months) the recurrent stone rate was 2%.

DISCUSSION

In expert centers, LCBDE during LC is safe and effective with low short and long term morbidity rates.

Scoring System for the Management of Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis: Cost Analysis of a Prospective Study

Predicting the presence of a persistent common bile duct (CBD) stone is a difficult and expensive task. The aim of this study is to determine if a previously described protocol-based scoring system is a cost-effective strategy. The protocol includes all patients with gallstone pancreatitis and stratifies them based on laboratory values and imaging to high, medium, and low likelihood of persistent stones. The patient's stratification then dictates the next course of management. A decision analytic model was developed to compare the costs for patients who followed the protocol versus those that did not. Clinical data model inputs were obtained from a prospective study conducted at The Mount Sinai Medical Center to validate the protocol from Oct 2009 to May 2013. The study included all patients presenting with gallstone pancreatitis regardless of disease severity. Seventy-three patients followed the proposed protocol and 32 did not. The protocol group cost an average of $14,962/patient and the non-protocol group cost $17,138/patient for procedural costs. Mean length of stay for protocol and non-protocol patients was 5.6 and 7.7 days, respectively. The proposed protocol is a cost-effective way to determine the course for patients with gallstone pancreatitis, reducing total procedural costs over 12 %.

Results of Medium Seventeen Years' Follow-Up after Laparoscopic Choledochotomy for Ductal Stones

Introduction. In a previously published article the authors reported the long-term follow-up results in 138 consecutive patients with gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones who underwent laparoscopic transverse choledochotomy (TC) with T-tube biliary drainage and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Aim of this study is to evaluate the results at up to 23 years of follow-up in the same series. Methods. One hundred twenty-one patients are the object of the present study. Patients were evaluated by clinical visit, blood assay, and abdominal ultrasound. Symptomatic patients underwent cholangio-MRI, followed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as required. Results. Out of 121 patients, 61 elderly patients died from unrelated causes. Fourteen patients were lost to follow-up. In the 46 remaining patients, ductal stone recurrence occurred in one case (2,1%) successfully managed by ERCP with endoscopic sphincterotomy. At a mean follow-up of 17.1 years no other patients showed signs of bile stasis and no patient showed any imaging evidence of CBD stricture at the site of choledochotomy. Conclusions. Laparoscopic transverse choledochotomy with routine T-tube biliary drainage during LC has proven to be safe and effective at up to 23 years of follow-up, with no evidence of CBD stricture when the procedure is performed with a correct technique.

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.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration using V-Loc suture with insertion of endobiliary stent

BACKGROUND

The treatment of concomitant gallbladder (GB) and common bile duct (CBD) stones is still variable, without a standard treatment protocol. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy is widely being used, but laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is also being widely performed. We present our method of LCBDE, with anterograde insertion of an endobiliary stent and primary closure of the CBD using unidirectional barbed suture.

METHODS

From November 2013 to March 2015, LCBDE was performed on 15 consecutive patients. Chart review was performed to analyze demographic data and perioperative data. After dissection of the GB from the liver bed, the CBD is dissected and a choledochotomy is made. A choledochoscope is inserted in the CBD, and using various methods, CBD stones are extracted. An endobiliary stent is inserted, and the CBD is closed using unidirectional barbed sutures.

RESULTS

Mean age of the patients was 64.7 ± 12.5 years. Of the 15 patients, six patients (40 %) were male and nine patients (60 %) were female. The average operation time and postoperative stay were 90.7 ± 32.5 min and 4.3 ± 1.2 days, respectively. There were no significant complications such as postoperative bleeding, bile leakage, or biliary stricture.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE using barbed V-Loc suture with insertion of endobiliary stent is a safe, feasible treatment modality that is easily reproducible. Our preliminary results show a zero complication rate, with an acceptable operation time.

Initial Cholecystectomy with Cholangiography Decreases Length of Stay Compared to Preoperative MRCP or ERCP in the Management of Choledocholithiasis

There are several treatments available for choledocholithiasis, but the optimal treatment is highly debated. Some advocate preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with cholangiography (IOC). Others advocate initial LC + IOC followed by common bile duct exploration or ERCP. The purpose of this study was to determine whether initial LC + IOC had a shorter length of stay (LOS) compared with preoperative magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) or ERCP. Patients who underwent cholecystectomy between 2012 and 2013 at two institutions were reviewed. Patients were selected if they had suspected choledocholithiasis, indicated by dilated CBD and/or elevated bilirubin, or confirmed choledocholithiasis. They were excluded if they had pancreatitis or cholangitis. There were 126 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis in this study. Of these, 97 patients underwent initial LC ± IOC with an average LOS of 3.9 days. IOC was negative in 47.4 per cent patients, and they had a shorter LOS compared with positive IOC patients (2.93 vs 4.82, P < 0.001). Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was successful in 64.7 per cent and had a shorter LOS compared with postoperative ERCP patients ( P = 0.01). Preoperative MRCP was performed in 21 patients with an average LOS of 6.48 days. Preoperative ERCP was performed in eight patients with an average LOS of seven days. Initial LC+IOC is associated with a shorter LOS compared to preoperative MRCP or ERCP. It is recommended as the optimal treatment choice for suspected choledocholithiasis.

Surgery for common bile duct stones--a lost surgical skill; still worthwhile in the minimally invasive century?

PURPOSE

Techniques of laparoscopic bile duct exploration have been reported for over 20 years. Despite the simplicity and success of these procedures, they have failed to become commonplace in most surgical departments, as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become the preferred method for dealing with bile duct stones. There is a risk of surgeons not obtaining or losing these skills, which may still be required as a definitive treatment when ERCP fails or is not available.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This paper describes these laparoscopic operations, which can be performed to enable a 'one-stop shop' treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS) at the time of cholecystectomy. In particular, transcystic basket clearance of the bile duct is possible in two-thirds of cases with very little increase in morbidity compared to routine cholecystectomy. The selection of patients who are most likely to be successfully treated with this technique is defined. Some of the authors have published large study series and prospective randomised trials, further refining the choices available to the surgeon who, when performing operative cholangiography, is already halfway to bile duct exploration.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery may reclaim this lost ground by offering an excellent and safe therapeutic option for many of the symptomatic CBDS.

Curative effect of cholecystolithotomy combined with tauroursodeoxycholic acid in treatment of patients with cholecystolithiasis

AIM: To evaluate the clinical effect of gallbladder preserving cholecystolithotomy combined with tauroursodeoxycholic acid in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis.

METHODS: Three hundred and forty-six patients with gallstones treated at our hospital from June 2008 to June 2010 were randomly divided them into either an experimental group or a control group, with 173 patients in each group. The experimental group received minimally invasive endoscopic lithotomy combined with tauroursodeoxycholic acid capsules, while the control group received minimally invasive endoscopic lithotomy combined with routine anti-inflammatory treatment. All patients were followed postoperatively (average, 2 years) to record patients' symptom relief, gallbladder function and gallbladder stone recurrence for the two groups.

RESULTS: The rates of improvement of biliary colic (89.83% vs 74.24%), right lower quadrant abdominal discomfort (85.99% vs 71.22%) and bloating (90.28% vs 74.03%) were significantly higher in the experimental group than in the control group (P < 0.05). Combination with tauroursodeoxycholic acid capsules could effectively improve the gallbladder emptying index (53.95 ± 10.61 vs 43.81 ± 12.39, P < 0.05), and reduce the recurrence rates at 1 and 2 years (1.16% vs 6.36%, 4.62% vs 16.18%, P < 0.05) compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION: Cholecystolithotomy combined with tauroursodeoxycholic acid can effectively eliminate gallbladder stone recurrence, relieve symptoms, and restore the gallbladder contraction function in patients with cholecystolithiasis.

Evidence-Based Management of Common Gallstone-Related Emergencies

Gallstone-related disease is among the most common clinical problems encountered worldwide. The manifestations of cholelithiasis vary greatly, ranging from mild biliary colic to life-threatening gallstone pancreatitis and cholangitis. The vast majority of gallstone-related diseases encountered in an acute setting can be categorized as biliary colic, cholecystitis, choledocholithiasis, and pancreatitis, although these diagnoses can overlap. The management of these diseases is uniquely multidisciplinary, involving many specialties and treatment options. Thus, care may be compromised due to redundant tests, treatment delays, or inconsistent management. This review outlines the evidence for initial evaluation, diagnostic workup, and treatment for the most common gallstone-related emergencies. Key principles include initial risk stratification of patients to aid in triage and timing of interventions, early initiation of appropriate antibiotics for patients with evidence of cholecystitis or cholangitis, patient selection for endoscopic biliary decompression, and growing evidence in favor of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for clinically stable patients.

Which differences do elderly patients present in single-stage treatment for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis?

Patients with symptomatic gallstones present common bile duct stones in approximately 10% of cases. It is possible to resolve both gallbladder and bile duct stones with a single procedure. The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of a single stage procedure for gallbladder and bile duct stones in the elderly patients and to expose the differences between the various techniques. From January 2008 to December 2013, we treated 1540 patients with gallbladder stones. In 152 cases, we also found bile duct stones. 150 of these were treated in a single stage procedure. We divided our patients into 2 groups: Group A was younger than 65 (104 patients); Group B was 65 or older (46 patients). We retrospectively compared sex, ASA score, conversion rate, success rate, post-operative complications, hospital stay, and treatment method. We had no intra-operative mortality. 1 patient in Group B, heart condition (ASA 4), died with multiple organ failure (MOF) 10 days after his operation. ASA score: 3.5 ± 0.5 in A vs 2 ± 0.9 in B (P 0.001), post-operative complications 6% in A vs 18.1% in B (P 0.0325) and hospital stay 4.1 ± 2.3 in A vs 9.5 ± 5.5 in B (P 0.0001) were significantly higher in Group B. No differences were found in term of success rate: 94% in A vs 90% in B (P 0.4944). The procedure used to obtain the clearance of the bile duct showed a different success rate across the two groups: for the patients under 65 years old, trans-cystic clearance (TC-CBDE) was successful in 90% of cases, and only 51% for those older than 65, where we had to recall 49% for laparo-endoscopic rendez-vous (RV-IOERC) (P 0.0014). In conclusion, single stage treatment is safe and effective also to elderly patients. The methods used in patients being younger than 65 years old is what appeared to be significantly different.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus pre or post-operative ERCP for common bile duct stones in patients undergoing cholecystectomy: is there any difference?

A best evidence topic in surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was: in patients with symptomatic gallstones and concomitant common bile duct (CBD) stones, is a single-stage surgical strategy (laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with common bile duct exploration) preferable, or a two-stage procedure involving LC with pre or post-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP)? Two hundred and six papers were found using the reported search, of which four presented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. A recent large meta-analysis concluded no significant difference in the clinical effectiveness or complication rate of either strategy. Three recent smaller studies concurred with this conclusion; however each noted improved cost-effectiveness of the single-stage approach advocating its use as the superior strategy when local resources and expertise are available. We conclude that for patients with symptomatic gallstones and concomitant choledocholithiasis, a single-stage surgical procedure is equivalent to two-stage LC and ERCP in terms of clinical outcomes, is associated with a shorter overall hospital stay and may be more cost-effective. On this basis a single-stage procedure is recommended for management of symptomatic gallstones and choledocholithiasis where local resources and expertise permit.

Results of treatment of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi by single-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration

INTRODUCTION

Choledocholithiasis is the most common cause of obstructive jaundice. Common bile duct stones are observed in 10-14% of patients diagnosed with gall bladder stones. In the case of gall bladder and common bile duct stones the procedure involves not only performing cholecystectomy but also removing the stones from bile ducts.

AIM

To compare the results of the treatment of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi by one-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration with two other methods: one-stage open cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration, and a two-stage procedure involving endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 2004 and 2011 three groups of 100 patients were treated for obstructive jaundice caused by choledocholithiasis. The first group of 42 patients underwent ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The second group of 23 patients underwent open cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration, whereas the third group of 35 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration. The data were analysed prospectively. The methods were compared according to complete execution, bile duct clearance and complication rate. Complications were analysed according to Clavien's Classification of Surgical Complications. The results were compared using the ANOVA statistical test and Student's t-test in Statistica. Value of p was calculated statistically. A p-value less than 0.05 (p < 0.05) signified that groups differed statistically, whereas a p-value more than 0.05 (p > 0.05) suggested no statistically significant differences between the groups.

RESULTS

The procedure could not be performed in 11.9% of patients in the first group and in 14.3% of patients in the third group. Residual stones were found in 13.5% of the patients in the first group, in 4.3% of the patients in the second group and in 6.7% of the patients in the third group. According to Clavien's classification of complications grade II and III, we can assign the range in the first group at 21.6% for grade II and 0% for grade III, in the second group at 21.4% and 3.6% and in the third group at 6.7% and 3.3% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of all three methods of treatment gives similar results. One-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration is after all the least invasive, safer and more effective procedure.

One-stage versus Two-stage Management for Concomitant Gallbladder Stones and Common Bile Duct Stones in Patients with Obstructive Jaundice

No consensus exists regarding the optimal management of concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones (CBDS). Previous studies showed a significant association between the presence of obstructive jaundice and increased risk of postoperative complications and conversion to open surgery. This retrospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of one-stage (laparoscopic cholecystectomy [LC] plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration) management versus two-stage (preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography/endoscopic sphincterotomy 1 LC) management for patients with obstructive jaundice, concomitant gallbladder stones, and CBDS. One-stage management (n = 88) or two-stage management (n = 122) was used for 210 eligible patients between January 2009 and March 2011. Both types of management proved to be effective and safe. No significant difference was observed in terms of stone clearance from the common bile duct (CBD), postoperative morbidity, mortality, or conversion to open surgery. However, one-stage management was more cost-effective and decreased the number of procedures. In addition, postoperative hospital stay and operative time were shorter for patients who received one-stage management. Especially for patients with CBD greater than 1 cm in diameter, one-stage management is a better choice.

Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The ideal method for managing concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct (CBD) stones is debatable. The currently preferred method is two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This prospective randomized trial compared the success and cost effectiveness of single- and two-stage management of patients with concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones were randomized to either single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration and cholecystectomy (group 1) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for endoscopic extraction of CBD stones followed by LC (group 2). Success was defined as complete clearance of CBD and cholecystectomy by the intended method. Cost effectiveness was measured using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed to compare outcomes.

RESULTS

From February 2009 to October 2012, 168 patients were randomized: 84 to the single-stage procedure (group 1) and 84 to the two-stage procedure (group 2). Both groups were matched with regard to demographic and clinical parameters. The success rates of laparoscopic CBD exploration and ERCP for clearance of CBD were similar (91.7 vs. 88.1 %). The overall success rate also was comparable: 88.1 % in group 1 and 79.8 % in group 2 (p = 0.20). Direct choledochotomy was performed in 83 of the 84 patients. The mean operative time was significantly longer in group 1 (135.7 ± 36.6 vs. 72.4 ± 27.6 min; p ≤ 0.001), but the overall hospital stay was significantly shorter (4.6 ± 2.4 vs. 5.3 ± 6.2 days; p = 0.03). Group 2 had a significantly greater number of procedures per patient (p < 0.001) and a higher cost (p = 0.002). The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of postoperative wound infection rates or major complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Single- and two-stage management for uncomplicated concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones had similar success and complication rates, but the single-stage strategy was better in terms of shorter hospital stay, need for fewer procedures, and cost effectiveness.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the same session: Feasibility and safety

AIM: To explore the feasibility and safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) performed during the same session.

METHODS: Between July 2010 and May 2013, 156 patients with gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones were enrolled in this retrospective study. According to the sequence of endoscopic procedures and LC, patients were classified into two groups: in group 1, patients underwent endoscopic stone extraction and LC during the same session, and in group 2, patients underwent LC at least 3 d after endoscopic stone extraction. Outcomes of the endoscopic procedures and LC were compared between the two groups, respectively.

RESULTS: There were 91 patients in group 1 and 65 patients in group 2. The characteristics of the two groups were similar. The mean duration of the endoscopic procedures was 34.9 min in group 1 and 35.3 min in group 2. There were no significant differences in the success rate of the endoscopic procedures (97.8% for group 1 vs 98.5% for group 2), the total rate of endoscopic complications (4.40% for group 1 vs 4.62% for group 2) and CBD stone clearance rate (96.7% for group 1 vs 96.9% for group 2). Duration of LC was 53.6 min in group 1 and 52.8 min in group 2. There were no significant differences in the overall LC-related morbidity and postoperative hospital stay.

CONCLUSION: Endoscopic stone extraction and LC performed during the same session was feasible and safe in patients with gallstones and concomitant CBD stones.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in children is associated with decreased cost and length of stay: results of a two-center analysis

PURPOSE

Our aim was to compare outcomes of children undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC+CBDE) to those undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with adjunctive endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (LC+ERCP).

METHODS

We performed a two-center retrospective chart review of all children (<18 years) undergoing LC+CBDE or LC+ERCP between January 2000 and July 2011. Wilcoxon test was performed on continuous variables and logistic regression modeling on categorical data. A P value < 0.05 was considered significant. Outcomes with a P value < 0.2 were selected for multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients were identified. Twenty-four (57%) underwent LC+ERCP, and eighteen (43%) underwent LC+CBDE. Demographic and clinical factors were well matched between groups. Total operative time was similar between groups (157 min vs. 152 min, P = .26). LC+CBDE patients had zero major complications and five minor complications (retained stone: 3, pancreatitis: 1, late recurrence: 1). LC+ERCP patients experienced two major complications (duodenal perforation: 1, bleeding requiring transfusion: 1), and four minor complications (pancreatitis: 2, retained stone: 2, P = .57). Median length of stay was significantly longer (15.7 days vs. 6.6 days, P = .02), and median hospital cost was significantly higher ($18,132 vs. $12,735, P < .01) in the LC+ERCP group. Multivariable analysis revealed that cost was significantly lower in patients undergoing LC+CBDE (P = .05, OR= 0.71; 95% CI: 0.51-0.97).

CONCLUSION

LC+CBDE at the time of cholecystectomy is associated with decreased length of stay, decreased cost, and has similar or improved morbidity compared to LC+ERCP.