Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis in a patient with situs inversus totalis: A case report

Situs inversus complicates diagnosis and treatment due to the mirrored organ placement in relation to normal anatomy. This report describes a 78-year-old female patient with situs inversus totalis who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Utilizing the "French mirror technique" for port placement, the surgeon adeptly mirrored standard maneuvers with a 2-mm needle forceps in the left hand and a 5-mm forceps in the right in a reversed anatomical setting. This technique maintained familiar hand movements, despite the patient's unique anatomy. The surgeon applied transcystic ductal bile duct exploration, using choledochoscopy for duct exploration and a basket catheter for stone removal. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration through the transcystic ductal route are viable and effective for patients with situs inversus.

Surgical strategies for challenging common bile duct stones in the endoscopic era: A comprehensive review of current evidence

While endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the primary treatment modality for common bile duct stones (CBDS) or choledocholithiasis due to advancements in instruments, surgical intervention, known as common bile duct exploration (CBDE), is still necessary in cases of difficult CBDS, failed endoscopic treatment, or altered anatomy. Recent evidence also supports CBDE in patients requesting single-step cholecystectomy and bile duct stone removal with comparable outcomes. This review elucidates relevant clinical anatomy, selection indications, and outcomes to enhance surgical understanding. The selection between trans-cystic (TC) vs trans-choledochal (TD) approaches is described, along with stone removal techniques and ductal closure. Detailed surgical techniques and strategies for both the TC and TD approaches, including instrument selection, is also provided. Additionally, this review comprehensively addresses operation-specific complications such as bile leakage, stricture, and entrapment, and focuses on preventive measures and treatment strategies. This review aims to optimize the management of CBDS through laparoscopic CBDE, with the goal of improving patient outcomes and minimizing risks.

A Retrospective Study on the Three-Port Technique of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration for the Management of Cholelithiasis and Choledocholithiasis

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is convenient in treating cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis due to its advantage of accelerated recovery. This retrospective study aimed to summarize the experience of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis treatment via three-port approach of LCBDE in Eastern China.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis between July 2019 and October 2021 were included. Patients who received LC+LCBDE+primary suturing of the common bile duct (CBD) via a three-port approach were assigned to the LCBDE-P group, and those who received LC+LCBDE+T-tube drainage of CBD comprised the LCBDE-T group. The measurement data were compared between the two groups. P-values <0.05 indicated statistical significance.

Results

A total of 88 patients were divided into two groups: LCBDE-P (n=50) and LCBDE-T (n=38). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that LCBDE-P is associated with a shorter length of stay (OR=0.115, 95% CI: 0.040-0.329, P<0.001) and lower hospitalization costs (OR=0.120, 95% CI: 0.041-0.357, P<0.001). No significant differences between the two groups were detected in the operation time, intraoperative hemorrhage, clearance rate of CBD stones, postoperative liver function, and postoperative complications (P>0.05).

Conclusion

The three-port approach of LCBDE is a safe and feasible strategy for managing cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Compared to LCBDE-T, LCBDE-P reduces the length of hospital stay and medical costs during hospitalization.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration to treat choledocholithiasis in situs inversus patients: A technical review

Situs inversus (SI) is a rare congenital condition characterized by a mirror-image transposition of the major visceral organs. Since the 1990s, more than one hundred SI patients have been reported to have successfully undergone laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In these cases, the major problem is to overcome is the left-right condition for right-handed surgeons. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), an alternative to treat patients with bile duct stones, has shown equivalent efficacy and is less likely to cause pancreatitis than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Recent updated meta-analyses revealed that a shorter postoperative hospital stay, fewer procedural interventions, cost-effectiveness, a higher stone clearance rate, and fewer perioperative complications are additional advantages of LCBDE. However, the technique is technically demanding, even for skilled laparoscopic surgeons. Conducting LCBDE in patients with difficult situations, such as SI, is more complex than usual. We herein review published SI patients with choledocholithiasis treated by LCBDE, including our own experience, and this paper focuses on the technical aspects.

Five-Year Experience with Transcystic Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

Background: Common bile duct (CBD) stones associated with cholecystitis can be treated by single-stage CBD exploration at the time of cholecystectomy or a two-stage approach with endoscopic stone extraction before or after cholecystectomy. The ideal management remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study is to analyze our outcomes with transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Material and Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent transcystic LCBDE between 2015 and 2019 was performed. Results: A total of 106 patients underwent transcystic LCBDE over 5 years. We performed 1192 laparoscopic cholecystectomies with cholangiograms from March 2015 to December 2019. Fifteen patients had a preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for CBD stones seen on magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography that during laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC), there were stones and/or sludge found in the CBD, which required clearance through a transcystic approach. Of the 91 patients who did not have a preoperative ERCP, clearance of the CBD was successful through a transcystic approach in 78 patients (86%). In the 13 patients that intraoperative clearance was not achieved (n = 13, 14%), a postoperative ERCP was performed. A total of 28 patients underwent either pre- or postoperative ERCP (n = 28, 26%). Choledochotomy was not performed in any of the patients. The mean operative time was 127 minutes (127 ± 48). The mean hospital length of stay (LOS) was 4 days (3.9 ± 2.8) with a median LOS of 3 days. Complications observed include wound infection (n = 2, 2%), pancreatitis after ERCP (n = 1, 1%), pneumonia (n = 1, 1%), and right hepatic duct injury (n = 1, 1%). Conclusion: Transcystic LCBDE is an effective and safe option for treatment of CBD stones. While a transcystic approach does not guarantee clearance of the CBD, it avoids the morbidity associated with a choledochotomy and can often prevent patients from having to undergo an additional procedure.

Robot-Assisted Common Bile Duct Exploration in Trinidad & Tobago

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is a feasible and safe option for the operative management of choledocholithiasis, there has been a general reluctance to perform this procedure in Caribbean practice. This is largely because duct exploration is perceived to be difficult with laparoscopic instruments, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become increasingly available. We report a case in which stones were extracted laparoscopically from the common bile duct, aided by the FreeHand® (Freehand 2010 Ltd., Guildford, Surrey, UK) robot, to show that the procedure is feasible and safe in the Caribbean environment.

Transcystic Choledochoscopy Utilizing a Disposable Choledochoscope: How We Do It

BACKGROUND

Biliary disease is common occurrence and can make up a large portion of the practice of a general surgeon. Choledocholithasis is a common entity amongst those with biliary disease. Although modern trends favor endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and other imaging modalities for the diagnosis and management of choledocholithiasis, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is likely underutilized.

METHODS

A literature summary utilizing a PUBMED search was performed to provide an up-to-date account regarding the latest data on LCBDE. A video identifying and explaining the critical components of a LBCDE procedure is provided.

RESULTS

LCBDE is an underutilized procedure which offers equivalent clinical outcomes compared with ERCP along with a shorter length of stay and reduced costs. LCBDE is also noted to be an effective option for common bile duct stones in the setting of altered anatomy, such as a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

CONCLUSION

Although modern trends favor ERCP and other imaging modalities for the diagnosis and management of choledocholithiasis, LCBDE is likely underutilized by surgeons. LCBDE can provide many benefits to patients including avoidance of additional procedures, shorter length of stay, higher success rates, and less costs. Out video should act is a guide for those surgeons interested in implementation LCBDE in their practice.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via choledochotomy with primary closure for the management of acute cholangitis caused by common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for patients with acute cholangitis caused by common bile duct stones (CBDSs). The outcomes after LCBDE with primary closure in patients with CBDS-related acute cholangitis are unknown. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LCBDE with primary closure for the management of acute cholangitis caused by CBDSs.

METHODS

Between June 2015 and June 2020, 368 consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis combined with cholecystolithiasis, who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) + LCBDE in our department, were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 193 patients with CBDS-related acute cholangitis underwent LC + LCBDE with primary closure of the CBD (PC group) and 62 patients underwent LC + LCBDE followed by T-tube placement (T-tube group). A total of 113 patients who did not have cholangitis were excluded. The clinical data were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no mortality in either group. No significant differences were noted in morbidity, bile leakage rate, retained CBD stones, or readmission rate within 30 days between the two groups. Compared with the T-tube group, the PC group avoided T-tube-related complications and had a shorter operative time (121.12 min vs. 143.37 min) and length of postoperative hospital stay (6.59 days vs. 8.81 days). Moreover, the hospital expenses in the PC group were significantly lower than those in the T-tube group ($4844.47 vs. $5717.22). No biliary stricture occurred during a median follow-up of 18 months in any patient. No significant difference between the two groups was observed in the rate of stone recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE with primary closure is a safe and effective treatment for cholangitis caused by CBDSs. LCBDE with primary closure is not inferior to T-tube drainage for the management of CBDS-related acute cholangitis in suitable patients.

Is Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Safe For The Oldest old patients?

Background

This study aimed to identify the risk factors for postoperative complications of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) in the oldest old patients aged 80 years or older.

Methods

From March 2001 to October 2020, 363 patients underwent LCBDE with stone removal. Based on their ages, they were divided into two groups, those younger than 80 years (n=240) and those 80 years old or older (n=123). We compared patient demographics, disease characteristics, surgical outcomes, and postoperative complications based on these groups.

Results

The older group had a higher proportion of patients with a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥5 (p<0.001) and the American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical status classification ≥3 (p<0.001). In addition, the older group had longer postoperative hospital stays than younger group (7.5±6.1 days vs. 6.2±3.9 days, p=0.013). However, there were no significant differences between groups according to the postoperative complications (13.8% vs. 20.3%, p=0.130). According to multivariate analysis, the risk factors for postoperative complications were Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥5 (odds ratio [OR]=2.307; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.162–4.579; p=0.017) and operative time >2 hours (OR=3.204; 95% CI, 1.802–5.695; p<0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with Charlson Comorbidity Index <5 and operation time <2 hours, LCDBE with stone removal can be considered safe for the oldest old patients.

The Challenges of Sump Syndrome: a Case Report and Literature Review

Sump syndrome is a rare complication of a side to side choledochoduodenostomy (CDD). After the introduction of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in 1968 Kozarek (Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 13(10):620-622, 2017), choledochoduodenostomy and its complications are seldom seen. The diagnosis of sump syndrome is further befogged by the lack of characteristic clinical or laboratory findings, the inability of the patient to provide medical records of their CDD, and the fact that sump syndrome only presents decades after a CDD. In this article, we will present a case of a 39-year-old female patient who presented as a case of ascending cholangitis with an initially unknown past surgical history. A detailed medical history was thoroughly taken, and her previous medical reports were presented after which an ERCP was done with extraction of debris was preformed. In a time where choledochoduodenostomy is rarely being chosen as a choice of treatment and its complications are infrequently encountered, this case serves as a reminder that even in the ERCP era, complications of choledochoduodenostomy should still be well understood.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration by Chopstick Technique in Choledocholithiasis

Background and Objectives

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration (LC with LCBDE) remains the preferred technique for difficult common bile duct stone (CBDS) removal. The chopstick method uses commonly available instruments and may be cost-saving compared to other techniques. We studied the outcome of LCBDE using the chopstick technique to determine if it could be considered a first-choice method.

Methods

Data from all patients that underwent LCBDE from January 1, 2012 to April 30, 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. A standard 4-port incision and CBDS permitted extraction with two laparoscopic instruments by chopstick technique via vertical choledochotomy. Demographic data, stone clearance rate, surgical outcomes, complications, and other associated factors were evaluated.

Results

Thirty-two patients underwent LCBDE. The mean number of preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) sessions was 2.4. In 65.5% of cases, the CBDS was completely removed by the chopstick technique, while 96.9% of stones were removed after using additional tools. The need for additional instruments was associated with increased age, increased numbers of stones, longer period from the latest ERCP session, and previous upper abdominal surgery. The conversion rate to open surgery was 28.1% and was significantly associated with a history of upper abdominal surgery.

Conclusion

The chopstick technique is a good alternative and could be considered as a first-line technique in LCBDE to remove the CBDS in cases with 1 to 2 large suprapancreatic CBDS due to instrument availability, cost-effectiveness, and comparable surgical outcomes.

Horseshoe kidney leading to ERCP failure; innovative use of guide wire during laparoscopic CBD exploration: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Horseshoe kidneys are the most common fusion defect of the kidneys, which amounts to about 0.25% of the population. They are usually asymptomatic and are often identified incidentally. The horseshoe kidney can push the second and third part of the duodenum anteriorly, leading to an altered CBD course. Choledocholithiasis is seen in approximately 10-15% of patients with cholelithiasis. Presently, the most preferred approach for managing CBD stones is ERCP. However, in ERCP failure cases, Laparoscopic CBD exploration is the primary treatment modality, with or without T-tube use, with all the advantages of minimally invasive surgery.

CASE PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION

A 65-year-old female presented with complaints of pain in the right hypochondriac region for three months associated with nausea, jaundice, and loss of appetite and weight. Her USG abdomen showed cholelithiasis with dilated CBD with horseshoe kidney with severe hydronephrosis of the left kidney. They are usually asymptomatic and are often identified incidentally. In this patient, it was believed that the horseshoe kidney had pushed the second and third part of the duodenum anteriorly, leading to an altered CBD course leading to ERCP failure. MRCP confirmed cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis with dilated CBD of 11.3 mm with horseshoe kidney. ERCP was attempted but was unsuccessful due to non-visualization of the papilla due to overcrowding of duodenal folds. For patients with ERCP failure, laparoscopic CBD exploration is mandatory. For this patient, the CBD was cannulated with a guidewire, if needed, for repeat ERCP and was closed with T-tube in situ.

CONCLUSION

There are no particular preoperative indicators that can predict the failure of ERCP. However, in ERCP failure cases, laparoscopic CBD exploration (with or without T-tube use) is the primary treatment modality.

Should Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis Be a Specialist-Only Procedure?

Background: Common bile duct exploration (CBDE) is performed uncommonly. Issues surrounding its uptake in the laparoscopic era include perceived difficulty and lack of training. We aim to determine the success of CBDE performed by "specialist" and "nonspecialist" common bile duct (CBD) surgeons to determine whether there is a substantial difference in success and safety. Methods: A 10-year retrospective audit was performed of patients undergoing CBD exploration for choledocholithiasis. Northern Health maintains an on-call available "specialist" CBD surgeon roster to aid with CBDE. Results: Five hundred fifty-one patients were identified, of which 489/551 (88.7%) patients had stones successfully cleared. Specialists had a higher success rate (90.8% versus 82.6%, P = .008), associated with a longer surgical time. Method (transcystic or transductal), approach (laparoscopic or open), and indication for operation were similar between groups. There was no significant difference in complications. To be confident of a surgeon having an 80% success rate, 70 procedures over 10 years were required, however, an "in-control" 50% success rate may only require 1 procedure per year. Conclusion: While specialist CBDE surgeons have improved success rates, nonspecialist general surgeons also have a good and comparable success rate with an equivalent complication rate. With realistic annual targets, nonspecialist CBD surgeons should be encouraged to perform CBDE in centers without specialist support.

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.

Laparoscopic Exploration of the Common Bile Duct: A Systematic Review of the Published Evidence Over the Last 10 Years

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic and open surgical interventions are widely implemented as the standard practice in common bile duct exploration. However, the laparoscopic approach has been also reported to have comparative/superior outcomes in this concept. This has created an ongoing debate about the ideal approach to adopt in practice.

METHODS

A systematic review of the published evidence over the last decade that has looked into the outcomes of laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct through transductal and transcystic approaches.

RESULTS

Our systematic review included 36 relevant papers. The majority were based on nonrandomized protocols conducted in single centers with high expertise. The data analysis showed that laparoscopic common bile duct exploration through both approaches was successful in more than 84% of the patients, with an average length of hospital stay of 5.6 days. Conversion to open surgery was reported in 5%-8% of the patients, and the bile leak rates from the more recent studies was 0%-12%, with mortality figures of 0%-1.3%. The outcomes were statistically in favor of the transcystic route when compared to the transductal route from the viewpoints of bile leak rates, mean operative time, duration of hospital stay and morbidity.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, both laparoscopic approaches in common bile duct exploration are safe in patients who are clinically fit to have this intervention. It is associated with a statistically significant lower overall morbidity and shorter duration of hospital stay when compared to open surgery. Relevant up-to-date high-quality randomized trials are unavailable.

Single-stage management of choledocholithiasis: intraoperative ERCP versus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the criterion standard for treating patients with symptomatic gallstone disease; however, the optimal technique for extracting common bile duct stones remains unclear. Recent studies have noted improved outcomes with single-stage techniques, such as intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (iERCP) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); however only few studies have directly compared those two single-stage techniques.

OBJECTIVES

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, we retrospectively analyzed the postoperative outcomes of all patients who underwent single-stage LC for choledocholithiasis from 2005 to 2017. Using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, as well as International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes, we stratified patients into two cohorts: those who underwent iERCP and LCBDE. Applying univariate techniques, we evaluated baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes for both cohorts. Our primary outcomes of interest were 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality; our secondary outcomes included rates of reoperation, readmission, operative time, and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Of the 1814 single-stage LC patients during our 13-year study period, 1185 (65.3%) underwent LCBDE; 629 (34.6%) underwent iERCP. Our univariate analysis showed that the two cohorts were homogeneous in terms of baseline characteristics, including demographics, preoperative comorbidities, laboratory values, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores. 30-day postoperative morbidity (including infectious and noninfectious complications) and overall mortality between groups were low and comparable. The mean operative time was slightly longer with LCBDE (125.1 ± 62.0 min) than iERCP (113.5 ± 65.2 min; P < 0.001), however the mean hospital length of stay, readmission rate, and reoperation rate were similar.

CONCLUSION

We found that both iERCP and LCBDE resulted in low, comparable rates of morbidity and mortality. Centers with readily available endoscopic expertise might favor iERCP for its ease of access and shorter operative time. However, LCBDE remains an appropriate technique for patients with choledocholithiasis, especially when immediate endoscopic intervention is unavailable.

Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The ideal management for patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis is still controversial. Laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV), combined with laparoscopy and endoscopy, is a novel and attractive technique. The aim of this research was to compare LERV with traditional two-stage management, preoperative ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP + LC), for treating patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHOD

Four databases, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and Medline, all updated to through September 2019, were searched to identify comparative studies on LERV versus ERCP + LC for treating cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Total operative time, successful common bile duct (CBD) stone clearance, postoperative morbidity, conversion to other procedures, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. Pooled data were measured by odds ratios (ORs) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total of 1061 patients were included in this meta-analysis, including 542 patients who received LERV and 519 patients who received ERCP + LC. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding successful CBD stone clearance (OR 2.20, P = 0.10), postoperative bleeding (OR 0.67, P = 0.37), postoperative cholangitis (OR 0.66, P = 0.53), postoperative bile leak (OR 0.87, P = 0.81), or conversion to other procedures (OR 0.75, P = 0.62). The total operative time was longer in the LERV group (MD = 44.93, P < 0.00001), while LERV was associated with less postoperative pancreatitis than the two-stage management group (OR 0.26, P = 0.0003). The incidence of overall morbidity was lower in the LERV group than in the two-stage management group (OR 0.41, P < 0.0001), and the LERV group had a shorter hospital stay (MD = - 3.52, P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

LERV is equivalent to traditional two-stage procedures in terms of CBD stone clearance and conversion, with less pancreatitis, lower overall morbidity, and shorter hospital stay but longer operation time. More clinical trials are needed to determine the best treatment for patients in different conditions.

Concomitant laparoscopic cholecystectomy and antegrade wire, rendezvous cannulation of the biliary tree may reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis events

INTRODUCTION

For patients with a gallbladder in situ, choledocholithiasis is a common presenting symptom. Both two-session endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and subsequent cholecystectomy (CCY) and single-stage (simultaneous CCY/ERCP) have been described. We utilize an antegrade wire, rendezvous cannulation (AWRC) technique to facilitate ERCP during CCY. We hypothesized that AWRC would eliminate episodes of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

An IRB approved, retrospective review of patients who underwent ERCP via AWRC for choledocholithiasis during CCY was performed. Patient characteristics, pre/postoperative laboratory values, complications, and readmissions were reviewed. AWRC was conducted during laparoscopic or open CCY for evidence of choledocholithiasis with or without preoperative biliary pancreatitis or cholangitis. Following confirmatory intraoperative cholangiogram, a flexible tip guidewire was inserted antegrade into the cystic ductotomy, through the bile duct across the ampulla and retrieved in the duodenum with a duodenoscope. Standard ERCP maneuvers to clear the bile duct are then performed over the wire.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients (27 female, age 19-77, BMI 21-50 kg/m²) underwent intraoperative ERCP via AWRC technique during CCY. Seventeen underwent CCY for acute cholecystitis. Fifteen patients underwent transgastric ERCP in the setting of previous Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Mean total operative time was 214 min. Mean ERCP time was 31 min. Thirty-three patients had biliary stents placed. There were no cannulations or injections of the pancreatic duct. There were no intraoperative complications associated with the ERCP and no patients developed PEP. Three patients developed a postoperative subhepatic abscess requiring drainage.

CONCLUSION

AWRC is a useful technique for safe and efficient bile duct cannulation for therapeutic ERCP in the setting of choledocholithiasis at the time of CCY. Despite supine (rather than the traditional prone) positioning, total ERCP times were short and we eliminated any manipulation of the pancreatic duct. No patients in our series developed PEP or post-sphincterotomy bleeding.