Choledocholithiasis Without Cholelithiasis: Should the Gallbladder Stay or Should It Go?

A retrospective cohort study on the optimal interval between endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) are the most important procedures for patients with choledocholithiasis and gallstones. Many studies recommend early LC after ERCP; however, there is still no consensus on the optimal interval between the two. The purpose of this study was to investigate the appropriate timing of LC after ERCP in patients with choledocholithiasis and cholecystolithiasis. We retrospectively reviewed all ERCPs in our institution from November 2014 to August 2021. All eligible 261 patients were divided into ERCP-LC1 (≤3 days), ERCP-LC2 (3-7 days), and ERCP-LC3 (>7 days). We also reviewed 90 patients with elective LC as the LC group. Procedures, treatment outcomes, and postoperative adverse events were evaluated. In a total of 1642 ERCPs, 261 eligible patients were divided into ERCP-LC1 (n = 102), ERCP-LC2 (n = 113), and ERCP-LC3 (n = 46). The ERCP-LC groups had no difference in operation time, postoperative adverse events, and open conversion rate with the LC group, but the total hospital stay and hospital stay after LC were longer than the LC group. There were no differences between the ERCP-LC groups in operation time, hospital stay after LC, open conversion rate, postoperative adverse events, and efficacy. However, LC within 7 days and even 3 days after ERCP had significant advantages in improvement in total length of stay and medical expenses. Furthermore, we also found an increased risk of gallbladder gangrene and perforation in LC >7 days after ERCP. LC within 7 days and even 3 days after ERCP is a safe, effective, and economical method for patients with choledocholithiasis and gallstones.

Bile Duct Stones Predict a Requirement for Cholecystectomy in Older Patients

BACKGROUND

The requirement for elective cholecystectomy in older patients is unclear. To determine predictors for requiring elective cholecystectomy in older patients, a prospective cohort study was performed.

METHODS

All patients with gallstone disease who presented to our department from 2006 to 2018 were included if they met the following criteria: (1) age 75 years or older, (2) presentation for elective cholecystectomy, and (3) preoperative diagnosis of cholecystolithiasis. Two therapeutic options, elective surgery and a wait-and-see approach, were offered at their initial visit. Enrolled patients were assigned to one arm of the study according to their choice of the therapeutic options. The primary endpoint was the incidence of gallstone-related complications. The endpoint was compared between patients who underwent cholecystectomy (CH group) and those who chose a wait-and-see approach (No-CH group).

RESULTS

During the study period, there were 344 patients in the CH group and 161 in the No-CH group. Among patients with a history of bile duct stones, the incidence of gallstone-related complications in the No-CH group was significantly higher (45% within 3 years, including two gallstone-related deaths) than that in the CH group (RR 2.66, 95% confidence interval 1.50-4.77, p = 0.0009). Among patients with no history of bile duct stones, the incidence of gallstone-related complications in the No-CH group reached only 10% over the 12 years.

CONCLUSION

Cholecystectomy is recommended for older patients with both histories of cholecystolithiasis and bile duct stones, whereas a wait-and-see approach is preferable for patients with no bile duct stone history. A history of bile duct stones is a good predictor for cholecystectomy in older patients.