Single-step treatment of gall bladder and bile duct stones: a combined endoscopic-laparoscopic technique

Contemporary management of common bile duct stone: What you need to know

ABSTRACT

Choledocholithiasis is a common presentation of symptomatic cholelithiasis encountered by the acute care surgeon. There is a wide spectrum of variation in management of this disease due to evolutions in laparoscopic and endoscopic techniques. Intricacies in management are related to the timing of diagnosis as well as locally available imaging modalities, surgical expertise, and ancillary advanced endoscopy and interventional radiological support. While individual patient demographics and institutional characteristics will determine management of choledocholithiasis, it is incumbent for the treating surgeon to be well versed in all manners of therapy currently available. The objective of this review is to provide an evidence-based summary of the contemporary management of choledocholithiasis.

Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy and transductal T-tube insertion with indocyanine green fluorescence imaging and laparoscopic ultrasound: A case report

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy for a large impacted common bile duct (CBD) stone is a challenging procedure because of the technical difficulty and the possibility of postoperative complications, even in this era of minimally invasive surgery. Herein, we present a case of large impacted CBD stones.

CASE SUMMARY

A 71-year-old man showed a distal CBD stone (45 mm × 20 mm) and a middle CBD stone (20 mm × 15 mm) on computed tomography. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography failed due to the large size of the impacted stone and the presence of a large duodenal diverticulum. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy was decided, and we used a near-infrared indocyanine green fluorescence scope to detect and expose the supraduodenal CBD more accurately. Then, the location, size, and shape of the stones were detected using a laparoscopic intraoperative ultrasound. The CBD was opened with a 2-cm-sized vertical incision. After irrigating several times, two CBD stones were removed with the Endo BabcockTM. T-tube insertion was done for postoperative cholangiography and delayed the removal of remnant sludge. The patient had no postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy by transcholedochal approach and transductal T-tube insertion is a safe and feasible option for large-sized impacted CBD stones.

Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A meta-analysis

PURPOSES

Patients with cholecysto- and choledocholithiasis usually undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/-endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). However, differences in the timing of LC after the ERCP may alter the post-operative outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of early (≤3 days) or delayed LC (>3 days) following ERCP on the post-operative outcomes.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the 3 databases PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was performed. Articles related to LC at different time-points after ERCP were retrieved. Dichotomous and continuous outcomes were analyzed by risk ratio (RR) and mean difference, and RevMan was used to analyze each group.

RESULTS

A total of 7 studies, including 5 randomized controlled studies and 2 retrospective studies, involved a total of 711 patients. There were 332 patients in early LC group and 379 in delayed LC group. The conversion rate was lower in the early LC group compared to the delayed LC group (RR 0.38, 95% confident interval 0.19 to 0.74, P = .005, I2 = 0%). Early LC resulted in a shorter operation time (RR -6.2, 95% CI -27.2 to -5.2, P = .004, I2 = 97%) and fewer complications (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.79, P = .004, I2 = 17%). Subgroup analysis found that there were no significant differences in the conversion rate (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.45, P = .26, I2 = 0%) or complications between the early LC group and the delayed group who underwent LC after 1 month.

CONCLUSION

Early LC after ERCP is the preferred treatment for patients with concurrent cholecysto- and choledocholithiasis due to improved clinical outcomes as compared to those who undergo delayed LC.

Subtotal cholecystectomy: is it a safe option for difficult gall bladders?

INTRODUCTION

Subtotal cholecystectomy (STC) is an alternative to total cholecystectomy (TC) in patients with severe inflammation/adhesions around the hepatocystic triangle. This study aimed to evaluate the safety profile of STC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients who had STC at our unit between February 2009 and August 2019. STC was divided into two types, reconstituting (R-STC) and fenestrating (F-STC), depending on whether the gall bladder remnant was closed or left open. Patients who had cholecystectomy for gall bladder malignancy or as part of another operation were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

A total of 5,664 patients underwent cholecystectomy during the study period. Of these, 97 (1.7%) underwent STC. The laparoscopic to open conversion rate was high at 48.8% (47 cases), as was the overall postoperative complication rate (45.4%, 44 cases). No patient suffered iatrogenic bile duct injury. Nineteen patients (19.6%) suffered postoperative bile leak. This was significantly higher in patients who had STC in the acute setting (41% vs 13% for elective STC cases; p=0.04). There was no significant difference in rate of bile leak or other complications between R-STC and F-STC types. The 90-day readmission rate was 8.2% (8 cases). No mortalities were recorded within 90 days post STC.

CONCLUSIONS

STC seems to be an effective technique to avoid bile duct injury in difficult cholecystectomy cases. However, the perioperative morbidity associated with STC is relatively high. Surgeons should be aware of the risks of STC and take appropriate steps to minimise them.

Development of a Predictive Model for Common Bile Duct Stones in Patients With Clinical Suspicion of Choledocholithiasis: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Current choledocholithiasis guidelines heavily focus on patients with low or no risk, they may be inappropriate for populations with high rates of choledocholithiasis. We aimed to develop a predictive scoring model for choledocholithiasis in patients with relevant clinical manifestations.

METHODS

A multivariable predictive model development study based on a retrospective cohort of patients with clinical suspicion of choledocholithiasis was used in this study. The setting was a 700-bed public tertiary hospital. Participants were patients who had completed three reference tests (endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and intraoperative cholangiography) from January 2019 to June 2021. The model was developed using logistic regression analysis. Predictor selection was conducted using a backward stepwise approach. Three risk groups were considered. Model performance was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration, classification measures, and decision curve analyses.

RESULTS

Six hundred twenty-one patients were included; the choledocholithiasis prevalence was 59.9%. The predictors were age > 55 years, pancreatitis, cholangitis, cirrhosis, alkaline phosphatase level of 125 - 250 or > 250 U/L, total bilirubin level > 4 mg/dL, common bile duct size > 6 mm, and common bile duct stone detection. Pancreatitis and cirrhosis each had a negative score. The sum of scores was -4.5 to 28.5. Patients were categorized into three risk groups: low-intermediate (score ≤ 5), intermediate (score 5.5 - 14.5), and high (score ≥ 15). Positive likelihood ratios were 0.16 and 3.47 in the low-intermediate and high-risk groups, respectively. The model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95% confidence interval: 0.76, 0.83) and was well-calibrated; it exhibited better statistical suitability to the high-prevalence population, compared to current guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Our scoring model had good predictive ability for choledocholithiasis in patients with relevant clinical manifestations. Consideration of other factors is necessary for clinical application, particularly regarding the availability of expert physicians and specialized equipment.

Comparing One-Stage vs Two-Stage Approaches for the Management of Choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

The management of symptomatic choledocholithiasis remains a controversial issue. At present, the three most common management options for choledocholithiasis include a preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy and stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy, then by either an intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy or a laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. The purpose of this study was to assess the consequences of the decision to pursue each of these three methods.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the existing data comparing these three management options. The literature from 2009 to 2021 pertaining to these three methods was reviewed for data on duct clearance, morbidity, mortality, recurrence rate, length of stay, and operative time. Next, we constructed decision trees for each method using a utility score analysis, and these utility scores were used to create a sensitivity analysis based on stone clearance rate.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography had a utility score of 0.9910, a stone clearance rate of 95.5%, a morbidity of 6.3%, and a mortality of 0.2%. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with laparoscopic cholecystectomy had a utility score of 0.9629, a stone clearance rate of 85.5%, a morbidity of 13.3%, and a mortality of 0.8%. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration had a utility score of 0.9882, a stone clearance rate of 88.3%, a morbidity of 12.9%, and a mortality of 0.3%.

CONCLUSION

We have shown that a laparoscopic cholecystectomy with an intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is associated with the best overall outcomes.

Management of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis: Endoscopic and surgical approaches

Gallstone disease and complications from gallstones are a common clinical problem. The clinical presentation ranges between being asymptomatic and recurrent attacks of biliary pain requiring elective or emergency treatment. Bile duct stones are a frequent condition associated with cholelithiasis. Amidst the total cholecystectomies performed every year for cholelithiasis, the presence of bile duct stones is 5%-15%; another small percentage of these will develop common bile duct stones after intervention. To avoid serious complications that can occur in choledocholithiasis, these stones should be removed. Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the ideal management strategy to perform such. For a long time, a direct open surgical approach to the bile duct was the only unique approach. With the advent of advanced endoscopic, radiologic, and minimally invasive surgical techniques, however, therapeutic choices have increased in number, and the management of this pathological situation has become multidisciplinary. To date, there is agreement on preoperative management and the need to treat cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis, but a debate still exists on how to cure the two diseases at the same time. In the era of laparoscopy and mini-invasiveness, we can say that therapeutic approaches can be performed in two sessions or in one session. Comparison of these two approaches showed equivalent success rates, postoperative morbidity, stone clearance, mortality, conversion to other procedures, total surgery time, and failure rate, but the one-session treatment is characterized by a shorter hospital stay, and more cost benefits. The aim of this review article is to provide the reader with a general summary of gallbladder stone disease in association with the presence of common bile duct stones by discussing their epidemiology, clinical and diagnostic aspects, and possible treatments and their advantages and limitations.

What features on intraoperative cholangiogram predict endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography outcome in patients post cholecystectomy?

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a procedure performed to remove bile duct stones. Intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) is often performed at the time of cholecystectomy to determine the presence of intraductal stones. However, many of the ERCP procedures performed for this indication fail to find any intraductal stones. Given that ERCP carries significant patient morbidity, we investigated whether there are features on IOC that can guide ERCP patient selection.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 152 patients who had an IOC filing defect and a subsequent ERCP was performed.

RESULTS

Small single stones greater than or equal to 4.5 mm on IOC can be used to predict the presence of stones on a subsequent ERCP. Furthermore, ERCPs performed for single filling defects smaller than 4.5 mm are more likely to be negative if performed later rather than earlier, suggesting that small stones can pass over time. We show that 80% of these stones will pass by 11 days after the IOC.

CONCLUSION

Single small stones on IOC should be given adequate time to pass into the intestine. Imaging should be performed to determine if the stone has passed into the intestine after day 11 prior to performing a therapeutic ERCP.

Dormia basket impacted during ERCP, resolved by laparoscopic bile duct approach: Case report

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the method of choice for treating and removing common bile duct (CBD) stones with high success rates. Among the adverse effects, impaction of the Dormia basket when removing the stones is an unusual complication.

CASE PRESENTATION

Two cases of choledocholithiasis with endoscopic treatment by ERCP and Dormia basket impaction, resolved by a laparoscopic approach to the bile duct.

DISCUSSION

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been developed as a technique to treat choledocholithiasis and simultaneously vesicular lithiasis by laparoscopy. LCBDE can be by means of a transcystic approach or by choledochotomy. The success of the treatment depends on surgical experience and the availability of adequate equipment, with high effectiveness to eliminate CBD stones and a success rate greater than 95%, it is equally effective for the resolution of adverse events during ERCP.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE provides an alternative therapy where there is no other type of treatment for the resolution of complications of ERCP. It is a safe, effective and reliable technique with high success rates, which offers the benefits of a minimally invasive approach.

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

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

Dilation of the cystic duct confluence in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and stone extraction in patients with secondary choledocholithiasis

Background

Many options exist for the management of cholelithiasis and secondary choledocholithiasis. Among them, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with choledocotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy has gained popularity. However, efforts should be made to ensure minimally invasive or noninvasive management of the common bile duct (CBD). The purpose of this study was to explore the clinical experience of non-invasive surgical modality, i.e., laparoscopic transcystic dilation of the cystic duct confluence in CBD exploration (LTD-CBDE), including feasibility, safety, adverse events, and incidence.

Methods

In this retrospective analysis, 68 patients were offered the LTD-CBDE technique from December 2015 to April 2018 based on patient’s own intention. During the surgery, the cystic duct confluence was dilated with separation forceps and/or a columnar dilation balloon. Subsequently, CBD exploration and stone extraction were performed with a choledochoscope. The entrance of the CBD was covered with a cystic duct stump wall and was subjected to primary closure at the end of surgery.

Results

Forty-nine females and 19 males with cholelithiasis and secondary choledocholithiasis were included. The mean age was 53 years old (18 to 72 year). Of these patients, 62 (91.2%) were successfully treated with the LTD-CBDE technique, and bile leakage was observed in 3 patients (4.4%). The mean operation time was 106 min, and the mean hospital stay was 5.9 days. Among the other 6 patients, 3 were converted to open cholecystectomy due to severe fibrosis, unclear anatomical structure at Calot’s triangle (n = 2) or Mirizze syndrome (n = 1); LCBDE was performed in 3 patients due to cystic duct atresia (n = 2) and low level of flow from the gallbladder duct into the CBD (n = 1). These patients had a smooth postoperative course. In total, 43/68 of the patients presented no radiological evidence of retained CBD stones at the postoperative follow-up (40 patients treated with LTD-CBDE) 1 year later.

Conclusions

The current work suggests that LTD-CBDE for the management of cholelithiasis and secondary choledocholithiasis is a feasible, safe and effective technique with a low complication rate. LTD-CBDE offers another alternative for surgeons to treat patients in similar scenarios. However, additional randomized, controlled studies are needed to demonstrate its efficacy, safety, and impact on CBD stenosis.

[Laparoscopic rendezvous surgery for cholecystocholedocholithiasis]

OBJECTIVE

To present a modified technique of laparoscopic surgery (Rendezvous technique) for cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

There were 41 patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis who underwent hybrid single-stage laparoscopic surgery (Rendezvous technique) as an alternative to conventional two-stage approach.

RESULTS

Two (4.8%) patients had elevated serum amylase level without signs of pancreatitis in postoperative period. Other 2 patients required redo transpapillary intervention due to residual stones. Laparoscopic interventions were successful in 95.2% of cases.

Primary duct closure combined with transcystic drainage versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy

BACKGROUND

We compared the post-operative course and final outcome of primary duct closure combined with transcystic drainage with those of T-tube drainage.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 112 consecutive patients treated with laparoscopic choledochotomy for common bile duct stones between February 2014 and December 2017. Primary closure with transcystic drainage was performed in 59 patients (group A), and laparoscopic choledochotomy with T-tube drainage was performed in 53 (group B). The primary endpoints were morbidity, the bile drainage quantity, operative time, post-operative stay, time until return to work and post-operative complications.

RESULTS

The operation was successfully completed in all patients. The return to work period in group A was significantly shorter than that in group B (7.25 ± 1.27 versus 46.47 ± 3.86 days, P < 0.05). The average daily drainage was not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the operation time (133.75 ± 14.51 versus 132.21 ± 12.71 min) and duration of hospital stay (5.15 ± 1.23 versus 5.94 ± 0.95 days) between the two groups (P > 0.05). Bile leakage was seen in one T-tube removal patient. No complications were reported in group A. The patients were followed for 2 to 29 months (average: 10). Normal liver function and no stricture of the bile duct were detected with ultrasonography.

CONCLUSION

Primary closure of choledochotomy and subsequent transcystic drainage is a simple and less invasive procedure than T-tube placement.

Comparison of mean pain scores for the patients with sub hepatic drainage to those without it after elective uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Objective:

The sub hepatic drain is often placed after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is considered to affect post operative infection, pain and sub hepatic collections. The objective of this study was to compare the degree of postoperative pain in patients with routine drainage with those without it after elective, uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Methods:

This randomized control trial (RCT) was done over six months from 9^th June 2015 to 8^th December 2015 at Military Hospital Rawalpindi. Sample calculated with WHO calculator and consecutive non probability random sampling used to divide 170 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in two groups. One group had routine sub hepatic drain and other didn’t. Degree of postoperative pain was assessed according to VISUAL ANALOGUE SCALE by duty doctor at 24 hours. Data was collected and analyzed applying chi square test and p value was <.05 considered statistically significant.

Results:

Our results demonstrated that intensity of post operative pain in routine drainage group is higher as compared to non drainage group after elective, uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Conclusion:

Routine placement of sub hepatic drain in elective uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be avoided to reduce post-operative pain.

Transcystic versus traditional laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: its advantages and a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The best approach for treating common bile duct stones remains a matter of debate. Traditional laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) can cause adverse events such as stenosis of the bile duct. Moreover, with advances in technology and surgical skills, the use of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) is gradually rising.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety, feasibility, and short-term clinical benefits of LTCBDE and LCBDE through matched cases.

METHODS

Web of science, Cochrane, PubMed, and CNKI were searched systematically to identify studies published between January 2007 and December 2017 that compared LTCBDE and LCBDE without a restriction of languages. This meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies matched the selection criteria, including 1561 cases of LTCBDE and 1500 cases of LCBDE. There was no obvious difference in stone clearance (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.84-2.47; P = 0.18). However, LTCBDE had a shorter operative time (MD - 17.72, 95% CI - 19.42 to - 16.02; P < 0.00001) and shorter hospital stay (MD - 2.20, 95% CI - 2.32 to - 2.08; P < 0.00001). Besides, the LTCBDE group showed significantly better results for blood loss (MD - 7.61, 95% CI - 8.85 to - 6.37; P < 0.00001) and postoperative complications (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19-0.41; P < 0.00001). In addition, LTCBDE was more cost efficient (MD - 2.51, 95% CI - 2.72 to - 2.30; P < 0.00001). Further, we calculated the absolute mean of operative time (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 97.56:117.81 min), hospital stay (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 5.22:8.91 days), hospital expenses (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 8646.121:11848.31 RMB), blood loss (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 29.3:52.0 ml), the rate of CBD stone clearance (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 92.8:95.0%), and postoperative complications (LTCBDE:LCBDE = 6.7:14.6%) in both groups to obtain more convincing results.

CONCLUSIONS

The stone clearance of LTCBDE was equal to that of LCBDE, and LTCBDE demonstrated a shorter operative time, lower blood loss, and other advantages. Thus, the surgical procedure of laparoscopic transcystic choledochotomy is feasible and safe.

Total bilirubin trend as a predictor of common bile duct stones in acute cholecystitis and symptomatic cholelithiasis

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that trends in total bilirubin in the context of cholecystitis and symptomatic cholelithiasis could be used to guide testing for the presence of common bile duct stones (CBDS).

METHODS

A review of adult patients with acute cholecystitis or biliary colic with elevated total bilirubin and at least two levels drawn prior to procedural intervention was performed. Trends of total bilirubin and other serum makers were examined to predict the presence of CBDS.

RESULTS

The total bilirubin level at presentation, average over 24 h and average over 48 h (3.74 mg/dl vs. 2.29 mg/dl, p = 0.005; 3.72 mg/dl vs. 2.40 mg/dl, p = 0.009; 2.41 mg/dl vs. 1.47 mg/dl, p < 0.001) respectively, were all higher in those with CBDS. However, prediction was not improved by following levels over time.

CONCLUSION

Patients presenting with elevated serum bilirubin, should undergo immediate imaging or procedural intervention rather than obtaining follow-up bilirubin levels.

Inpatient Choledocholithiasis Requiring ERCP and Cholecystectomy: Outcomes of a Combined Single Inpatient Procedure Versus Separate-Session Procedures

OBJECTIVES

Separate-session endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the usual method for management of inpatient choledocholithiasis. Our goal was to compare single operative-session LC and ERCP to a multi-session approach for both the same hospitalization and within 30 days after; there is limited data comparing the three groups.

METHODS

A retrospective review on inpatients with choledocholithiasis that underwent ERCP and LC was performed. Single operative-session ERCP + LC (SOS group) and separate hospitalization ERCP + LC (DH group) were compared against the control cohort: separate-session ERCP + LC performed during the same hospitalization (SH group).

RESULTS

Among the 214 cases, 37 (17%) had LC + ERCP performed under a single operative session (SOS), 130 (60.7%) cases had LC + ERCP performed in separate operative sessions during the same hospitalization (SH), and 47 (22%) cases had LC + ERCP performed in different hospitalizations, within 30 days (DH). There was no statistically significant difference in efficacy or adverse events. The SOS group had a statistically significant mean shorter length of hospital stay as compared to the SH and DH groups (5.46 vs 7.15 vs 9.38; p = 0.05 and 0.02). There was a statistically significant reduction in the total cost of care in the SOS group versus the SH group ($59,221 vs $75, 808; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

The SOS approach is safe, efficacious, and cost-efficient when compared to separate operative sessions. This approach can be considered in situations where it is preferable for the patient to undergo a single session of anesthesia, without compromising technical success and safety.

Laparoscopy-Assisted Trans-Gastric Rendez-vous for the Treatment of Common Bile Duct Stones in Patients with Prior Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones in a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) represent a major challenge for ERCP due to long-limb anatomy. Trans-gastric approach has been proposed but entails high ERCP-related risks. Laparoscopy assisted trans-gastric rendez-vous (LATG-RV) is a one-step procedure that may lower the risks of these patients.

METHODS

We describe our initial experience in four patients with past history of RYGB and CBD stones.

RESULTS

All patients underwent LATG-RV and had successful CBD stone clearance. Postoperative course was uneventful with normal amylase levels. Average procedure time was 105 min and postoperative stay 2 days.

CONCLUSION

LATG-RV is a safe and effective procedure for the clearance of CBD stones in RYGB patients. It may have fewer complications and shorter operative time than regular trans-gastric ERCP.

Strategies of minimally invasive treatment for intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones

Cholelithiasis is a kind of common and multiple diseases. In recent years, traditional laparotomy has been challenged by a minimally invasive surgery. Through literature review, the therapeutic method, effect, and complications of minimally invasive treatment of intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones by combining our practical experience were summarized as follows. (1) For intrahepatic bile duct stones, the operation may be selected by laparoscopic liver resection, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), or percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy. (2) For concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones, the surgical approach can be selected as follows: laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) or endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation, LC plus laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration, LC plus LCBDE, and T-tube drainage or primary suture. (3) For concomitant intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones, laparoscopic liver resection, choledochoscopy through the hepatic duct orifice on the hepatectomy cross section, LCBDE, EST, and percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy could be used. According to the abovementioned principle, the minimally invasive treatment approach combined with the surgical technique and equipment condition will be significant in improving the therapeutic effect and avoiding the postoperative complications or hidden dangers of intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic bile duct exploration versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) plus laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) stones exploration (LCBDE) with LC plus endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of patients with gallstones and CBD stones.

METHODS

The authors searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase to identify relevant studies. Risk ratios (RRs) were pooled to compare stone clear, retained stone, conversion to other procedures, and complications. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) were pooled to compare operative time, and length of hospital stay. A fixed-effects model or random-effects model was used to pool the estimates, according to the heterogeneity among the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1663 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled estimate suggested that LC-LCBDE had comparable effects with LC-EST in terms of CBD stone clear rate (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.09; P = .583), retained stones rate (RR = 1.27, 95% CI: 0.51, 3.19; P = .607), and length of hospital stay (WMD = -0.96 days, 95% CI: -2.20, 0.28). In addition, LC-LCBDE was associated with significantly higher conversion rate (RR = 1.59, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.35; P = .019) and less operative time (WMD = -11.55 minutes, 95% CI: -16.68, -6.42; P < .001) than LC-EST. The incidence of complications was not significant difference between the 2 surgical approaches (RR = 1.07, 95% CI: 0.86, 1.34; P = .550).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current evidence, both LC-LCBDE and LC-EST were highly effective in detecting and removing CBD stones and were equivalent in complications. However, our results might be biased by the limitations. Large-scale well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm our findings.

Ultrathin choledochoscope improves outcomes in the treatment of gallstones and suspected choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and simultaneous laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) using an ultrathin choledochoscope with LC followed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERC) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) when indicated.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients seen between 2004 and 2014 and treated with LC+LTCBDE or LC for gallstones and suspected choledocholithiasis. Postoperative complications and surgical outcomes were compared using t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, or chi-square test.

RESULTS

115 patients underwent successful LC+LTCBDE and 112 LC; follow-up data was available for 103 and 106 patients, respectively. Seventeen patients (16.5%) in the LC+LTCBDE group and 10 (28.6%) in the LC+ERC+ES group developed complications (P = 0.114). The LC+LTCBDE group had a significantly higher rate of satisfactory biliary function outcomes than the LC+ERC+ES group (98.1% vs. 85.7%, respectively) (P = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Single-step LC+LTCBDE using an ultrathin choledochoscope may provide better outcomes in patients with gallstones and suspected choledocholithiasis.

Endoscopic versus laparoscopic treatment for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Background and study aims: Overall, 5 % to 15 % of patients undergoing cholecystectomy for cholelithiasis have concomitant bile duct stones, and the incidence of choledocholithiasis increases with age. There is no clear consensus on the best therapeutic approach (endoscopic versus surgical). Patients and methods: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial was performed to compare three treatment options for patients with choledocholithiasis at the National Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery in Havana, Cuba from November 2007 to November 2011. The patients were randomized in three groups. Group I: patients who underwent intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) to confirm the choledocholithiasis followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) associated with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), group II: patients who underwent preoperative ERCP followed by LC during the same hospital admission and group III: patients who underwent IOC to confirm the choledocholithiasis followed by LC associated with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Results: A total of 300 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis were included in the trial and were randomized. As a result, a total of 134 patients were diagnosed with the presence of choledocholithiasis and treated during the study period. There were no significant differences in success rates of ductal stone clearance, but retained stone, postoperative complications and length of hospital stay were better in group I. Conclusions: Intraoperative ERCP/ES shows a higher rate of common bile duct stones clearance, a shorter hospital stay, and lower morbidity, but further research with a larger study population is necessary to determine the additional benefits of this procedure. The results to date suggests that in appropriate patients, single-stage treatments are the best options.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

A survey on concomitant common bile duct stone and symptomatic gallstone and clinical values in Shiraz, Southern Iran

Background:

Common bile duct stone (CBDS) as a result of gallstone is one of the gastrointestinal disorders. In this study, the incidence of CBDS and symptomatic gallstone in Shiraz were investigated, and their management suggested.

Materials and Methods:

This is a retrospective study that enrolled among 560 patients. The incidence of gallstone together with CBDS was evaluated using an ultrasonography studyand clinical data in the period between March 2014 and 2014 in Shiraz. Comparison between data was done using Student’s t-test or Chi-square test.

Results:

Of these patients, 18.6% were male, and 81.4% were female with a mean age of 47.67 ± 0.74 years. The concomitant rate of gallstone and CBDS was 8.6%. 6.8% of patients with concomitant of gallstone and CBDS showed symptoms while 1.8% had not been diagnosed before the operation. The mean of serum alkaline phosphatase level in patients with the only gallstone was 255.80 IU/L and patients with concomitant gallstone, and CBDS was 580.88 IU/L with a significant difference between two groups (P < 0.001). Furthermore, liver function tests (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine transaminase) showed a significant difference between two groups of patients (P < 0.01, P < 0.001).

Conclusions:

Clinical variables such as tenderness, fever, and Morphy sign were more severein patients with concomitant gallstone and CBDS. The concomitant rate of gallstone and CBDS in our society is less that Western countries and asymptomatic patients showed fewer ratios than other countries. We think the approach for asymptomatic CBDS patients with gallstone can be affected by our results.

Strategy of minimally invasive surgery for patients with intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones

Cholelithiasis is a common, frequently occurring disease. In recent years, traditional laparotomy is challenged by minimally invasive surgery. Through literature review combined with our practical experience based on the present situation of minimally invasive treatment of intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones, a strategy for improving the effectiveness of minimally invasive treatment is discussed as follows: (1) For intrahepatic bile duct stones, laparoscopic hepatectomy, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), or percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy can be chosen according to the indications; (2) For concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) + endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) or endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD), LC + laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE), LC + LCBDE + T tube drainage or primary suture can be chosen according to the indications; (3) For concomitant intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones, laparoscopic liver resection, choledochoscopy through the hepatic duct orifice on the hepatectomy cross-section, LCBDE, EST, or percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy could be chosen according to the indications. Reasonable selection of minimally invasive treatments according to this strategy is of great significance to improve the therapeutic effect for intrahepatic and extrahepatic bile duct stones.

Intraoperative ERCP for management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: choledochotomy versus transcystic approach?

PURPOSE

To compare the difference of primary suture following 3-port laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) between modified transcystic and transcholedochal approach in the treatment of choledocholithiasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent 3-port LCBDE by modified transcystic approach (n = 80) and those who underwent 3-port LCBDE by transcholedochal approach (n = 209) were included in this study. The operative time, duration of hospital stay, diameter of the cystic duct, diameter of the common bile duct (CBD), complications, and demographics were retrospectively analyzed in all patients.

RESULTS

All operations were successfully performed. No patient was converted to laparotomy. No mortality was associated with the 2 groups. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups for the operative time (91.94 ± 34.21 min vs. 96.13 ± 32.15 min), duration of hospital stay (9.82 ± 3.48 d vs. 10.74 ± 5.34 d), diameter of cystic duct (0.47 ± 0.09 cm vs. 0.47 ± 0.08 cm), and complications (2.5% vs. 2.87%) (all P > 0.05). A significant difference was observed in terms of the diameter of CBD (1.18 ± 0.29 cm vs. 1.04 ± 0.24 cm P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The modified transcystic LCBDE was safe and feasible for treating choledocholithiasis but it might be more suitable for the CBD with a smaller diameter.

Management and Outcome of Borderline Common Bile Duct with Stones: A Prospective Randomized Study

INTRODUCTION

Management of common bile duct stones (CBDS) in patients with borderline CBD presents a surgical challenge. The aim of this study was to compare conservative treatment with endoscopic stone extraction for the treatment of borderline CBD with stones.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective randomized controlled trial includes patients with CBDS in borderline CBD (CBD <10 mm) associated with gallbladder stones who were treated with conservative treatment or endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC). The primary outcome was successful CBD clearance. The secondary outcomes were the overall complications, cost, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

LC and IOC revealed complete clearance of CBDS in 48 (96%) cases in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) group (52% of patients by ERCP, and 44% of patient passed the stone spontaneously), and in the remaining two patients, the CBDS was removed by transcystic exploration. In the conservative group, LC and IOC revealed complete clearance of CBDS in 90% of cases, and in the remaining 10% of patients, the CBDS was removed by transcystic exploration. Post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is noticed significantly in the ERCP group (2 [4%] versus 8 [16%]; P = .04). The average net cost was significantly higher in the ERCP group. Recurrent biliary symptoms developed significantly in the ERCP group after 1 year (10% versus 0%; P = .02) in the form of recurrent cholangititis and recurrent CBDS.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of CBDS in patients with borderline CBD represents a surgical challenge. Borderline CBD increases the technical difficulty of ERCP and increases the risk of PEP. Conservative management of CBDS in borderline CBD not only avoids the risks inherent in ERCP and unnecessary preoperative ERCP, but it is also effective in clearing CBDS. The hepatobiliary surgeon should consider a conservative line of treatment in CBDS in borderline CBD in order to decrease the cost and avoid unnecessary ERCP.

Intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography: A useful tool in the hands of the hepatobiliary surgeon

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for patients with gall bladder stones (GS) and common bile duct stones (CBDS).

METHODS: Patients treated for GS with CBDS were included. LC and intraoperative transcystic cholangiogram (TCC) were performed in most of the cases. Intraoperative ERCP was done for cases with proven CBDS.

RESULTS: Eighty patients who had GS with CBDS were included. LC was successful in all cases. Intraoperative TCC revealed passed CBD stones in 4 cases so intraoperative ERCP was performed only in 76 patients. Intraoperative ERCP showed dilated CBD with stones in 64 cases (84.2%) where removal of stones were successful; passed stones in 6 cases (7.9%); short lower end stricture with small stones present in two cases (2.6%) which were treated by removal of stones with stent insertion; long stricture lower 1/3 CBD in one case (1.3%) which was treated by open hepaticojejunostomy; and one case (1.3%) was proved to be ampullary carcinoma and whipple’s operation was scheduled.

CONCLUSION: The hepatobiliary surgeon should be trained on ERCP as the third hand to expand his field of therapeutic options.

Single-session minimally invasive management of common bile duct stones

Up to 18% of patients submitted to cholecystectomy had concomitant common bile duct stones. To avoid serious complications, these stones should be removed. There is no consensus about the ideal management strategy for such patients. Traditionally, open surgery was offered but with the advent of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) minimally invasive approach had nearly replaced laparotomy because of its well-known advantages. Minimally invasive approach could be done in either two-session (preoperative ERCP followed by LC or LC followed by postoperative ERCP) or single-session (laparoscopic common bile duct exploration or LC with intraoperative ERCP). Most recent studies have found that both options are equivalent regarding safety and efficacy but the single-session approach is associated with shorter hospital stay, fewer procedures per patient, and less cost. Consequently, single-session option should be offered to patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiaisis provided that local resources and expertise do exist. However, the management strategy should be tailored according to many variables, such as available resources, experience, patient characteristics, clinical presentations, and surgical pathology.

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.

Use of rigid tubal ligation scope: Serendipity in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

AIM

To assess the feasibility, safety of rigid tubal ligation scope in laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Rigid nephroscope was used for laparoscopic CBD exploration until one day we tried the same with the rigid tubal ligation scope, which was passed easily into CBD both proximally and distally visualising the interior of the duct for presence of stone that were removed using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) basket. This serendipity led us to use this scope for numerous patients from then on. A total of 62 patients, including male and female, underwent laparoscopic CBD exploration after choledochotomy with rigid tubal ligation scope between March 2007 and December 2012 followed by cholecystectomy. All the patients had both cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis with minimum duct diameter of 12 mm. A total of 48 patients were given T-tube through choledochotomy and closed, and the remaining 14 patients had primary closure of choledochotomy.

RESULTS

There were no intra-operative complications in any of the patients like CBD injury or portal vein injury. Post-operatively graded clamping of T-tube was done and was removed after 15 days in the patients who were given T-tube. None had retained the stone after T-tube cholangiography, which was done before removing the tube. Mean duration of follow up was 6 months. No patients had any complaints during the follow up.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic CBD exploration is also feasible with rigid tubal ligation scope. With experienced surgeons, CBD injury is very minimal and stone clearance can be achieved in almost all patients. This rigid tubal ligation scope can be an alternative to other rigid and flexible scopes.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of intraoperatively demonstrated choledocholithiasis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy and complications of postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in confirming and treating choledocholithiasis found at intraoperative cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

Patients who had undergone ERCP following a cholecystectomy between 2008 and 2011 with an indication of intraoperative cholangiography findings consistent with choledocholithiasis were identified from a prospectively collected database of a single endoscopist. Deep biliary access rate, confirmation of choledocholithiasis, clearance rate of bile duct stones, delay between cholecystectomy and postoperative ERCP, and the complication rates following the procedure were analysed.

RESULTS

The median age of the 41 patients (16 male, 25 female) was 42 years (range: 18–82 years). Sixteen surgeons performed the operations with a median delay of 6 days (range: 1–103 days) between cholecystectomy and postoperative ERCP. Common bile duct access was achieved in 100% of the patients, with ERCP taking a median time of 16 minutes (range: 6–40 minutes). Initial ERCP confirmed the presence of a stone in 30 patients (73%) and successful stone removal occurred in 28 of these 30 patients (93%) during the first ERCP and in the remaining 2 on a subsequent ERCP. Following ERCP, two patients (4.9%) experienced extended hospital stays for four and eight days owing to complications, including one patient (2.4%) with mild acute pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that postoperative ERCP is highly effective in both confirming and treating choledocholithiasis. However, there is a significant risk of short-term complications that must be taken into consideration when deciding management.

Rendezvous technique for cholecystocholedochal lithiasis in octogenarians: is it as effective as in younger patients, or should endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy be preferred?

BACKGROUND

The treatment of cholecystocholedochal lithiasis (CCL) requires cholecystectomy and common bile duct (CBD) clearance, which can be achieved surgically or with a combination of surgery and endoscopy. The latter includes a two-stage-approach-preoperative retrograde cholangiography (ERC) and sphincterotomy (ST) followed by delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), or vice versa-or a one-stage-approach-the rendezvous technique (RVT), where ERC, ST, and LC are performed during the same procedure. No data on the use of RVT in octogenarians have been reported in the literature so far. The study aims to show whether the RVT is as effective in elderly as in younger patients. Moreover, results of RVT are compared with those of a two-stage sequential treatment (TSST) in octogenarians, to identify the best approach to such a population.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Prospectively collected data of 131 consecutive patients undergoing RVT for biliary tract stone disease were retrospectively analyzed. Two analyses were performed: (1) results of RVT (operative time, conversion rate, CBD clearance, morbidity/mortality, hospital stay, costs, and need for further endoscopy) were compared between octogenarians and younger patients, and (2) results of RVT in the elderly were compared with those of 27 octogenarians undergoing TSST for CCL.

RESULTS

Octogenarians undergoing RVT were in poorer general condition (P<.0001) and had a higher conversion rate (P<.0001) and a longer hospital stay (P<.007) than younger patients. No differences in the rates of CBD clearance, surgery-related morbidity, mortality, and costs were recorded. Although octogenarians undergoing RVT were in poorer general condition than those undergoing TSST, the results of the two approaches were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

RVT in the elderly seems to be as cost-effective as in younger patients; nevertheless, it may lead to a higher conversion rate and longer hospital stay. In octogenarians, RVT is not inferior to TSST in the treatment of CCL even for patients in poor condition.

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.

Synchronous vs sequential laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis

AIM: To compare synchronous laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and sequential LC combined with EST for treating cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHODS: A total of 150 patients were included and retrospectively studied. Among these, 70 were selected for the synchronous operation, in which the scheme was endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography combined with EST during LC. The other 80 patients were selected for the sequential operation, in which the scheme involved first cutting the papillary muscle under endoscopy and then performing LC. The indexes in the two groups, including the operation time, the success rate, the incidence of complications, and the length of the hospital stay, were observed.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the numbers of patients, sex distribution, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, serum bilirubin, γ-glutamyl transpeptidase, mean diameter of common bile duct stones, and previous medical and surgical history (P = 0.54, P = 0.18, P = 0.52, P = 0.22, P = 0.32, P = 0.42, P = 0.68, P = 0.70, P = 0.47 and P = 0.57). There was no significant difference in the surgical operation time between the two groups (112.1 ± 30.8 min vs 104.9 ± 18.2 min). Compared with the sequential operation group, the incidence of pancreatitis was lower (1.4% vs 6.3%), the incidence of hyperamylasemia (1.4% vs 10.0%, P < 0.05) was significantly reduced, and the length of the hospital stay was significantly shortened in the synchronous operation group (3 d vs 4.5 d, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION: For treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis, synchronous LC combined with EST reduces incidence of complications, decreases length of hospital stay, simplifies the surgical procedure, and reduces operation time.

Rendezvous cannulation technique reduces post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective nationwide study of 12,718 ERCP procedures

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate if intraoperative rendezvous cannulation reduces the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) because there is no universal consensus on the optimal treatment of common bile duct stones.

METHODS

We performed a nationwide case-control study, nested within the cohort of ERCP procedures reported to the Swedish Registry for Gallstone Surgery and ERCP (GallRiks), between 2007 and 2009. Data were collected prospectively from a web-based registry of ERCP procedures that includes variables such as patient characteristics, indication, cannulation technique, diagnostic findings, therapeutic measures, and complications. The primary outcome was PEP.

RESULTS

The registry included 12,718 ERCP procedures performed on patients without a history of previous ERCP. The risk of PEP when using the rendezvous technique compared with those who were cannulated by conventional means was reduced from 3.6 to 2.2% (odds ratio (OR) 0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.2-0.9, P=0.02). Although a significant reduction there are overall relatively few cases with PEP and the calculated numbers needed to treat to avoid one case of PEP is as high as 71. Other factors associated with increased risk of PEP were young age, prolonged procedure time, and elective ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Rendezvous bile duct cannulation during ERCP reduces the risk of PEP from 3.6 to 2.2% compared with conventional biliary cannulation.

A 10-year study of rendezvous intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography during cholecystectomy and the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Rendezvous intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (RV-IOERC), also called guidewire-facilitated IOERC, is one of the single-stage options available for managing common bile duct stones (CBDS) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The objective of this study is to investigate procedure-related complications in IOERC patients and stone clearance.

METHODS

All patients who underwent IOERC between January 2000 and December 2009 were identified from the local registry of Karolinska University Hospital in Huddinge. Medical charts and ERC reports were studied, and descriptive statistics were obtained. Outcomes were procedure-related complications, especially post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), stone clearance, and mortality.

RESULTS

307 patients were identified. In 264 of the patients, the rendezvous cannulation technique was successful (86 %); in the remaining 43 patients, conventional cannulation technique was necessary. In total, PEP occurred in seven patients (2.28 %). One of the PEP patients was in the rendezvous cannulated group (0.37 %), whereas six patients developed PEP in the nonrendezvous group (13.95 %, p < 0.001). The primary stone clearance rate was 88.27 % (271/307). There was no mortality within 90 days in the series.

CONCLUSIONS

IOERC with RV cannulation technique for management of CBDS during laparoscopic cholecystectomy has a low PEP rate and a high stone clearance rate, making it a safe and feasible method for removing CBDS. However, the technique requires logistics to perform IOERC in the operating theater. The present data suggest that IOERC with RV cannulation is superior to conventional cannulation with respect to risk of PEP.

Preoperative versus intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with gallbladder and suspected common bile duct stones: system review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Conducting preoperative versus intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with gallbladder and suspected common bile duct stones remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the outcomes of preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (POES) versus intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOES).

METHODS

We searched multiple electronic databases for prospective, randomized, controlled trials related to safety and effectiveness of POES versus IOES. Relative risk ratios (RRs) were estimated with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) based on an intention-to-treat analysis. We considered the following outcomes: clearance rate, postprocedural complications, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

Five trials with 631 patients (318 with POES, 313 with IOES) were analyzed. Although the overall rates of common bile duct stone clearance were similar between POES and IOES (RR 0.96, 95 % CI 0.91-1.01; p = 0.13), the failure rate of common bile duct cannulation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was significantly higher for IOES (RR 2.54, 95 % CI 1.23-5.26; p = 0.01). The pooled RR after POES for overall complication rates was similar to that for IOES (RR 1.56, 95 % CI 0.94-2.59; p = 0.09). However, compared with IOES, the RR risk of ERCP-related complications was significantly higher for POES (RR 2.27, 95 % CI 1.18-4.40, p = 0.01), especially in the patients at high risk of developing post-ERCP pancreatitis. There was no significant difference in morbidity after laparoscopic cholecystectomy or required subsequent open surgery between the two groups. In the subgroup analyses, the RR risks of post-ERCP pancreatitis were significantly higher for POES (RR 4.85, 95 % CI 1.41-16.66, p = 0.01), and mean hospital stay was longer in the POES group (RR 2.22, 95 % CI 1.98-246; p < 0.01). However, the rates of bleeding, perforation, cholangitis, cholecystitis, and gastric ulceration did not differ significantly between POES and IOES.

CONCLUSIONS

With regard to the stone clearance and overall complication rates, POES is equal to IOES in patients with gallbladder and common bile duct stones. However, IOES is associated with a reduced incidence of ERCP-related pancreatitis and results in a shorter hospital stay.

Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones

AIM: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.

METHODS: Four databases, including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Science Citation Index up to September 2011, were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were extracted from the studies by two independent reviewers. The primary outcomes were stone clearance from the common bile duct, postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were conversion to other procedures, number of procedures per patient, length of hospital stay, total operative time, hospitalization charges, patient acceptance and quality of life scores.

RESULTS: Seven eligible RCTs [five trials (n = 621) comparing preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); two trials (n = 166) comparing postoperative ERCP/EST + LC with LC + LCBDE], composed of 787 patients in total, were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis detected no statistically significant difference between the two groups in stone clearance from the common bile duct [risk ratios (RR) = -0.10, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.24 to 0.04, P = 0.17], postoperative morbidity (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.10, P = 0.16), mortality (RR = 2.19, 95% CI: 0.33 to 14.67, P = 0.42), conversion to other procedures (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.54 to 2.70, P = 0.39), length of hospital stay (MD = 0.99, 95% CI: -1.59 to 3.57, P = 0.45), total operative time (MD = 12.14, 95% CI: -1.83 to 26.10, P = 0.09). Two-stage (LC + ERCP/EST) management clearly required more procedures per patient than single-stage (LC + LCBDE) management.

CONCLUSION: Single-stage management is equivalent to two-stage management but requires fewer procedures. However, patient’s condition, operator’s expertise and local resources should be taken into account in making treatment decisions.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and effective

Management strategy for common bile duct (CBD) stones is controversial with several treatment options if stones in the CBD are recognized intraoperatively. The aim of this study was to report our experience with same-session combined endoscopic-laparoscopic treatment of gallbladder and CBD stones. We retrospectively evaluated 31 patients with cholecystolithiasis and CBD stones undergoing same-session combined endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy and endoscopic stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Same-session ERCP and sphincterotomy were performed in all patients, and stone extraction was successfully performed in 29 patients (93%) with 2 failures (7%) due to impacted stones. In 8 patients (26%), the laparoscopic procedure was converted to open cholecystectomy because of dense adhesions or unclear anatomy. Two patients (7%) developed mild pancreatitis postoperatively and no other morbidity or mortality. In conclusion, same-session ERCP with stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy seems to be a safe and effective treatment strategy for CBD stones.

Intraoperative ERCP: What role does it have in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

In the treatment of patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis (CBDS) detected during intraoperative cholangiography (IOC), or when the preoperative study of a patient at intermediate risk for CBDS cannot be completed due to the lack of imaging techniques required for confirmation, or if they are available and yield contradictory radiological and clinical results, patients can be treated using intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during the laparoscopic treatment or postoperative ERCP if the IOC finds CBDS. The choice of treatment depends on the level of experience and availability of each option at each hospital. Intraoperative ERCP has the advantage of being a single-stage treatment and has a significant success rate, an easy learning curve, low morbidity involving a shorter hospital stay and lower costs than the two-stage treatments (postoperative and preoperative ERCP). Intraoperative ERCP is also a good salvage treatment when preoperative ERCP fails or when total laparoscopic management also fails.

Single-stage treatment with intraoperative ERCP: management of patients with possible choledocholithiasis and gallbladder in situ in a non-tertiary Spanish hospital

BACKGROUND

The best way to reduce endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) complications is not to perform it if it is unnecessary. Both intraoperative and postoperative ERCP rely on use of intraoperative cholangiography as a final diagnostic test for choledocholithiasis (CLD) whenever clinical data are unable to rule out CLD. Intraoperative ERCP could become a therapeutic option when a previous preoperative ERCP fails. We present our experience with intraoperative ERCP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a descriptive and prospective study of a cohort of 82 patients with moderate risk of CLD. They were operated on by laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC). We performed intraoperative ERCP using the rendezvous technique.

RESULTS

Thirty-six out of 82 patients had an abnormal IOC study. Mean age was 58.7 years (standard deviation, SD 16.6, 25-83 years), and 60.6% were females. Ultrasound study showed that 51.4% of patients had a dilated bile duct. Magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC) was performed on three patients (8.3%). The success rate of intraoperative ERCP was 88.2%. Three out of the 36 patients (8.8%) had ERCP complications [2 mild papillary bleeding (5.8%), 1 acute pancreatitis (2.9%)]. The rate of conversion to open surgery was 5% with a surgical complications rate of 4% [one injured duct and two surgical bleeding which required re-operation (2.5%)]. There were no mortalities. Four patients (11.1%) needed post-surgical ERCP, with a residual CLD rate of 5.6% (two patients) in the postoperative period. Mean surgical time was 181 min (SD 60, 75-345 min). Mean hospital stay was 6.2 days (SD 4.7, 2-24 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative ERCP is an option to prevent performing ERCP unnecessarily on patients with moderate risk of CLD not confirmed using appropriate radiological studies. It can resolve the biliary disease in a single step with a similar success rate to standard ERCP, but with low morbidity, especially of acute pancreatitis. The residual CLD rate is also very low.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastrointestinal lesions in the operating room: an analysis of 102 cases

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) conducted in the operating room for gastrointestinal lesions.

METHODS: A total of 102 patients with gastrointestinal lesions diagnosed by endoscopy from March 2008 to May 2010 were enrolled. Chromoendoscopy and endoscopic ultrasonography were performed to confirm the extent and depth of the lesions. All the patients underwent routine preoperative evaluation. Tracheal intubation and general anesthesia were conducted in the operating room. The operation duration, volume of submucosal injection solution used, changes in blood Hb levels, and the rates of en bloc resection and complications were recorded.

RESULTS: The maximum diameter of resected samples was 2.72 cm ± 0.81 cm. The volume of submucosal injection solution used was 35.5 mL ± 14.05 mL. The average operation duration was 65.91 min ± 25.49 min. The en bloc resection rate was 95.1%. The perforation rate was 2.9%. Two patients received emergency surgery because of perforation and uncontrolled delayed hemorrhage.

CONCLUSION: ESD conducted in the operating room is associated with less complications and permits prompt, convenient handling of complications and avoiding medical risks.