Endoscopic sphincterotomy with or without cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis in high-risk surgical patients: a decision analysis

Difficult biliary stones in the elderly: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography - A single surgical tertiary centre experience with follow-up

Background

Pancreaticobiliary diseases and choledocholithiasis are common in elderly patients. Endoscopic treatment of biliary stones represents a well-established mini-invasive technique. However, limited data are available regarding the treatment of 'difficult' biliary stones, especially in the elderly population. The aim of our study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients ≥85 years of age with complex biliary stones.

Materials and Methods

From January 2015 to January 2017, data from ERCP procedures performed for complex biliary stones were retrospectively collected. The patients were divided into two groups based on their age: Group A - aged 85 years or older (n = 110) and Group B - aged 65 years or younger (n = 62). Demographic data, success, complications and recurrence rates for both groups were reported.

Results

Chronic comorbidities (86.3% vs. 24.2%; P < 0.001) and use of antithrombotic drugs (48.2% vs. 19.3%; P < 0.001) were more frequent in the elderly. The technical success rate (95.4% vs. 96.7%; P > 0.6) and complication rate (8.2% vs. 13%; P > 0.2) were not statistically different among the two groups. Periampullary diverticula (PAD) were observed more frequently in Group A (38.1% vs. 17.7%; P < 0.006). More patients from Group B underwent cholecystectomy during the same admission (8.2% vs. 42.3%; P < 0.001). The recurrence rate was not different among the groups (7.6% vs. 5%; P > 0.5). PAD was identified as the risk factor for recurrence (P < 0.02).

Conclusion

ERCP in the elderly was found to be a safe procedure, carrying a high degree of success for the treatment of difficult biliary stones.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and primary closure of choledochotomy after failed endoscopic sphincterotomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and primary closure of choledochotomy for the patients with common bile duct stones (CBDS) who failed in endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST).

METHODS

Between January 2007 and June 2012, a total of 78 patients who subjected to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and EST, but failed in endoscopic stone extraction, were referred to us. The following day, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and primary closure of choledochotomy were performed in all patients.

RESULTS

No intraoperative complications were experienced in the patients. 6 patients required conversion to open cholecystectomy due to impacted stones. The mean operative time was 145 min. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 6d. All the patients achieved successful stone clearance. 13 cases had slight bile leaks, which resolved spontaneously. None of the patients experienced biliary peritonitis, biliary fistula, pancreatitis, or cholangitis.

CONCLUSION

If it is performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons, primary closure following immediate laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is safe and feasible for patients with CBDS who fail in endoscopic stone extraction.

Management of preoperatively suspected choledocholithiasis: a decision analysis

BACKGROUND

The management of symptomatic or incidentally discovered common bile duct (CBD) stones is still controversial. Of patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis, 5-15% will also harbor CBD stones, and those with symptoms suggestive of choledocholithiasis will have an even higher incidence. Options for treatment include preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy (ERCP/ES) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiogram (LC/IOC), followed by either laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or placement of a common bile duct double-lumen catheter with postoperative management. The purpose of this analysis was to determine the optimal management of such patients.

METHODS

A decision analysis was performed to analyze the management of patients with suspected common bile duct stones. The basic choice was between preoperative ERCP/ES followed by LC, LC/IOC followed by LCBDE, or common duct double-lumen catheter (Fitzgibbons tube) placement with either expectant management or postoperative ERCP/ES. Data on morbidity and mortality was obtained from the literature. Sensitivity analysis was done varying the incidence of positive CBD stones on IOC with associated morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

One-stage management of symptomatic CBD stones with LC/LCBDE is associated with less morbidity and mortality (7% and 0.19%) than two-stage management utilizing preoperative ERCP/ES (13.5% and 0.5%). Sensitivity analysis shows that there is an increase in morbidity and mortality for LC/LCBDE as the incidence of positive IOC increases but are still less than two-stage management even with a 100% positive IOC (9.4%, 0.5%). If a double-lumen catheter is to be used for positive IOC, the morbidity would be higher than two-stage management only if the positive IOC incidence is more than 65% but still with no mortality.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE has lower morbidity and mortality rates compared to preoperative ERCP/ES in the management of patients with suspected CBD stones even if the chance of CBD stones reaches 100%. Using a common duct double-lumen catheter may be considered if LCBDE is not feasible and the chance of CBD stone is less than 65%.