Synchronous vs sequential laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis

Optimal timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and common bile duct clearance: A prospective observational study

Background:

The treatment of patients with cholelithiasis with common bile duct (CBD) stones is CBD clearance with cholecystectomy. While traditional teachings advocate waiting for 4–6-week post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) with CBD clearance, recent studies favour an early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Hence, this study was conducted to evaluate the optimal timing of LC post-ERCP.

Methods:

We conducted a prospective observational study between March 2017 and October 2018. Patients diagnosed with cholelithiasis and CBS stones on ultrasonography or computed tomography were included. They were assigned to one of two groups (<2 weeks and >2 weeks) based on the time interval between ERCP and subsequent LC. Chi-square test was used to analyse the intraoperative and post-operative outcomes between the two study groups,

Results:

One hundred and forty patients were included in the study of which 69 underwent an early LC (<2 weeks). There was a significant decrease in the blood loss and incidence of bowel injury in the early group. Calots triangle was better defined and critical view of safety was achieved more in the patients who underwent an early LC. This resulted in a significantly lower incidence of drain placement and length of hospital stay in those patients who underwent an early LC.

Conclusion:

A delay of 2 weeks after ERCP makes the LC more difficult and is associated with a longer hospital stay. We advocate LC within 2 weeks of ERCP whenever feasible.

Clinical Impact of Preoperative Relief of Jaundice Following Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography on Determining Optimal Timing of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in Patients with Cholangitis

Background: About 10% of patients with gallbladder (GB) stones also have concurrent common bile duct (CBD) stones. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) after removal of CBD stones using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the most widely used method for treating coexisting gallbladder and common bile duct stones. We evaluated the optimal timing of LC after ERCP according to clinical factors, focusing on preoperative relief of jaundice. Methods: A total of 281 patients who underwent elective LC after ERCP because of choledocholithiasis and cholecystolithiasis from January 2010 to April 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. We compared the hospital stay, perioperative morbidity, and rate of surgical conversion to open cholecystectomy according to the relief of jaundice before surgery. These enrolled patients were divided into two groups: relief of jaundice before surgery (group 1, n = 125) or not (group 2, n = 156). Results: The initial total bilirubin level was higher in group 1; however, there were no significant differences in the other baseline characteristics including age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, previous surgical history, white blood cell count, C-reactive protein, and operative time between the two groups. There was also no significant difference in postoperative hospital stay between the two groups (4.5 ± 3.3 vs. 5.5 ± 5.6 days, p = 0.087). However, after ERCP, the waiting time until LC was significantly longer in group 1 (5.0 ± 4.9 vs. 3.5 ± 2.4 days, p < 0.001). There were no statistical differences in the conversion rate (3.2% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.518) or perioperative morbidity (4.0% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.348), either. Conclusions: LC would not be delayed until the relief of jaundice after ERCP since there were no significant differences in perioperative morbidity or surgical conversion rate to open cholecystectomy. Early LC after ERCP may be feasible and safe in patients with cholangitis and cholecystolithiasis.

Same-Day versus Conventional Different-Day Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Multi-Center Retrospective Study

Same-day endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and cholecystectomy (LC) could potentially reduce hospital length of stay (HLOS). Patients undergoing same-day procedures (N = 164) between 2012 and 2014 were compared with different-day procedures performed in the second half of 2014 (N = 276), in the Kaiser Permanente Southern California database. Both groups had comparable baseline characteristics. ERCP success rate (97.5% vs 93.5%), overall postoperative morbidity (3.66% vs 3.99%), and retained stones (2.5% vs 5.8%) were not different between groups ( P > 0.05); however, HLOS was shorter in the same-day group (2.99 ± 2.34 vs 3.84 ± 2.52 days, P < 0.001). Morbidity, procedure success, and HLOS were not different in the same-day group, whether ERCP was performed before or after LC ( P > 0.05). In the same-day group, those undergoing single anesthesia had higher BMI (40.1 ± 10.8 vs 30.3 ± 6.6) and were more likely to have gastric bypass (30% vs 0%) than those undergoing separate anesthesia sessions ( P < 0.01). Longer HLOS (4.8 ± 3.5 vs 2.9 ± 2.2 days) and higher estimated blood loss (65 ± 90 mL vs 20 ± 29 mL) were also associated with the single-anesthetic session ( P < 0.01). ERCP performed on the same day of LC reduces HLOS without increasing morbidity. This approach does not affect postoperative morbidity and ERCP success rate, whether ERCP was performed before or after LC.

Laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for stones in the gallbladder and bile duct

BACKGROUND

The management of gallbladder stones (lithiasis) concomitant with bile duct stones is controversial. The more frequent approach is a two-stage procedure, with endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone removal from the bile duct followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous combines the two techniques in a single-stage operation.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone removal followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (the single-stage rendezvous technique) versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (two stages) in people with gallbladder and common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, Science Citation Index Expanded Web of Science, and two trials registers (February 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials that enrolled people with concomitant gallbladder and common bile duct stones, regardless of clinical status or diagnostic work-up, and compared laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy procedures in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. We excluded other endoscopic or surgical methods of intraoperative clearance of the bile duct, e.g. non-aided intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or laparoscopic choledocholithotomy (surgical incision of the common bile duct for removal of bile duct stones).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised clinical trials with 517 participants (257 underwent a laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous technique versus 260 underwent a sequential approach), which fulfilled our inclusion criteria and provided data for analysis. Trial participants were scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy because of suspected cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. Male/female ratio was 0.7; age of men and women ranged from 21 years to 87 years. The run-in and follow-up periods of the trials ranged from 32 months to 84 months. Overall, the five trials were judged at high risk of bias. Athough all trials measured mortality, there was just one death reported in one trial, in the laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous group (low-quality evidence). The overall morbidity (surgical morbidity plus general morbidity) may be lower with laparoscopic rendezvous (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.20; participants = 434, trials = 4; I² = 28%; low-quality evidence); the effect was a little more certain when a fixed-effect model was used (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.99). There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the two approaches on the failure of primary clearance of the bile duct (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.38; participants = 517; trials = 5; I² = 58%; very low-quality evidence). The effects of either approach on clinical post-operative pancreatitis were unclear (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.12; participants = 517, trials = 5; I² = 24%; low-quality evidence). Hospital stay appeared to be lower in the laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous group by about three days (95% CI 3.51 to 2.50 days shorter; 515 participants in five trials; low-quality evidence). There was very low-quality evidence that suggested longer operative time with laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous (MD 34.07 minutes, 95% CI 11.41 to 56.74; participants = 313; trials = 3; I² = 93%). The Trial Sequential Analyses of operating time and the length of hospital stay indicated that all the trials crossed the conventional boundaries, suggesting that the sample sizes were adequate, with a low risk of random error.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to determine the effects of the laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy techniques in people undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy on mortality and morbidity. The laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous procedure may lead to longer operating times, but it may reduce the length of the hospital stay when compared with preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, no firm conclusions could be drawn because the quality of evidence was low or very low. If confirmed by future trials, these data might re-design the scenario of treatment of this condition, albeit requiring greater organisational effort. Future trials should also address issues such as quality of life and cost analysis.

Optimal Timing for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: A Systematic Review

Background and Aims:

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy is often used as definitive treatment for common bile duct stones. The aim of this study was to investigate the optimal time interval between endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Materials and Methods:

PubMed and Embase were searched for studies comparing different time delays between endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Observational studies and randomized controlled trials were included. Primary outcome was conversion rate from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy and secondary outcomes were complications, mortality, operating time, and length of stay.

Results:

A total of 14 studies with a total of 1930 patients were included. The pooled estimate revealed an increase from a 4.2% conversion rate when laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed within 24 h of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography to 7.6% for 24–72 h delay to 12.3% when performed within 2 weeks, to 12.3% for 2–6 weeks, and to a 14% conversion rate when operation was delayed more than 6 weeks.

Conclusion:

According to this systematic review, it is preferable to perform cholecystectomy within 24 h of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography to reduce conversion rate. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not increase mortality, perioperative complications, or length of stay and on the contrary it reduces the risk of reoccurrence and progression of disease in the delay between endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Comparative quality of life study between endoscopic sphincterotomy and surgical choledochotomy

AIM: To determine quality of life improvement in choledocholithiasis patients who underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) versus open choledochotomy (OCT).

METHODS: Eligible choledocholithiasis patients (n = 216) hospitalized in the Changhai Hospital between May 2010 and January 2011 were enrolled into a prospective study using cluster sampling. Patients underwent EST (n = 135) or OCT (n = 81) depending on the patient’s wishes. Patients were followed-up with a field survey and by correspondence. Patients were also given the self-administered Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) to measure patient quality of life before surgery, and at two and six weeks after the procedures.

RESULTS: With respect to baseline patient characteristics, the EST and OCT groups were comparable. After the procedure, gallstones were completely eliminated in all patients. Among 216 eligible patients, 191 patients (88.4%) completed all three surveys, including 118 patients who underwent EST (118/135; 87.4%) and 73 patients who underwent OCT (73/81; 90.1%). EST was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay than OCT (8.8 ± 6.5 vs 13.9 ± 6.7 d; P < 0.001). The GIQLI score was similar between the EST and OCT groups before cholelithotomy (103.0 ± 15.4 vs 99.7 ± 10.2), but increased significantly in the EST group at two weeks (113.4 ± 12.0 vs 107.2 ± 11.2; P < 0.001) and six weeks (120.7 ± 10.6 vs 116.9 ± 7.5; P < 0.05) after the procedures.

CONCLUSION: EST, compared with OCT, is associated with better postoperative quality of life in patients treated for choledocholithiasis.