Reference Citation Analysis: Find an Article, Find a Category, Find a Journal, Find a Scholar

For:	[Subscribe] [Scholar Register]

Number	Cited by Other Article(s)
1	Comparing a single-staged laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration versus a two-staged endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 2018;164:1030-1034. [PMID: 30054013 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.05.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2018] [Revised: 05/09/2018] [Accepted: 05/13/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Abstract BACKGROUND With the advent of minimally invasive surgery, the limits of surgery have been stretched by questioning the more usual, established 2-stage approach for choledocholithiasis with an initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in favor of the single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to compare the related benefits, difficulties, and outcomes of these 2 methods at a single institution. METHODS A retrospective analysis of 128 patients satisfying the inclusion criteria was divided into 2 groups (n = 68 for the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy and n = 60 for the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy) between 2014 and 2017. Patient data including age, sex, duration of the operation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay were reviewed. RESULTS The group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy had 24 men and 44 women (mean age 52 years), and the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy had 16 men and 44 women (mean age 47 years). Statistically significant results were found in the clearance range (100% in the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus 75% in the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy), a shorter total duration of hospitalization for the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (4.1 days vs 8.4 days) (P < .05), but a great incidence of biliary leakage in the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Duration of surgery was not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a single-stage procedure that has many advantages over endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy if appropriate experience and when expertise is available. Collapse Key Words Collapse MESH Headings Collapse Grants Collapse Affiliation(s) Collapse

Number

Cited by Other Article(s)

Comparing a single-staged laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration versus a two-staged endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 2018;164:1030-1034. [PMID: 30054013 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.05.052] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/11/2018] [Revised: 05/09/2018] [Accepted: 05/13/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]

Abstract

BACKGROUND

With the advent of minimally invasive surgery, the limits of surgery have been stretched by questioning the more usual, established 2-stage approach for choledocholithiasis with an initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in favor of the single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to compare the related benefits, difficulties, and outcomes of these 2 methods at a single institution.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 128 patients satisfying the inclusion criteria was divided into 2 groups (n = 68 for the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy and n = 60 for the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy) between 2014 and 2017. Patient data including age, sex, duration of the operation, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and duration of hospital stay were reviewed.

RESULTS

The group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy had 24 men and 44 women (mean age 52 years), and the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy had 16 men and 44 women (mean age 47 years). Statistically significant results were found in the clearance range (100% in the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus 75% in the group with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy), a shorter total duration of hospitalization for the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (4.1 days vs 8.4 days) (P < .05), but a great incidence of biliary leakage in the group with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Duration of surgery was not different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy is a single-stage procedure that has many advantages over endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/laparoscopic cholecystectomy if appropriate experience and when expertise is available.

Collapse