Predictors of Failed Transcystic Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: Analysis of Multicenter Integrated Health System Database

Intraoperative Cholangiogram Interpretation for Laparoscopic Transcystic Bile Duct Exploration: Is Concurrence Possible?

Background

Laparoscopic transcystic bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) represents a secure and efficacious approach for managing common bile duct (CBD) stones, particularly in patients concurrently undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The decision to proceed with LTCBDE hinges on real-time assessment of the intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC), which is highly operator-dependent and poorly interpreted. No established criteria exist to guide the evaluation of IOCs for LTCBDE. This study aims to ascertain the concordance among surgeons, experienced in LTCBDE, on critical aspects of IOC interpretation.

Methods

A retrospective collection of IOC images of 40 patients who underwent LC, IOC, and LTCBDE at a tertiary university hospital between 2017 and 2018 was undertaken. Two hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) and 2 acute care surgery (ACS) specialists independently reviewed the images. They were tasked with assessing IOC features hypothesized to influence duct exploration and stone extraction complexity, along with overall suitability for LTCBDE based exclusively on the IOC images. Agreement percentages were calculated and Kappa inter-rater reliability statistics were assessed.

Results

The overall agreement percentages concerning IOC features ranged between 52.5% and 82.5% with agreements surpassing 75% deemed robust. Maximum agreement was achieved in the interpretation of cystic duct morphology, whether straight or characterized by spiral valves. The concurrence for amenability of LTCBDE also demonstrated substantial accord among surgeons (ACS: 92.5%, HPB: 95%, total: 87.5%). Consistently high agreement was evident within specialty groups.

Conclusions

Anatomical attributes displayed superior agreement levels, as opposed to variables necessitating measurements. We recommend the development of a structured approach for the interpretation of IOC to facilitate surgical education in LTCBDE.

Comparison of the efficacy of LTCBDE and LCBDE for common bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The choice of surgical methods for common bile duct stones (CBDS) is controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE).

Methods

Relevant literature published before March 30, 2023 in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane was searched to screen studies comparing LTCBDE and LCBDE. RevMan 5.4 was used for meta-analysis of fixed-effects and random-effects models.

Results

A total of 21 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 3065 patients in the LTCBDE group and 2,453 patients in the LCBDE group. CBDS clearance was 95.4% (2,682/2,812) in LTCBDE group and 94.7% (1,810/1,911) in LCBDE group (OR: 1.84, 95% CI: 1.36, 2.48, P < 0.0001; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.56). In LTCBDE group, operative time(MD = -34.60, 95% CI: -46.05, -23, 15, P < 0.00001 I 2 = 96%, P < 0.00001), postoperative hospital stay (MD = -2.92, 95% CI: -3.62, -2.21, P < 0.00001; I 2 = 92%, P < 0.00001), postoperative complications (OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.38, 0.58, P < 0.0001; I 2 = 26%, P = 0.15), residual stone(OR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.34, 0.66, P < 0.0001; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.56), bile leak (OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.55, P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%,P = 0.52), mortality (OR: 0.10, 95% CI: 0.01, 0.88, P = 0.04; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.71) and recurrent stones(OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.74, P = 0.007; I 2 = 5%, P = 0.38) were better than LCBDE group. There was no difference in pancreatitis (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.52, 2.16. P = 0.86; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.98) and biliary stricture(OR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.08, 1.09, P = 0.07; I 2 = 0%, P = 0.57).

Conclusions

LTCBDE is safe, efficient, and of great clinical significance, and is worth promoting to some patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: what factors determine success?

BACKGROUNDS

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been shown to be effective in managing choledocholithiasis whilst avoiding ERCP-related complications. However, patient and technical factors effects outcome. This study aimed to explore the matters effecting the failure of LCBDE.

METHODS

All patients who underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) between 2007 and 2021 were identified using a prospective database. Data were collected for patients who underwent LCBDE including demographics, pre-operative investigations, intra-operative findings, technique of bile duct clearance and clearance rates, and post-operative outcomes. Predictors of failed LCBDE were identified.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed in 3648 patients. Of these, 374 underwent LCBDE for suspected choledocholithiasis. Choledochoscopy was most frequently used (58.8%) with a success rate of 84.1%. Small cystic duct diameter (4.7 vs. 3.4 mm, P = 0.002), stone size >6 mm (P = 0.02), stone: cystic duct ratio >1 (P = 0.04), and >3 stones was associated with failed LCBDE by univariate analysis. Small cystic duct diameter (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.26-0.77, P = 0.004) and stone size >6 mm (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.06-0.92), P = 0.04) correlated with failure by multivariate analysis. Failed LCBDE was associated with increased length of stay (6.6 days vs. 3.1 days, P = 0.001), however the rate of serious complications or mortality was unaffected.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is safe and effective in managing choledocholithiasis. Factors such as cystic duct diameter, size and number of CBD stones, and stone: cystic duct ratio are associated with increased likelihood of inadequate clearance. The presence of these factors can help clinicians in decision making during LCBDE to improve chance of success.

Learning Curve of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review

Background: Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with cholecystectomy has superior outcomes over two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram with interval cholecystectomy. With decreasing trend of LCBDE, this study aims to summarize the literature on learning curve (LC) in LCBDE. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for articles from inception to June 3, 2022 (PROSPERO Ref No: CRD42022328451). Basic clinical demographics were collected. Poisson means (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) was used to determine the number of cases required to surmount the LC (N_LC). Results: Eight articles (n = 2071 patients) reported LC outcomes in LCBDE with mean study period of 5.9 ± 2.8 years. Majority of studies (62.5%) used arbitrary methods of LC analysis. Most common outcomes reported were complications (any or major) (75%), open conversion (75%), length of stay (62.5%), and operating time (50%). Mean CBD diameter was 11.3 ± 4.8 mm (n = 1122 patients). Incidence of acute cholecystitis, acute cholangitis, and acute pancreatitis were 13.9% (n = 232/1668), 7.8% (n = 128/1629), and 13.7% (n = 229/1668), respectively. Pooled analysis of all the included studies showed N_LC of 78.8 cases (95% CI: 71.9-86.3). Studies that used cumulative sum control chart analysis, nonarbitrary methods, and arbitrary-based LC had N_LC of 152.0 (95% CI: 135.4-170.1), 108.0 (95% CI: 96.6-120.4), and 49.7 (95% CI: 42.0-58.3) cases, respectively. N_LC was 37.0 cases (95% CI: 29.1-46.5) for single surgeon LC, and 99.8 cases (95% CI: 90.2-110.0) for institutional LC. Conclusion: Studies reporting N_LC in LCBDE are heterogeneous. Further studies should use nonarbitrary methods of analysis for patient-reported outcome measures and procedure-specific morbidity.

Incidence and management of choledocholithiasis on routine intraoperative cholangiogram: a 5-year tertiary centre experience

BACKGROUND

The incidence of choledocholithiasis on routine intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) during cholecystectomy is approximately 12%. Cholecystectomy without IOC may lead to undiagnosed choledocholithiasis placing patients at risk of complications such as pancreatitis or cholangitis. This study aims to determine the incidence of choledocholithiasis intraoperatively as well as the associated risk factors and the methods of management.

METHODS

A retrospective observational analysis of all laparoscopic cholecystectomies with IOC at the Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service from 1 January 2016 to 2 December 2021 was carried out. Patient demographics, operative data and cholangiogram findings were collected from electronic medical systems.

RESULTS

A total of 3904 cholecystectomies were carried out over the study period. 3520 (90.1%) had an IOC, and 474 (13.4%) had positive IOC findings. 158 (33.3%) of the cases were managed intraoperatively with hyoscine butylbromide with or without intravenous glucagon followed by biliary tree flushing alone, 183 (38.6%) received transcystic bile duct exploration (TCBDE) with a success rate of 83% and 167 (35.2%) received endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Choledocholithiasis was incidental in 44 (9.28%) patients.

CONCLUSION

Incidental choledocholithiasis during routine IOC is not uncommon. Management predominantly includes intraoperative TCBDE or postoperatively via an ERCP. This study has not found reliable preoperative factors to predict choledocholithiasis based on preoperative clinical, radiological and biochemical factors. A small proportion of patients received preoperative endoscopic intervention, and the decision-making process requires further investigation.

Factors That Predict the Success of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis: A 10-Year Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) can be performed to treat choledocholithiasis at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to identify factors that predict the success of LCBDE.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective audit was performed on patients who underwent LCBDE for the management of choledocholithiasis at Northern Health between 2008 and 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 513 patients were identified with an overall success rate of 90.8%. Most LCBDE were done through a transcystic approach with the remainder through a choledochotomy. When comparing patients with a successful operation to those that were unsuccessful, univariate analysis demonstrated significant differences in preoperative white cell count and number of duct stones found. Age and elevated nonbilirubin liver function tests were found to be significant factors associated with the failure of LCBDE on multivariate analysis. The likelihood of a failed operation in those with multiple stones was observed to be almost halved compared with patients with single stone although this did not reach significance [odds ratio (OR): 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.28-1.01, P=0.055]. Multivariate analysis indicated that unsuccessful procedures (OR: 10.13, 95% CI: 4.34-23.65, P<0.001) and multiple duct stones (OR: 3.79, 95% CI: 1.66-8.67, P=0.002) were associated with an increased risk of severe complications.

CONCLUSIONS

A single impacted stone may be more difficult to remove, however complications were more likely to be associated with multiple duct stones. With no other clinically relevant predictive factors, and because of the high success of the procedure and the low morbidity, LCBDE remains an option for all patients with choledocholithiasis.

The ABCdE score for PREdicting Lithotripsy Assistance during transcystic Bile duct Exploration by Laparoendoscopy (PRE-LABEL)

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones are reported in ~ 15% of patients who undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. Prior to lithotripsy techniques, transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) was limited to smaller CBD stones. The addition of lithotripsy to LCBDE increases cost, operative time and staffing requirements. Predicting which patients might require lithotripsy would be useful in operative planning. The primary aim was to investigate clinical variables for predicting lithotripsy assistance during transcystic bile duct exploration by laparoendoscopy (PRE-LABEL). Secondary aims were to develop and validate a predictive scoring tool.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of consecutive patients who underwent transcystic LCBDE at a single centre in the UK was performed to investigate clinical variables for PRE-LABEL and develop a scoring tool (ABCdE score: age, bilirubin, CBD diameter, ERCP). Binary logistic regression was used to investigate which independent variables (predictors) were associated with lithotripsy assistance during transcystic LCBDE. The ABCdE score was applied to both UK and Spain patient cohorts to determine its sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.

RESULTS

From 8 pre-operative clinical variables analysed, age ≤ 40 years, bilirubin > two-times upper limit of normal, CBD diameter ≥ 10 mm and ERCP failure of stone extraction were independent predictors of requiring lithotripsy during transcystic LCBDE and formed the ABCdE score. The hazard ratios were 2.87, 3.79, 2.78 and 10.06, respectively. An ABCdE score ≥ 2 resulted in 71% sensitivity, 81% specificity and 79% accuracy in predicting lithotripsy during LCBDE (UK cohort). Validation using a contemporary cohort from Spain yielded similar sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the only study to date reporting independent predictors of requiring lithotripsy assistance during transcystic LCBDE. ABCdE score ≥ 2 can highlight patients that may require lithotripsy in order to avoid failure of transcystic LCBDE and therefore avoid choledochotomy or post-operative ERCP.

Ten strategies to improve the efficacy of laparoscopic biliary surgery

Laparoscopic surgery is the gold standard treatment of symptomatic gallstones. For some, it is also the treatment of choice for choledocholithiasis. Certain special and rare circumstances regarding the number, size and location of bile duct stones or altered bile duct anatomy (embryonic or acquired), can be challenging to resolve with usual laparoscopic techniques. For these situations, we describe 10 surgical strategies that are relatively simple and inexpensive to apply, making them appropriate to be used in most surgical centers.

Laparoscopic Transcystic Versus Transductal Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic transcystic (TC) and transductal (TD) common bile duct (CBD) exploration.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN Register, and bibliographic reference lists. CBD clearance rate, perioperative complications, and biliary complications were defined as the primary outcome parameters. Procedure time, length of hospital stay, conversion to open procedure were the secondary outcomes. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

We identified 30 studies reporting a total of 4073 patients comparing outcomes of laparoscopic TC (n = 2176) and TD (N = 1897) CBD exploration. The TC approach was associated with significantly lower overall complications (RD: -0.07, P = 0.001), biliary complications (RD: -0.05, P = 0.0003), and blood loss (MD: -16.20, P = 0.02) compared to TD approach. Moreover, the TC approach significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD: -2.62, P < 0.00001) and procedure time (MD: -12.73, P = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference in rate of CBD clearance (RD: 0.00, P = 0.77) and conversion to open procedure (RD: 0.00, P = 0.86) between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic TC CBD exploration is safe and reduces overall morbidity and biliary complications compared to the TD approach. Moreover, it is associated with significantly shorter length of hospital stay and procedure time. High-quality randomised trials may provide stronger evidence with respect to impact of the cystic duct/CBD diameter, number or size of CBD stones, or cystic duct anatomy on the comparative outcomes of TC and TD approaches.

Five-year follow-up outcomes of laparoscopic choledochoscopy via the cystic duct for choledocholithiasis in patients with gallstones and common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

There are many treatments for gallstones combined with common bile duct stones. Currently, laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus common bile duct exploration and endoscopic sphincterotomy plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy are often used, but T tube drainage is required for the former, and the latter is controversial due to the destruction of the Oddi sphincter.

AIM

To investigate the clinical effect of laparoscopic choledochoscopy in the treatment of gallstones with common bile duct stones.

METHODS

A total of 125 patients who underwent laparoscopic choledochoscopy and cholecystectomy for gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones were followed for 5 years from January to December 2013. The clinical effects were analyzed.

RESULTS

The operation was successful in 122 cases, with a success rate of 97.6%. The average age of the patients was 58.21 ± 13.01 years old. The mean operation time was 87.95 ± 39.12 min, and mean intraoperative blood loss was 11.27 ± 6.85 mL. All patients underwent balloon dilatation, of whom 33 underwent microctomy at the confluence of the cystic duct and 5 underwent lithotrity via choledochoscopy. The mean time to first postoperative exhaust was 32.48 ± 17.85 h, and mean postoperative hospital stay was 2.03 ± 1.62 d. The rate of complications at short-term follow-up was 5.74%, and there were a total of 7 cases, including 4 cases of postoperative pancreatitis cured by symptomatic treatment with octreotide and ulinastatin, 2 cases of bile leakage cured by ENBD drainage, and 1 case of surgical wound infection cured by re-dresses. The rate of complications at 5-year follow-up was 4.92%, and there were 4 cases of recurrent common bile duct stones, including 1 case with intrahepatic bile duct stones and 2 cases with pancreatitis. Four patients died, of whom two patients had a myocardial infarction, one had a lung infection, and one had a car accident, all of which were not related to the operation.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic choledochoscopy for the treatment of gallbladder stones combined with common bile duct stones has both good short- and long-term results, with the advantages of little trauma, rapid recovery, and few complications.