Laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis concomitant with calculus of the left intrahepatic duct or abdominal adhesions

A nomogram to predict conversion of laparoscopic surgery to laparotomy for Choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is effective for treating common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, it has high requirements for surgeons and the risk of conversion to laparotomy cannot be ignored. However, when conditions during surgery are not favorable, persisting with laparoscopic procedures blindly can lead to serious complications. Our study aimed to establish a nomogram model for predicting conversion of laparoscopic to laparotomy for choledocholithiasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 867 patients who were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis and underwent laparoscopic surgery were randomly divided into a training group (70%, n = 607) and a validation group (30%, n = 260). A nomogram was constructed based on the results of logistic regression analysis. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to assess the predictive performance of the nomogram.

RESULTS

Previous upper abdominal surgery, maximum diameter of stone ≥12 mm, medial wall of the duodenum stone, thickening of the gallbladder wall, thickening of CBD wall, stone size/CBD size ≥0.75, and simultaneous laparoscopic hepatectomy were included in the nomogram. The AUC values were 0.813 (95% CI: 0.766-0.861) and 0.804 (95% CI: 0.737-0.871) in the training and validation groups, respectively. The calibration curve showed excellent consistency between the nomogram predictions and actual observations. DCA showed a positive net benefit for the nomogram.

CONCLUSIONS

We constructed a nomogram with a good ability to predict conversion to open surgery in laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis, which can help surgeons to make a reasonable operation plan before surgery and timely convert to laparotomy during operation to reduce potential harm to the patient.

Detection of the common bile duct in difficult bile duct exploration using indocyanine green fluorescence imaging: A case report

We describe two cases using indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging for visualization of the common bile duct (CBD) in patients with difficult Bile duct exploration (BDE) due to extensive dense adhesions around the hepatoduodenal ligament. The CBD was rapidly detected under fluorescence guidance without excessive dissection of extensive dense adhesions. It is illustrated that the use of ICG fluorescence imaging is effective and feasible for detecting the CBD and thus we highly recommend this method during difficult BDE.

One-step percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy in patients with choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) may be inappropriate for most patients with choledocholithiasis. This study aimed to evaluate one-step percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy (PTCSL) in the treatment of patients with choledocholithiasis who could not undergo ERCP (e.g., failed ERCP, altered anatomy, and/or contra-indications).

METHOD

This was a retrospective single-centre series of 67 patients who underwent choledocholithiasis between November 2015 and March 2018: 35 with one-step PTCSL (Group A) and 32 with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration (Group B).

RESULTS

Compared with Group B, Group A showed shorter duration of operation, length of stay in the hospital, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative drainage time, and time to oral intake (all P<0.05). Intraoperative blood loss, costs, conversion to open surgery (one in group A vs. seven in group B; P=0.023), and bile leakage (none in group A vs. four in group B; P=0.047) were lower in Group A than in Group B. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the intraoperative clearance rate, ultimate clearance rate, and several postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

One-step PTCSL could be an alternative for patients with choledocholithiasis, especially when ERCP is not feasible.

Application of Laparoscopic Technique in the Treatment of Hepatolithiasis

Hepatolithiasis is commonly encountered in Southeastern and East Asian countries, and its incidence is increasing in Western countries. For symptomatic hepatolithiasis or asymptomatic hepatolithiasis with signs of liver atrophy or malignancy, surgical intervention is needed, especially when peroral cholangioscopy and percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotomy are not suitable or fail to be performed. Currently, laparoscopic surgery is gradually replacing traditional open surgery and becoming a better option. Various types of laparoscopic surgeries, including laparoscopic hepatectomy, laparoscopic biliary exploration through the common bile duct or the hepatic duct stump, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery, have been developed for the treatment of simple hepatolithiasis, hepatolithiasis concomitant with choledocholithiasis, recurrent hepatolithiasis, and complicated hepatolithiasis. The related clinical experience is gradually accumulating. In this review, the laparoscopic applications and their advantages will be summarized. In most cases, the laparoscopic technique could provide the advantages of less trauma, reduced blood loss, and faster postoperative recovery.

3D laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus 2D in choledocholithiasis patients: a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND

This study was designed to investigate whether 3D laparoscopic common bile duct (LCBDE) could improve surgical outcomes in choledocholithiasis patients compared with 2D LCBDE.

METHOD

Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to balance the bias in baseline characteristic between two groups.

RESULTS

213 patients underwent 3D LCBDE and 212 patients receiving 2D LCBDE were enrolled in this study. The operation time and blood loss in 3D group were significantly less than that in 2D group. After propensity score matching, a total of 114 paired cases were selected from the two groups. The operation time and blood loss in 3D group remain significantly lower than in 2D group. In the end, the subgroup analysis based on abdominal adhesion level was performed and it was observed that for patients with adhesion level 1 and level 2, 3D surgery could obviously decrease the operation time and intraoperative blood loss.

CONCLUSIONS

3D LCBDE would significantly reduce operation time, blood loss, and conversion rate to laparotomy in choledocholithiasis patients versus 2D LCBDE. For patients with abdominal adhesions level 1 and level 2, 3D LCBDE could provide better surgical outcomes than 2D LCBDE.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations

Background

A history of abdominal biliary tract surgery has been identified as a relative contraindication for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), and there are very few reports about laparoscopic procedures in patients with a history of abdominal biliary tract surgery.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes of 227 consecutive patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations at our institution between December 2013 and June 2019. A total of 110 consecutive patients underwent LCBDE, and 117 consecutive patients underwent open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE). Patient demographics and perioperative variables were compared between the two groups.

Results

The LCBDE group performed significantly better than the OCBDE group with respect to estimated blood loss [30 (5–700) vs. 50 (10–1800) ml; p = 0.041], remnant common bile duct (CBD) stones (17 vs. 28%; p = 0.050), postoperative hospital stay [7 (3–78) vs. 8.5 (4.5–74) days; p = 0.041], and time to oral intake [2.5 (1–7) vs. 3 (2–24) days; p = 0.015]. There were no significant differences in the operation time [170 (60–480) vs. 180 (41–330) minutes; p = 0.067]. A total of 19 patients (17%) in the LCBDE group were converted to open surgery. According to Clavien’s classification of complications, the LCBDE group had significantly fewer postoperative complications than the OCBDE group (40 vs. 57; p = 0.045). There was no mortality in either group. Multiple previous operations (≥ 2 times), a history of open surgery, and previous biliary tract surgery (including bile duct or gallbladder + bile duct other than cholecystectomy alone) were risk factors for postoperative adhesion (p = 0.000, p = 0.000, and p = 0.000, respectively).

Conclusion

LCBDE is ultimately the least invasive, safest, and the most effective treatment option for patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations and is especially suitable for those with a history of cholecystectomy, few previous operations (< 2 times), or a history of laparoscopic surgery.

Robotic surgeries for patients with colorectal cancer who have undergone abdominal procedures: Protocol for meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although the safety and the advantages of laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries have been confirmed, the use of both modalities in patients with previous abdominal surgeries (PAS) history remains uncertain. Herein, we perform a meta-analysis to investigate the impact of PAS on perioperative recovery outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.

METHODS

We will search PUBMED, the Cochrane Library, the Chinese Biomedical database (CBM), WanFang data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) up to January 2018. Studies will be screened by title, abstract, and full text independently and in duplicate. Studies that report the impact of PAS on perioperative recovery outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries will be eligible for inclusion. Outcome variables will be assessed included combined resection, conversion, operation time, blood loss, number of retrieved lymph nodes, days to soft diet intake, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications. Assessment of risk of bias and data synthesis will be performed using STATA SE 12.0. Heterogeneity among studies will be assessed using the I statistic.

RESULTS

Randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and propensity-matched comparative studies will be used for the quantitative synthesis of the meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of PAS on perioperative recovery outcomes from laparoscopic and robotic colorectal surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

We aim to draw an objective conclusion of the comparisons in aspects of perioperative outcomes and provide physicians level I evidences for clinical decision makings.