Primary closure and rate of bile leak following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via choledochotomy

Clinical Evaluation of Primary Suturing of Normal-Diameter Common Bile Ducts After Microincision of Cystic Duct Confluence for Stone Removal

PURPOSE

In patients with gallstones complicated by common bile duct (CBD) stones, both normal and dilated common bile ducts have been reported. The goal of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of primary suturing after microincision of the cystic duct confluence in treating these patients.

METHOD

Between July 2018 and December 2021, 104 patients were admitted to the Department of General Surgery at Guannan County People's Hospital with gallstone complications, and their records were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into 2 groups: normal CBD group (n=70, CBD diameter: 6.0 to 8.0 mm) and dilated CBD group (n=34, CBD diameter: >8.0 mm). In these 104 patients, there were 75 cases of CBD stones with acute cholangitis, 12 cases of CBD stones without cholangitis, and 17 cases of mild biliary pancreatitis with CBD stones (including 2 cases of biliary pancreatitis with cholangitis). Among all patients, there were 37 cases with jaundice, 67 cases without jaundice, and 5 cases of emergency surgery. All patients underwent microincision of the cystic duct confluence followed by primary suturing. Both groups were compared on a variety of general and perioperative indicators.

RESULT

All patients underwent laparoscopy combined with choledochoscopy; there were no cases of biliary tract injury or conversion to laparotomy. There was no statistically significant difference in operation duration ( P =0.286), blood loss ( P =0.06), length of stay ( P =0.821), and time to drainage tube removal ( P =0.096) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Microincision of the cystic duct confluence, followed by a primary suture, is a safe and effective treatment for CBD stones in patients with a normal CBD diameter, as determined by preoperative imaging.

Laparoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Transcystic Approach for the Treatment of Common Bile Duct Stones

Background: The treatment of choledocholithiasis with nondilated common bile duct (CBD) is a challenge for surgeons who often choose endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) staging surgery instead of simultaneous laparoscopic CBD exploration with LC because of the small CBD diameter. This study aims to introduce and assess the clinical applicability of a technique we developed to identify and extract CBD stones using laparoscopic ultrasound (LUS). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed surgical procedures and clinical data of 13 patients who underwent LC and CBD exploration using LUS between May 2022 and August 2023. The cystic duct was used for CBD stone removal. Results: Ten patients were successfully treated; 2 patients with residual stones were treated with ursodeoxycholic acid, whereas 1 patient required a microincision near the CBD and choledochoscopy because of stone incarceration in the duodenal papilla. The CBD diameter was 6 mm (5-9 mm). There were less than three CBD stones, with diameters of 2-6 mm; the median operative time was 105 minutes (range, 52-155 minutes). One patient developed postoperative cholangitis. The median postoperative hospital stay was 6 days (3-8 days). The stone clearance rate was 76.9%, and the CBD stone detection rate was 100%. No intraoperative complications, postoperative bile leakage, and mortality occurred. Conclusions: CBD exploration and transcystic stone extraction under LUS guidance are safe and effective approaches for patients with choledocholithiasis; strict control over surgical indications is necessary. This study could provide new strategies for effectively treating choledocholithiasis.

Upfront Laparoscopic Management of Common Bile Duct Stones: What Are the Risk Factors of Failure?

BACKGROUND

Treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS) includes laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with either laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or perioperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The main objective of this study was to identify predictive factors for the failure of upfront and exclusive surgical treatment by LCBDE.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective study on patients with CBDS and operated for LC between 2007 and 2019. The use of intra- or postoperative endoscopy for CBD clearance within 6 months after surgery was considered as failure of LCBDE. Predictors for the failure of LCBDE were investigated and outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Among 222 operated patients, LCBDE was successfully performed in 173 patients (78%) and 49 (22%) required ERCP with sphincterotomy (intraoperative (n=29) or postoperative (n=20)). Independent risk factors for surgical failure were male sex (OR: 2.525 (1.111-5.738); p=0.027), anesthesia induction time ≥ 4 p.m. (OR: 4.858 (1.731-13.631); p=0.003), pediculitis (OR: 4.147 (1.177-14.606); p=0.027), and thin CDB < 4mm (OR: 11.951 (3.562-40.097), p< 0.0001). Age, ASA score, cystic anatomy, presence of cholecystitis, and the surgeon's experience were not identified as predictors for surgical failure. A general anesthesia number >1 (6% vs. 33%; p < 0.0001), length of initial stay (6 [1-42] vs. 8 [2-27], p=0.012), total length of hospitalization (6 [1-45] vs. 9 [2-27]; p=0.010), and the rate of emergency readmissions (3.5% vs. 12.2%; p=0.027) were significantly higher in the LCBDE failure group.

CONCLUSIONS

Upfront LCBDE for CBDS was associated with improved outcomes compared to intra-/postoperative ERCP recourse. Male sex, pediculitis, thin CBD, and surgery later than 4 p.m were associated with LCBDE failure and the need for endoscopic treatment.

REGISTRATION NUMBER AND AGENCY

The present retrospective study was approved by our local ethics committee and was declared on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04467710).

[Modern minimally invasive technologies for the treatment of cholelithiasis]

Surgical community has not yet reached any consensus on the adequate treatment of gallstone disease with combined stones of the gallbladder and bile ducts. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic papillosphincterotomy (EPST) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCE) have been considered the optimal treatment method for the past thirty years. Thanks to improvement of technologies and experience in laparoscopic surgery, many centers in the world offer simultaneous treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis, i.e. LCE and laparoscopic choledocholithotomy. Transcystical and transcholedochal extraction of calculi from the common bile duct is the most common. Intraoperative cholangiography and choledochoscopy are used to assess extraction of calculi while T-shaped drainage, biliary stent and primary suture of common bile duct are used to complete choledocholithotomy. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy is associated with certain difficulties, requires some experience in choledochoscopy and intracorporeal suturing of common bile duct. There are many unresolved issues regarding the choice of laparoscopic choledocholithotomy technique depending on the number and dimensions of stones, diameter of cystic duct and common bile duct. The authors analyze literature data on the role of modern minimally invasive interventions in the treatment of gallstone disease.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via choledochotomy with primary closure for the management of acute cholangitis caused by common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for patients with acute cholangitis caused by common bile duct stones (CBDSs). The outcomes after LCBDE with primary closure in patients with CBDS-related acute cholangitis are unknown. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LCBDE with primary closure for the management of acute cholangitis caused by CBDSs.

METHODS

Between June 2015 and June 2020, 368 consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis combined with cholecystolithiasis, who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) + LCBDE in our department, were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 193 patients with CBDS-related acute cholangitis underwent LC + LCBDE with primary closure of the CBD (PC group) and 62 patients underwent LC + LCBDE followed by T-tube placement (T-tube group). A total of 113 patients who did not have cholangitis were excluded. The clinical data were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no mortality in either group. No significant differences were noted in morbidity, bile leakage rate, retained CBD stones, or readmission rate within 30 days between the two groups. Compared with the T-tube group, the PC group avoided T-tube-related complications and had a shorter operative time (121.12 min vs. 143.37 min) and length of postoperative hospital stay (6.59 days vs. 8.81 days). Moreover, the hospital expenses in the PC group were significantly lower than those in the T-tube group ($4844.47 vs. $5717.22). No biliary stricture occurred during a median follow-up of 18 months in any patient. No significant difference between the two groups was observed in the rate of stone recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE with primary closure is a safe and effective treatment for cholangitis caused by CBDSs. LCBDE with primary closure is not inferior to T-tube drainage for the management of CBDS-related acute cholangitis in suitable patients.

Laparoscopic versus Conventional Surgery for Acute Cholangitis of Severe Type: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective

Currently, the choice between laparoscopic surgery and conventional laparotomy in the surgical treatment of acute cholangitis of severe type (ACST) is debatable. This study compared the clinical efficacy of these two surgical methods through a meta-analysis based on relevant clinical randomized controlled trials (RCT) on ACST.

Methods

We systematically searched several databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and WangFang) for RCT on the surgical treatment of ACST between 2010 and 2022. Relevant data were extracted, and a meta-analysis was performed using the statistical software Stata 16.0.

Results

From initial 1089 studies retrieved, 15 studies (n = 1247 patients) were eligible. The total number of patients was 1247, of whom 635 were classified in the treatment group (laparoscopic surgery) and 612 patients in the control group (conventional laparotomy). This meta-analysis showed that compared with conventional laparotomy, laparoscopic surgery was associated with higher effective rate (OR = 3.808, 95% CI [2.383, 6.085], P < 0.001), lower incidence rate of complications (OR = 0.192, 95% CI [0.139, 0.265], P < 0.001), shorter operation duration (SMD = -3.274, 95% CI [-4.503, -2.045], P < 0.001), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (SMD = -2.432, 95% CI [-2.988, -1.877], P < 0.001). Further, the indicators of symptomatic relief (anus exhaust time, jaundice relief time, gastrointestinal function recovery time, and abdominal pain relief time) and inflammatory levels (white blood cell count, alanine aminotransferase, total bilirubin level, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level) in the treatment group were better than those in the control group.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significant improvement in treatment efficiency, reduced risk of complications, and better treatment outcomes in patients with ACST.

Factors Influencing Suture Difficulty of T-tube Fixation and Closure in Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

BACKGROUND

Suture under the laparoscopy was considered as one of the most difficult and time-consuming tasks in laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration. Difficult suturing can lead to prolonged suturing time and decreased suturing quality. The aim of this study was to identify preoperative factors associated with the difficulty of T-tube suture following laparoscopic bile duct exploration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who experienced successful laparoscopic CBD exploration with T-tube drainage were collected. Perioperative outcomes and short-term and long-term complications were recorded. Associations of the average suture time per stitch with preoperative demographic data and laboratory tests in patients were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 106 cases (46 males and 60 females) were included in this study. The average suture time per stitch was between 3 and 7.5 minutes with a median of 4.5 minutes (4, 5). There were no biliary leakage and other T-tube-related complications in all patients during follow-up. Spearman correlation analysis revealed that biliary tract reoperation (r=0.384, P<0.0001) and a higher body mass index (r=0.486, P<0.0001) were positively correlated with the average suture time per stitch, while there was no association between the average suture time per stitch and other preoperative demographic data and preoperative blood parameters, including CBD diameter, age, sex, operative time, preoperative white cell count, alanine transaminase, total bilirubin, and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified 2 preoperative variables (biliary tract reoperation and a higher body mass index) that were positively associated with the suture difficulty under laparoscopy. An adequately powered prospective multicentre study is needed to validate our findings.

Greater than or equal to 8 mm is a safe diameter of common bile duct for primary duct closure: single-arm meta-analysis and systematic review

Greater than or equal to 8 mm was often used as the safe diameter of primary duct closure (PDC) after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) in previous studies, but it is impossible to verify the source of this safe diameter, and lack of evidence for the safe diameter of PDC. Hence, this study evaluates the incidence of postoperative complications by single-arm meta-analysis to demonstrate the feasibility of using 8 mm as the safe diameter of PDC, so as to provide reference for clinical selection. Eligible studies were searched by MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science from January 1995 to May 2021, investigating eligible literature using PDC after LCBDE for methods of common bile duct closure. The single-arm meta-analysis was analyzed by "meta" package under R 4.0.5, and the pooled incidence of postoperative complications was calculated. Twelve literatures were enrolled in this single-arm meta-analysis including 792 patients. The pooled complications rate including total complications (13.1%, 95% CI 10.1-15.6%), total biliary duct-related complications (9.4%, 95% CI 7.4-11.6%), residual stones (1.3%, 95% CI 0.3-2.7%), bile leakage (5.1%, 95% CI 3.5-6.9%), postoperative pneumonia (2.1%, 95% CI 0.8-3.8%), postoperative acute pancreatitis (1.8%, 95% CI 0.2-4.3%), and stone recurrence (2.6%, 95% CI 1.1-4.4%). The clinical indication of PDC after LCBDE should follow that the diameter of common bile duct ≥ 8 mm as the safe diameter.

Primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is safe and feasible for patients with non-severe acute cholangitis

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) have been confirmed in elective settings. However, the suitability of primary closure after LCBDE in the treatment of patients with non-severe acute cholangitis in emergency settings remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to explore the safety and feasibility of LCBDE with primary closure in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis combined with gallbladder stones treated by LCBDE with primary closure at our institution from January 2015 to April 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. These patients were divided into two groups: emergency group (patients with non-severe acute cholangitis) and elective group (patients without acute cholangitis). The demographic and perioperative data of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-two patients received LCBDE combined with primary closure during this period, including 70 in the emergency group and 52 in the elective group. Baseline characteristics were balanced in both groups, except for higher levels of white blood cells (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and albumin in the emergency group. No postoperative mortality occurred in either group. Compared to the elective group, the emergency group had a longer operation time (P = 0.011), and more estimated blood loss (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of conversion (2.9% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.507), use of baskets (84.2% vs. 78.8%, P = 0.481), use of electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) (2.9% vs. 1.9%, P = 1.000), or postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.214). The incidence of postoperative complications was comparable between the two groups. During the follow-up period, none of the patients experienced biliary stricture, and 1 case of stone recurrence occurred in the elective group.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE with primary closure for choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe acute cholangitis has the equivalent efficacy and morbidity to elective surgery. Primary closure after LCBDE is a safe and feasible option for choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe acute cholangitis.

A UK survey on variation in the practice of management of choledocholithiasis and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (ALiCE Survey)

BACKGROUND

The practice of managing suspected/confirmed common bile duct stones (CBDS) can vary significantly in the UK. We aimed to assess this variability in practice and challenges to form a basis for future consensus.

METHODS

An electronic survey containing 40 questions on various aspects of management of CBDS was sent to surgeons who perform cholecystectomies via five surgical associations.

RESULTS

 A total of 132 surgeons responded to the survey. The speciality of surgeons includes upper gastro-intestinal (68%), general (18%), colorectal (12%), and others (2%). For patients with suspected CBD stones, 80% would choose magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography, and 14.4% would proceed to intra-operative imaging. Most surgeons preferred intra-operative cholangiogram over intra-operative ultrasound (83% vs 17%). For the treatment, 62.1% preferred a two-stage approach [endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC)] and 33.4% chose a single-stage approach [LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE)]. Eighty (60.6%) responders performed LCBDE, and 19 (23.8%) of them performed > 10 LCBDEs in a year. Two third of surgeons (62.5%) preferred a trans-choledochal approach to CBDS. Half of the surgeons that perform LCBDE use a T-tube selectively and 1.6% routinely. The "availability of very good ERCP service" and "lack of formal training" were the two main reasons for surgeons not performing LCBDE. Both surgeons' speciality and whether they perform other complex laparoscopic surgery were significantly associated with choosing a two-stage approach over a one-stage approach (χ² test, speciality p = 0.033, complex surgery p = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

 Our survey confirms the significant variability in the diagnosis and management of CBDS. The two-stage approach is still the most common way of managing CBDS in the UK. The main reasons for the low uptake of the single-stage approach are the availability of good ERCP service, lack of equipment and lack of formal training in the technique of LCBDE.

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.

Outcomes of laparoscopic bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis with small common bile duct

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration (LCBDE) is one of the main treatments for choledocholithiasis with CBD diameter of larger than 10 mm. However, for patients with small CBD (CBD diameter ≤ 8 mm), endoscopic sphincterotomy remains the preferred treatment at present, but it also has some drawbacks associated with a series of complications, such as pancreatitis, hemorrhage, cholangitis, and duodenal perforation. To date, few studies have been reported that support the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.

AIM

To investigate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.

METHODS

A total of 257 patients without acute cholangitis who underwent LC + LCBDE for cholecystolithiasis from January 2013 to December 2018 in one institution were reviewed. The clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed. According to whether the diameter of CBD was larger than 8 mm, 257 patients were divided into large CBD group (n = 146) and small CBD group (n = 111). Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed to adjust for clinical differences. The demographics, intraoperative data, short-term outcomes, and long-term follow-up outcomes for the patients were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

In total, 257 patients who underwent successful LC + LCBDE were enrolled in the study, 146 had large CBD and 111 had small CBD. The median follow-up period was 39 (14-86) mo. For small CBD patients, the median CBD diameter was 0.6 cm (0.2-2.0 cm), the mean operating time was 107.2 ± 28.3 min, and the postoperative bile leak rate, rate of residual CBD stones (CBDS), CBDS recurrence rate, and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41% (6/111), 3.60% (4/111), 1.80% (2/111), and 0% (0/111), respectively; the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.4 ± 3.6 d. For large CBD patients, the median common bile duct diameter was 1.0 cm (0.3-3.0 cm), the mean operating time was 115.7 ± 32.0 min, and the postoperative bile leak rate, rate of residual CBDS, CBDS recurrence rate, and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41% (9/146), 1.37% (2/146), 6.85% (10/146), and 0% (0/146), respectively; the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.7 ± 2.7 d. After propensity score matching, 184 patients remained, and all preoperative covariates except diameter of CBD stones were balanced. Postoperative bile leak occurred in 11 patients overall (5.98%), and no difference was found between the small CBD group (4.35%, 4/92) and the large CBD group (7.61%, 7/92). The incidence of CBDS recurrence did not differ significantly between the small CBD group (2.17%, 2/92) and the large CBD group (6.52%, 6/92).

CONCLUSION

LC + LCBDE is safe and feasible for choledocholithiasis patients with small CBD and did not increase the postoperative bile leak rate compared with chole-docholithiasis patients with large CBD.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure is beneficial for patients with previous upper abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous upper abdominal surgery (PUAS) is considered a contraindication to laparoscopic surgery. Whether LCBDE-PC is feasible and beneficial for patients with PUAS remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and benefits of LCBDE-PC for patients with PUAS.

METHODS

From June 2011 to September 2019, 1167 patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures for choledocholithiasis were reviewed retrospectively. Perioperative outcomes were compared between patients with and without PUAS in un-matched and matched cohorts.

RESULTS

LCBDE-PC was performed successfully in 88.3% of patients with PUAS, and 92.5% of patients without PUAS (P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that PUAS was not a risk factor that affected successful performance of LCBDE-PC. Although a higher rate of conversion to open surgery and longer operative time were observed in patients with PUAS, no significant differences were found between patients with and without PUAS in multivariate and propensity score analysis (P > 0.05). A predictive nomogram for LCBDE-PC failure was developed based on potential predictors from the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression model. Successful performance of LCBDE-PC was associated with operative time. A linear regression model for operative time showed impacted stone in the CBD and intraoperative laser use was the most important factor in determining the operative time.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE-PC is feasible and beneficial for patients with PUAS. However, patients with PUAS with a high possibility of LCBDE-PC failure from the nomogram and a longer operative time from the linear regression model should be cautious when undergoing LCBDE-PC.

The Safety and Efficacy of Primary Duct Closure without Endoscopic Nasobiliary Drainage after Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

Background

Primary duct closure (PDC) after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely applied for choledocholithiasis. However, there has been controversy over the placement of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) during operation. To date, few studies compare the clinical effect of PDC without and with ENBD. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of PDC without ENBD for choledocholithiasis.

Methods

From January 2016 to December 2018, a total of 164 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled and divided into group A (undergone LCBDE + PDC without ENBD, 81 cases) and group B (undergone LCBDE + PDC with ENBD, 83 cases) in this study. The intraoperative conditions and postoperative complications were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

In group A, the time of operation, postoperative first flatus, extubation, antibiotics, and discharge were shorter than in group B (t = -17.775, p = 0.000; t = -7.649, p = 0.000; t = -5.807, p = 0.000; t = -9.247, p = 0.000; t = -9.322, p = 0.000, respectively). Furthermore, intraoperative blood loss was less (t = -2.199, p = 0.029) and hospital costs were lower (t = -6.685, p = 0.000). However, there was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the 2 groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

In patients who meet the screening criteria, PDC without ENBD after LCBDE is safe and effective and worthy of clinical application.

Laparoscopic Exploration of the Common Bile Duct: A Systematic Review of the Published Evidence Over the Last 10 Years

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic and open surgical interventions are widely implemented as the standard practice in common bile duct exploration. However, the laparoscopic approach has been also reported to have comparative/superior outcomes in this concept. This has created an ongoing debate about the ideal approach to adopt in practice.

METHODS

A systematic review of the published evidence over the last decade that has looked into the outcomes of laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct through transductal and transcystic approaches.

RESULTS

Our systematic review included 36 relevant papers. The majority were based on nonrandomized protocols conducted in single centers with high expertise. The data analysis showed that laparoscopic common bile duct exploration through both approaches was successful in more than 84% of the patients, with an average length of hospital stay of 5.6 days. Conversion to open surgery was reported in 5%-8% of the patients, and the bile leak rates from the more recent studies was 0%-12%, with mortality figures of 0%-1.3%. The outcomes were statistically in favor of the transcystic route when compared to the transductal route from the viewpoints of bile leak rates, mean operative time, duration of hospital stay and morbidity.

CONCLUSION

In experienced hands, both laparoscopic approaches in common bile duct exploration are safe in patients who are clinically fit to have this intervention. It is associated with a statistically significant lower overall morbidity and shorter duration of hospital stay when compared to open surgery. Relevant up-to-date high-quality randomized trials are unavailable.

Can T-tube drainage be replaced by primary suture technique in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is considered the best treatment and has the advantages of being minimally invasive for common bile duct (CBD) stones, the choice of T-tube drainage (TTD) or primary duct closure (PDC) after LCBDE is still controversial. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare the superiority of PDC versus TTD after LCBDE for choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

All potential studies which compare the surgical effects between PDC with TTD were electronically searched for in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library databases up to November 2019. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

In total, six randomized controlled trials with 604 patients (307 in the PDC group and 297 in the TTD group) were included in the current meta-analysis. As compared with the TTD group, the pooled data showed that PDC group had shorter operating time (WMD = -24.30; 95% CI = -27.02 to -21.59; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%; p < 0.88), less medical expenditure (WMD = -2255.73; 95% CI = -3330.59 to -1180.86; p < 0.0001; I² = 96%; p < 0.00001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (OR = -2.88; 95% CI = -3.22 to -2.54; p < 0.00001; I² = 60%; p < 0.03), and lower postoperative complications (OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.78; p = 0.77; I² = 0%; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups concerning bile leakage (OR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36 to 1.53; p = 0.42; I² = 0%; p = 0.90) and retained stones (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.36 to 2.52; p < 0.93; I² = 0%; p < 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE with PDC should be performed as a priority alternative compared with TTD for choledocholithiasis.

Primary Closure Versus T-Tube Drainage Following Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration in Patients With Previous Biliary Surgery

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been recently introduced for management of CBD stone in patients with previous biliary surgery history. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of primary closure in patients with previous biliary surgery history compared to T-tube drainage. Eighty patients with previous biliary surgery history including laparoscopic cholecystectomy, open cholecystectomy, or open common bile duct exploration were enrolled in the retrospective study. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the methods of choledochotomy closure. Group A: patients with primary closure after LCBDE (n = 51); group B: patients with T-tube drainage after LCBDE (n = 29). Group A exhibited a shorter postoperative hospital stay and lower hospitalization expenses compared to group B. There was no significant difference in conversion rate to open surgery, operating time, intraoperative blood loss, bile leakage rate, overall complication rate, and stone recurrence rate between the 2 groups. Biliary stricture was not observed in the 2 groups during the follow-up period. Primary closure following LCBDE is safe and effective for the management of CBD stones in patients with previous biliary surgery history.

Combined gastroscopic and choledochoscopic transabdominal nasobiliary drainage

Common bile duct (CBD) stones are a frequent problem in Chinese populations, and their incidence is particularly high in certain areas (Wang et al., 2013). In recent years, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have been the main surgical procedures for CBD stones, although each has different advantages and disadvantages in the treatment of choledocholithiasis (Loor et al., 2017; Zhou et al., 2017). For patients with large stones, a dilated CBD, especially concurrent gallstones, LCBDE is the preferred and most economical minimally invasive procedure (Koc et al., 2013). However, a T-tube is often placed during LCBDE to prevent postoperative bile leakage; this is associated with problems such as bile loss, electrolyte disturbance, and decreased gastric intake (Martin et al., 1998). In addition, the T-tube usually must remain in place for more than a month, during which time the patient's quality of life is seriously compromised. Many skilled surgeons currently perform primary closure of the CBD following LCBDE, which effectively speeds up rehabilitation (Hua et al., 2015). However, even in sophisticated medical centers, the incidence of postoperative bile leakage still reaches ≥10% (Liu et al., 2017). Especially for a beginner, bile leakage remains a key problem (Kemp Bohan et al., 2017). Therefore, a safe and effective minimally invasive surgical approach to preventing bile leakage during primary closure of the CBD after LCBDE is still urgently needed.

Clinical role of frequency-doubled double-pulse neodymium YAG laser lithotripsy for removal of difficult biliary stones in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND

The optimal methods for patients with difficult biliary stones remain under debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of frequency-doubled double-pulse neodymium YAG (FREDDY) laser lithotripsy for removing difficult biliary stones during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE).

METHODS

Between March 2013 and January 2015, 42 consecutive patients with difficult biliary stones who underwent LCBDE with FREDDY laser lithotripsy were included in this study. The clinical data of all patients were retrospectively collected and analysed.

RESULTS

Bile ducts were completely cleared in all patients. The complications related to laser lithotripsy were not noted. A total of 38 patients (90.5%) underwent primary closure of common bile duct, and T-tube drainage was applied to four patients (9.5%). No bile duct injury, bleeding and perforation were observed. There were no post-operative surgery-related deaths. Bile leakage occurred in four patients (9.5%) with primary closure procedure, and all of them were managed successfully with conservative therapy. The median follow-up period was 42.8 months, with no evidence of bile duct stricture and stone recurrence in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The LCBDE combined with FREDDY laser lithotripsy appear to be effective and safe for the treatment of difficult biliary stones.

Meta-analysis of laparoscopic transcystic versus transcholedochal common bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis

Background

It is not clear whether laparoscopic transcystic exploration (LTCE) laparoscopic choledochotomy (LCD) is superior in the management of choledocholithiasis. In this meta-analysis, the success of LTCE versus LCD was evaluated.

Methods

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Trip, PubMed, Ovid and Embase databases were searched systematically for relevant literature up to May 2017. Studies that compared the success rate of LTCE and LCD in patients with choledocholithiasis were included. PRISMA guidelines were followed. Multiple independent reviewers contributed on a cloud-based platform. Random-effects model was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) or standardized mean differences (MDs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals. An a priori hypothesis was generated based on clinical experience that LTCE is as successful as LCD.

Results

Of 3533 screened articles, 25 studies comprising 4224 patients were included. LTCE achieved a lower duct clearance rate than LCD (OR 0.38, 95 per cent c.i. 0·24 to 0·59). It was associated with a shorter duration of surgery (MD -0·86, 95 per cent c.i. -0·97 to -0·77), lower bile leak (OR 0·46, 0·23 to 0·93) and shorter hospital stay (MD -0·78, -1·14 to -0·42) than LCD. There was no statistically significant difference in conversion, stricture formation or reintervention rate.

Conclusion

LCD has a higher rate of successful duct clearance, but is associated with a longer duration of surgery and hospital stay, and a higher bile leak rate.

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.

Primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is feasible for elderly patients: 5-Year experience at a single institution

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been demonstrated safety and effective for patients with gallbladder stones and extrahepatic bile duct stones, however few studies reported its suitability for the treatment of elderly patients. Thus, our study aims to investigate the safety and feasibility of primary closure after LCBDE in the treatment of elderly patients.

METHODS

408 out of 499 patients with Gallbladder stones complicated with choledocholithiasis who were undergone LCBDE and primary closure were divided into two groups: Group A (<65 years old, n = 249) and Group B (≥65 years old, n = 159) and the related clinical data were compared and analyzed by statistical method.

RESULTS

Pre-operative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of elderly patients was significantly higher than the younger patients (P < 0.05). In both groups, the positive rate of Choledocholithiasis and bile sludge at exploration, number of stones in CBD, utilization rate of Electro-hydraulic lithotripsy, estimated blood loss, successful duct clearance, the rate of postoperative bile leakage, postoperative bile duct stricture, reoperation, stone recurrence, and other postoperative complications showed no significant difference (p > 0.05). There were also no statistical differences between both groups in time to removal of drainage, postoperative hospital stay, readmission within 30 days and mortality (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

It is safe and feasible to treat the elderly patients with common bile duct stones under the premise of strict surgical indications, skilled laparoscopic procedures and accurate endoscopic suture techniques.

Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Is a Safe and Effective Strategy for Elderly Patients

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely used to remove common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, surgery is not considered as the first treatment choice for elderly patients with CBD stones because of the potential risk of postoperative complications. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficiency of LCBDE for elderly patients.

METHODS

From April 2011 to October 2016, 265 consecutive patients underwent LCBDE. We performed a retrospective study and divided these patients into 2 groups. The younger group was younger than 70 years old (n = 179), and the elderly group was 70 years old or older (n = 86). We compared patient demographics, clinical characteristics, intraoperative parameters, postoperative complications, and incidence of recurrent stone between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The elderly patients had higher preoperative morbidity of chronic diseases, such as pulmonary diseases, heart diseases, arterial hypertension, and abdominal operation history ( P < .05). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate to open surgery, total cost, overall complications, and incidence of recurrent stone ( P > .05).

CONCLUSION

LCBDE can also be carried out as a safe and effective approach to remove CBD stones in elderly patients, although they have higher risk of chronic diseases.

Learning curve for performing choledochotomy bile duct exploration with primary closure after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Primary closure after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is a safe and effective approach for treating cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve of performing primary closure after LC+LCBDE.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent primary closure after LC+LCBDE performed by a single surgeon from January 2009 to April 2015 in our institution, and analyzed preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis to evaluate the learning curve for this procedure.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 390 patients. The total postoperative complications rate was 7.2%, including bile leakage in 9 (2.3%) patients and retained common bile duct stone in 3 (0.8%) patients. The CUSUM operating time (OT) learning curve was best modeled by the equation: CUSUM_OT = 312.209 × procedure^0.599 × e^{(-0.011×procedure)} + 122.608 (R² = 0.96). The learning curve was composed of two phases, phase 1 (the initial 54 patients) and phase 2 (the remaining 336 patients). A significant decrease in the OT (116.8 ± 22.4 vs. 93.8 ± 17.8 min; p < 0.001) and complication rate (16.7 vs. 5.7%; p < 0.01) including the rate of bile leakage (7.4 vs. 1.5%; p < 0.01) and retained stone (3.7 vs. 0.3%; p < 0.01) was observed between the two phases. In addition, 20 patients had conversion to open surgery. Impacted stones were independently associated with conversion, as indicated by a multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

The data suggest that the learning curve of this procedure was achieved in approximately 54 cases. An impacted stone was the only risk factor that affected the conversion rate.

In vivo porcine training model of laparoscopic common bile duct repair with T-tube insertion under the situation of iatrogenic common bile duct injury

Purpose

We introduce a training porcine model for laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) repair with T-tube insertion. The model could be the feasible training tool for a surgeon learning hepatobiliary surgery.

Methods

Totally laparoscopic CBD repair with T-tube insertion was performed on 9 pigs by 9 trainees naïve in hepatobiliary surgery. Similar to the situation of iatrogenic injury, CBD was transected by laparoscopic scissors at the middle part about 1 cm in length, and the transected CBD was repaired through end-to-end anastomosis with T-tube insertion. A secureness of anastomosis was confirmed by saline leakage test and all animals were sacrificed after the surgery.

Results

All novice surgeons completed operations successfully without complications. Total mean operative time was 85 ± 1.7 minutes and the mean time spent performing the CBD repair with T-tube insertion was 71 ± 3 minutes. There was no bile leakage after primary anastomosis in all animals.

Conclusion

This porcine training model for laparoscopic CBD repair with T-tube insertion could be a feasible and effective training tool for surgeons with little experience in laparoscopic hepatobiliary surgery.

Single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in 101 consecutive patients: choledochotomy, transcystic, and transfistulous approaches

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis is still evolving. Only a few reports of single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) have been published.

METHODS

One hundred and one consecutive patients underwent single-incision LCBDE (SILCBDE) by one surgeon with straight instruments during a 42-month period.

RESULTS

Choledochotomies were performed on 61 patients (60.4%). The success rate of intrahepatic duct exploration was 68.0% (17/25) for patients undergoing transcystic choledochoscopic bile duct explorations following longitudinal cystic ductotomies. The ductal clearance rate was 100%. Eighteen procedures (17.8%) were converted, including one open surgery. Nineteen patients (18.8%) experienced 26 episodes of complications; the majority (19 episodes) were classified as Clavien-Dindo grade I. Excluding those patients with Mirizzi syndrome (McSherry type II), multivariate logistic regressions showed that patients who were older or had complicated cholecystitis had higher procedure conversion rates and that higher modified APACHE II scores, higher white blood cell counts, and longer operative times were independent risk factors for complications. Based on operative times, 20 successful SILCBDEs were needed to get through the learning phase. A higher transcystic approach rate (46.5 vs. 8.3%; P < 0.01) and a shorter operative time (207 ± 62 vs. 259 ± 66 min; P < 0.01) were observed in the experienced phase. Compared with our early series of multi-incision LCBDE, the SILCBDE group had a higher bile duct stone clearance rate (100 vs. 94.4%; P < 0.05) and a higher proportion of patients with concomitant acute cholecystitis (59.6 vs. 22.2%; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE with a 100% ductal clearance rate is possible following an algorithm for various approaches. SILCBDE is feasible under a low threshold for procedure conversion. A transcystic approach should be tried first if indicated, and a longitudinal cystic ductotomy to the cystocholedochal junction is beneficial. Prospective, randomized trials comparing single-incision and multi-incision LCBDE are anticipated.

Primary Closure Following Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Combined with Intraoperative Choledochoscopy and D-J Tube Drainage for Treating Choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND This study aimed to assess the clinical short-term results of a primary closure following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) combined with intraoperative choledochoscopy and D-J tube drainage for choledocholithiasis treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS Twenty-five patients (14 women and 11 men) who underwent LCBDE with primary duct closure and D-J tube drainage for choledocholithiasis were retrospectively enrolled. The D-J tube (4.7F×14 cm) was removed using a duodenoscope if there was no bile leakage. Before discharge, patients were examined for blood amylase. After discharge or D-J tube removal, all patients were routinely assessed for complications. RESULTS Mean operating time was 135±46 min (range, 78-195 min). Mean intraoperative blood loss was 71±24 mL (range, 25-110 mL). Total hospital stay was 6-9 days (mean, 8.04±1.37 days). Two patients experienced intraoperative bile leakage, which was stopped with re-suturing. None of these patients experienced postoperative bile leaks. Three patients had slight elevation of serum amylase before discharge but without pancreatitis signs. The successful clearance rate of stones was 100%. During 1-year follow-up, no recurrence or severe complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS A primary closure following LCBDE combined with intraoperative choledochoscopy and D-J tube drainage is safe and feasible for choledocholithiasis treatment.

Risk factors for bile leakage after primary closure following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Primary closure following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely adopted because of the efficacy and safety in treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, the risk factors for bile leakage, the most common complication after primary closure, has not been clarified yet.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LCBDE with primary closure after choledochotomy between Feb. 2012 and Jun. 2016 was performed. Risk factors for bile leakage were identified by logistic regression inculding demographic factors, preoperative condition and surgical details.

Results

Between Feb. 2012 and Jun. 2016, a total of 265 LCBDE procedures were applied in our hospital and 141 patients with primary closure were included in this study. Bile leakage occurred in 11.3% (16/141) of these patients, and happened more frequently in patients with slender CBD (<1 vs ≥1 cm, 31.6% vs 7.0%, p = 0.04) and those managed by inexperienced surgeons (initial 70 cases vs later cases, 17.1% vs 5.6%, p = 0.04). After multivariable regression, the diameter of CBD [OR 95% CI, 3.799 (1.081–13.349), p = 0.04] and experience of surgeons [OR 95% CI, 4.228 (1.330–13.438), p = 0.03] were significantly related to bile leakage.

Conclusion

Slender CBD and inexperienced surgeons were the high risk factors for bile leakage after primary closure following LCBDE.

Five hundred consecutive laparoscopic common bile duct explorations: 5-year experience at a single institution

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has gained wide popularity in the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Bile leakage remains a major cause of postoperative morbidity. The aim of this study was to report 5-year results of 500 LCBDEs and identify risk factors associated with bile leakage.

METHODS

Five hundred consecutive LCBDEs performed in one institution from September 2011 to June 2016 were reviewed. Patients' clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Univariable and multivariable analysis of bile leakage was performed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

We found stones (n = 388) or bile sludge (n = 71) in 459 patients (92%) on exploration, leaving 41 patients (8%) without stones. Operative time was 128 min in the first 250 LCBDEs, and this decreased to 103 min in the second 250 LCBDEs (P = 0.0004). Four hundred and eight (82%) procedures were completed with primary closure after choledochotomy; the rate of primary closure increased significantly in the second 250 patients compared with the first (88 vs 76%; P = 0.0005), whereas T-tube placement (2 vs 6%; P = 0.0225) and transcystic approach (7 vs 12%; P = 0.0464) decreased, respectively. Stone clearance was successful in 495 patients (99%). Overall morbidity was 5%, and bile leakage occurred in 17 patients (3.4%). Two patients died from bile leakage. The median follow-up was 24 months with stone recurrence occurred in two patients and bile duct stricture in one patient. Univariable analysis identified diameter of the common bile duct (CBD), stone clearance, and T-tube insertion as risk factors related to bile leakage. Multivariable analysis taking these three factors into account identified non-dilated CBD (risk ratio (RR) = 9.87; P = 0.007) and failure in stone clearance (RR = 11.88; P = 0.024) as significant risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Bile leakage following LCBDE is associated with diameter of the CBD and stone clearance. LCBDE would be safer in proficient laparoscopic surgeons with a careful selection of patients.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a safe and definitive treatment for elderly patients

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stone is one of the most common diseases among elderly people. In recent decades, there are numerous studies regarding the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Elderly patients are often regarded as high-risk patients because they are more likely to present with age-specific deterioration of organ function and coexisting chronic diseases, which may reduce their tolerance of laparoscopic surgery. Although laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis is now widely accepted as the treatment for CBD stone, its appropriateness for the treatment of elderly patients or those with coexisting high-risk patients has not been well established. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to analyze the safety and efficacy of LCBDE in elderly patients.

METHODS

Between January 2012 and November 2015, 376 patients underwent LCBDE in our center. Based on their ages, they were divided into two groups, and a retrospective study was performed. By making comparisons between younger group who were younger than 70 years (n = 253) and elderly group who were 70 years old or older (n = 123), the demographics, clinical characteristics, laboratory data, operative parameters and outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Before operation, elderly patients had more coexisting chronic diseases and risk factors, such as arterial hypertension, heart diseases, pulmonary diseases and previous abdominal surgery (P < 0.05). In both groups, LCBDE was equally successful with a high clearance rate (100 % in elderly patients vs. 98.8 % in younger group, P = 0.554). Besides, the operating time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, total costs and overall complication showed no significant difference between two groups (P > 0.05). There was no major bile duct injury or death in either group.

CONCLUSION

Although elderly patients are frequently confronted with coexisting disorders, LCBDE can be considered as a safe and effective technique in choledocholithiasis treatment for elderly patients.

A survey of European-African surgeons' management of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones can be managed by either endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). The aim of this survey was to document the management of CBD stones by European-African HPB Association (E-AHPBA) members.

METHODS

All 331 members of the E-AHPBA were invited by personal email to participate to an online survey.

RESULTS

Ninety-three (28%) surgeons replied within 2 months. Responding surgeons were attending surgeons (84%), working as HPB surgeons (75%) in academic hospitals (73%). In patients with clinically suspected CBD stones, MRCP was the preferred diagnostic test for 61% of respondents. LCBDE was the preferred therapeutic strategy for 11 (12%) respondents only. Previous gastric surgery was an absolute contraindication to ERCP for 47% of respondents. Absence of CBD dilation was considered an absolute contraindication for LCBDE in 24% of respondents. Yearly caseload exceeded 10 patients for only 30% of 56 centers performing LCBDE. The transcystic approach was preferred by 39% of surgeons performing LCBDE. There was considerable variation amongst respondents with regard to type and duration of drainage, bile duct closure technique and follow-up after LCBDE.

CONCLUSION

Indications for single-stage LCBDE are not standardized and do not appear well established across E-AHPBA members.

Intraoperative endoscopic nasobiliary drainage over primary closure of the common bile duct for choledocholithiasis combined with cholecystolithiasis: a cohort study of 211 cases

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) was often used for preoperative biliary drainage in cases like cholangiocarcinoma or acute obstructive suppurative cholangitis, reports on endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) over primary closure of the common bile duct (CBD) are limited. This study compares outcomes of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) + laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) + intraoperative ENBD + primary closure of CBD with equivalent patients who underwent preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and subsequent LC.

METHODS

From January 2013 to December 2015, 829 consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis combined with cholecystolithiasis underwent surgery in our department. 211 patients underwent LC + LCBDE + intraoperative ENBD + primary closure of CBD (group A) and 117 preoperative ERCP + subsequent LC (group B). A total of 501 patients (355 who underwent T-tube drainage and 146 who underwent transcystic exploration) were excluded from the analysis. Clinical records, operative findings, and postoperative follow-up were analyzed.

RESULTS

Age and sex distribution, comorbidity, presentations, CBD diameter, and size and number of stones were similar in the two groups, and there was no postoperative mortality. Duration of surgery in group A was shorter (83 vs. 104 min, P < 0.01), as was postoperative hospital stay (6 vs. 9 days, P < 0.01). Average operative expenditure in group A was less than that of group B ($ 3816 vs. $ 4015, P < 0.01). The success rate in group A was higher (100 vs. 91%, P < 0.01). Ten patients in group B converted to LCBDE. The postoperative complication rate was higher in group B but without significant difference (1.9 vs. 4.2%, P = 0.29). Median follow-up time was 24 (3-28) months (n = 302 patients). Two patients in group B reported residual stones.

CONCLUSION

LC + LCBDE + intraoperative ENBD + primary closure of CBD should have priority over preoperative ERCP + subsequent LC for choledocholithiasis combined with cholecystolithiasis.

Role of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in the management of choledocholithiasis

Surgical fraternity has not yet arrived at any consensus for adequate treatment of choledocholithiasis. Sequential treatment in the form of pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered as optimal treatment till date. With refinements in technique and expertise in field of minimal access surgery, many centres in the world have started offering one stage management of choledocholithiasis by LC with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Various modalities have been tried for entering into concurrent common bile duct (CBD) [transcystic (TC) vs transcholedochal (TD)], for confirming stone clearance (intraoperative cholangiogram vs choledochoscopy), and for closure of choledochotomy (T-tube vs biliary stent vs primary closure) during LCBDE. Both TC and TD approaches are safe and effective. TD stone extraction is involved with an increased risk of bile leaks and requires more expertise in intra-corporeal suturing and choledochoscopy. Choice depends on number of stones, size of stone, diameter of cystic duct and CBD. This review article was undertaken to evaluate the role of LCBDE for the management of choledocholithiasis.

Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: 9 Years Experience from a Single Center

Introduction

The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) through cholangiotomy with T-tube placement in one séance for common bile duct stones (CBDS).

Methods

Between January 2005 and December 2010, a total of 99 patients with CBDS stones undergoing LCBDE with T-tube insertion at Enköping Hospital, Sweden, were registered prospectively. All patients were followed up by review of the patient records according to a standardized protocol.

Results

No severe intraoperative complications were registered. Four procedures required conversion to open cholecystectomy due to impacted stones or technical difficulty. The mean operative time was 194 min [(SD) 57 min]. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 4.8 days, SD 2.4 days. At secondary cholangiography, 2 (2%) retained stones were found. Two (2%) patients had minor bile leakage, which resolved spontaneously. None of the patients experienced biliary peritonitis, biliary fistula, pancreatitis, or cholangitis. No death within 30 days after surgery was seen. No patient was readmitted with clinical signs of stricture.

Conclusion

If performed by a surgeon familiar with the technique, LCBDE is a safe and feasible alternative for managing CBDS. The advantages are most pronounced in the case of multiple and large CBDS. The risk for retained stones and stricture is low.

Effects of intravenously infused lidocaine on analgesia and gastrointestinal function of patients receiving laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

Objective:

To evaluate the effects of intravenously infused lidocaine on analgesia and gastrointestinal function of patients receiving laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

Methods:

Seventy-eight patients with cholelithiasis were randomly divided into a treatment group and a control group (n=39) that all had laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. The treatment group was intravenously infused with 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine by using a venous pump under anesthesia induction at the speed of 2 mg·kg^-1 ·h^-1 until the end of surgery, while the control group was given normal saline with the same volume.

Results:

All patients successfully completed the surgery, with similar surgical time, incision length and intraoperative blood loss. The required lidocaine concentrations of the treatment group were 2.64±1.23 μg/ml, 1.14±0.4 μg/ml and 0.93±0.32 μg/ml respectively 2 hour, 12 hour and 48 hour after surgery. Pain score of the treatment group, which was significantly lower than that of the control group at the postoperative 2 hour (P<0.05), was similar to those of the control group at the postoperative 12 hour and 48 hour. With extended time, the pain score significantly decreased (P<0.05). The treatment group had significantly shorter first anal exhaust time and first defecation time than those of the control group (P<0.05). Adverse reactions, such as nausea and vomiting, dizziness, headache, subcutaneous emphysema and fat liquefaction of incision, occurred similarly in the two groups, which were alleviated by symptomatic treatment.

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is a promising minimally invasive surgery for patients with cholelithiasis, during which intravenously infused lidocaine can rapidly recover the gastrointestinal function and exert short-term analgesic effects, with mild adverse reactions also.

Innovative technique of needlescopic grasper-assisted single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: A comparative study

AIM: To investigate the safety and feasibility of needlescopic grasper-assisted single-incision laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (nSIL-CBDE) by comparing the surgical outcomes of this technique with those of conventional laparoscopic CBDE (CL-CBDE).

METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients who underwent CL-CBDE or nSIL-CBDE for the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones between January 2000 and December 2014. For performing nSIL-CBDE, a needlescopic grasper was also inserted through a direct puncture below the right subcostal line after introducing a single-port through the umbilicus. The needlescopic grasper helped obtain the critical view of safety by retracting the gallbladder laterally and by preventing crossing or conflict between laparoscopic instruments. The gallbladder was then partially dissected from the liver bed and used for retraction. CBD stones were usually extracted through a longitudinal supraduodenal choledochotomy, mostly using flushing a copious amount of normal saline through a ureteral catheter. Afterward, for the certification of CBD clearance, CBDE was performed mostly using a flexible choledochoscope. The choledochotomy site was primarily closed without using a T-tube, and simultaneous cholecystectomies were performed.

RESULTS: During the study period, 40 patients underwent laparoscopic CBDE. Of these patients, 20 underwent CL-CBDE and 20 underwent nSIL-CBDE. The operative time for nSIL-CBDE was significantly longer than that for CL-CBDE (238 ± 76 min vs 192 ± 39 min, P = 0.007). The stone clearance rate was 100% (40/40) in both groups. Postoperatively, the nSIL-CBDE group required less intravenous analgesic (pethidine) (46.5 ± 63.5 mg/kg vs 92.5 ± 120.1 mg/kg, P = 0.010) and had a shorter hospital stay than the CL-CBDE group (3.8 ± 2.0 d vs 5.1 ± 1.7 d, P = 0.010). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that nSIL-CBDE could be safe and feasible while improving cosmetic outcomes when performed by surgeons trained in conventional laparoscopic techniques.