Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis

Comparison of Primary Suture and T-Tube Drainage After Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Combined with Intraoperative Choledochoscopy in the Treatment of Secondary Common Bile Duct Stones: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis

Objective: To compare the safety and feasibility of T-tube drainage and primary suture after laparoscopy combined with choledochoscopy in the treatment of secondary choledocholithiasis. Methods: The clinical data of patients who underwent laparoscopic choledochoscopy combined with choledochoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for secondary choledocholithiasis from June 2015 to June 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the different treatment method of common bile duct (CBD) incision, the patients were divided into a T-tube drainage group and a primary suture group. The preoperative clinical characteristics, results of preoperative liver function tests (LFTs), LFTs on the first day after the operation and the fourth day after the operation, operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative complications, and times of postoperative hospital stay were compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference in preoperative clinical data, preoperative LFTs, and postoperative complications between the two groups (P > .05). However, primary suture demonstrated significant advantages (P < .05) in terms of the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and other related factors. Bilirubin levels on the first day after the operation and the fourth day after the operation between the two groups suggested that T-tube drainage reduces bilirubin in the short term, but that long-term bilirubin draining is similar between the two strategies. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that choledochal diameter less than 8 mm was an independent risk factor for bile leakage. Conclusions: Laparoscopy combined with intraoperative choledochoscopic CBD exploration is superior to T-tube drainage in terms of the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay. The ability of reducing bilirubin by traditional T-tube drainage is indeed better than that of primary suture in the early stage after operation, but there is no difference in long-term outcome between the two groups. Choledochal diameter ≤8 mm was an independent risk factor for bile leakage. To summarize, LCBDEs primary suture for secondary choledocholithiasis is safe and feasible.

Clinical Efficacy Analysis of the Combination of the Laparoscope and Preoperative or Intraoperative Duodenoscope in the Treatment of Cholecystolithiasis with Choledocholithiasis: A Retrospective Study

Aim: This study aims to analyze the efficacy and safety of the combination of laparoscope and preoperative (PODL) or intraoperative (IODL) duodenoscope in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis.

Materials and Methods: From January 2015 to February 2017, 51 patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis, who were treated with the PODL (n = 29) or IODL (n = 22), were reviewed retrospectively. The efficacy and safety were evaluated and compared between these two groups.

Results: The success rates were 100% in IODL group and 96.6% in PODL group. There was no statistical significance in the difference of stone clearance rate and residual stone rate between two groups (P > .05). There were no significant differences in complications, like aspiration, gastrointestinal perforation, and acute cholangitis between two groups (P > .05). IODL significantly decreased numeric rating scale (NRS) scoring, reduced surgery cost and shortened hospitalization time compared to that of PODL group (P < .05). No cholangitis, reoccurrence of stones or biliary obstruction occurred in all 51 patients.

Conclusion: In this retrospective study, IODL was found superior to PODL. And the IODL can significantly decrease NRS scoring, reduce surgery cost and shorten hospitalization time.

Surgical (Open and laparoscopic) management of large difficult CBD stones after different sessions of endoscopic failure: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives

For complicated common bile duct stones (CBDS) that cannot be extracted by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), management can be safely by open or laparoscopic CBD exploration (CBDE). The study aimed to assess these surgical procedures after endoscopic failure.

Methods

We analyzed 85 patients underwent surgical management of difficult CBDS after ERCP failure, in the period from 2013 to 2018.

Results

Sixty-seven (78.8%) and 18(21.2%) of our patients underwent single and multiple ERCP sessions respectively. An impacted large stone was the most frequent cause of ERCP failure (60%). Laparoscopic CBDE(LCBDE), open CBDE(OCBDE) and the converted cases were 24.7% (n = 21), 70.6% (n = 60), and 4.7% (n = 4) respectively. Stone clearance rate post LCBDE and OCBDE reached 95.2% and 95% respectively, Eleven (12.9%) of our patients had postoperative complications without mortality. By comparing LCBDE and OCBDE; there was a significant association between the former and longer operative time. On comparing, T-tube and 1ry CBD closure in both OCBDE and LCBDE, there was significantly longer operative time, and post-operative hospital stays in the former. Furthermore, in OCBDE group, choledocoscopy had an independent direction to 1ry CBD repair and significant association with higher stone clearance rate, shorter operative time, and post-operative hospital stay.

Conclusion

Large difficult CBDS can be managed either by open surgery or laparoscopically with acceptable comparable outcomes with no need for multiple ERCP sessions due to their related morbidities; furthermore, Open choledocoscopy has a good impact on stone clearance rate with direction towards doing primary repair that is better than T-tube regarding operative time and post-operative hospital stay.

•

Large difficult CBD stones can be managed either by open surgery or laparoscopically with acceptable comparable outcomes.

•

No need for multiple ERCP sessions due to their related morbidities.

•

Open choledocoscopy has a good impact on stone clearance rate with direction towards doing primary repair.

•

Primary repair is better than T-tube regarding operative time and post-operative hospital stay.

Surgical (Open and laparoscopic) management of large difficult CBD stones after different sessions of endoscopic failure: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives

For complicated common bile duct stones (CBDS) that cannot be extracted by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), management can be safely by open or laparoscopic CBD exploration (CBDE). The study aimed to assess these surgical procedures after endoscopic failure.

Methods

We analyzed 85 patients underwent surgical management of difficult CBDS after ERCP failure, in the period from 2013 to 2018.

Results

Sixty-seven (78.8%) and 18(21.2%) of our patients underwent single and multiple ERCP sessions respectively. An impacted large stone was the most frequent cause of ERCP failure (60%). Laparoscopic CBDE(LCBDE), open CBDE(OCBDE) and the converted cases were 24.7% (n = 21), 70.6% (n = 60), and 4.7% (n = 4) respectively. Stone clearance rate post LCBDE and OCBDE reached 95.2% and 95% respectively, Eleven (12.9%) of our patients had postoperative complications without mortality. By comparing LCBDE and OCBDE; there was a significant association between the former and longer operative time. On comparing, T-tube and 1ry CBD closure in both OCBDE and LCBDE, there was significantly longer operative time, and post-operative hospital stays in the former. Furthermore, in OCBDE group, choledocoscopy had an independent direction to 1ry CBD repair and significant association with higher stone clearance rate, shorter operative time, and post-operative hospital stay.

Conclusion

Large difficult CBDS can be managed either by open surgery or laparoscopically with acceptable comparable outcomes with no need for multiple ERCP sessions due to their related morbidities; furthermore, Open choledocoscopy has a good impact on stone clearance rate with direction towards doing primary repair that is better than T-tube regarding operative time and post-operative hospital stay.

The reasonable drainage option after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for the treatment of choledocholithiasis

OBJECTIVE

To obtain a reasonable drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for the treatment of choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

Data of 350 consecutive patients who underwent LCBDE in our hospital from January 2014 to December 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. All the patients were divided into three groups according to different drainage types after LCBDE, including T-tube group with 116 cases, primary closure (PC) group with 114 cases and stent insertion group with 120 cases. Operative parameters and outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The operative time was no significant difference between the T-tube group (106.71 ± 5.19 min), PC group (105.46 ± 5.77 min) and stent insertion group (106.88 ± 5.91 min) (F = 2.175, P = 0.115). The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the stent insertion group (5.62 ± 0.70 d) than in the T-tube group (7.79 ± 0.85 d) and PC group (7.60 ± 0.80 d) (F = 279.649, P = 0.000). The hospitalization cost was significantly less in the stent insertion group (19,432.78 ± 661.74 yuan) than in the T-tube group (22,059.90 ± 697.98 yuan) and PC group (21,927.20 ± 772.02 yuan) (F = 512.492, P = 0.000). The incidence of postoperative biliary-specific complications was 2.59% (3/116 cases) in the T-tube group, 2.63% (3/114 cases) in the PC group, and 0% (0/120 cases) in the stent insertion group, but this difference was not statistically significant (χ² = 3.177, P = 0.204). The return to normal levels of postoperative liver function tests (LFTs) was significantly faster in the stent insertion group and T-tube group than in the PC group (P < 0.05). The number of 314 patients were followed up for a median time of 20 months (range from 1-48 months), and no biliary stricture, cholangitis or stone recurrence occurred in these patients during that time.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent insertion shows better results when compared with T-tube drainage and primary duct closure in terms of postoperative hospital stay and hospitalization cost. It is the prior option for the choledochotomy closure after LCBDE in suitable patients.

Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Versus Open Approach in Cirrhotic Patients with Choledocholithiasis: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and benefits of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) compared with open approach (OCBDE) in cirrhotic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2009 and December 2012, a total of 113 cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis underwent common bile duct (CBD) explorations in our department. There were two groups of patients: A:LCBDE (n = 61) and B:OCBDE (n = 52). Patients' demographic characteristics, surgical data, postoperative outcomes, and long-term results were retrospectively collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups in the demographic characteristics or preoperative status. The transcystic approach was successfully performed in 52 (46.0%) patients (group A:34, group B:20), whereas choledochotomy was successful in 59 (54.0%) patients (group A:27, group B:32). The differences between group A and group B in terms of surgical time (124.9 ± 34.2 minutes versus 132.6 ± 48.6 minutes, P = .323), stone clearance rate (93.4% versus 94.2%, P > .05), short-term complication rate (9.8% versus 13.4%, P = .547), and recurrent stone rate (6.6% versus 5.8%, P > .05) were not statistically significant. However, group A suffered less blood loss [95 (60-200) mL versus 200 (90-450) mL, P < .001] and shorter length of hospital stay (4.7 ± 2.5 days versus 11.3 ± 3.1 days, P < .001) than group B. In the LCBDE group, 4 (6.6%) patients were converted due to heavy inflammation and severe adhesions. No mortality, biliary injury, or stricture occurred during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE can be safely performed in patients with Child-Pugh A or B cirrhosis and choledocholithiasis, with considerable efficiency, minimal short-term complications, and acceptable long-term outcomes. LCBDE has the advantages over open CBD exploration of less bleeding and reduced length of hospital stay.

MELD scores and Child-Pugh classifications predict the outcomes of ERCP in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis: a retrospective cohort study

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is challenging in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ERCP in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis and accessed the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores and Child-Pugh classifications for prediction of morbidity and mortality.From January 2000 to June 2014, 77 ERCP operations were performed in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. The data on operative complications were analyzed. MELD scores and Child-Pugh classifications were calculated and associated with operative outcomes and survival. Telephone follow-up was performed to determine survival situations.No death, perforation, or hemorrhage caused by gastroesophageal varices occurred as a result of the procedure. The rate of intraoperative hemorrhage was 13.0%, and the rate of postoperative morbidity was 27.3% including hemorrhage (18.2%), post-ERCP pancreatitis (6.1%), aggravated infection of the biliary tract (1.3%), hepatic encephalopathy (1.3%), and respiratory failure (1.3%). Four (5.2%) patients had both intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhage. Receiver operating characteristic analysis identified MELD scores higher than 11.5 as the best cutoff value for predicting complication incidence (95% confidence interval = 0.63-0.87). Twenty-one (44.7%) patients with a MELD score above 11.5 developed a complication, and 3 (10%) patients who had a lower MELD score developed a complication (P = 0.001). Both MELD score and Child-Pugh classification had prognostic value in patients without jaundice, although sex may result in different prognostic values based on the 2 scores. The rate of complications was not significantly different among patients with different Child-Pugh classifications. No significant difference was observed in patients with different MELD scores or Child-Pugh classifications in terms of median survival times.ERCP is an effective and safe procedure in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. MELD scores can predict the risk of operative complications, but Child-Pugh classification system scores do not predict the risk of complications.