Intraoperative Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Research Articles

One-Stage Intraoperative ERCP combined with Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Versus Two-Stage Preoperative ERCP Followed by Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in the Management of Gallbladder with Common Bile Duct Stones: A Meta-analysis.

Concomitant gallbladder and common bile duct (CBD) stones, known as cholecystocholedocholithiasis, are clinically prevalent. There is currently no consensus on sequential versus simultaneous management approaches, and, if simultaneous, which approach to adopt. This meta-analysis evaluates the safety and efficacy of one-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) versus two-stage ERCP followed by LC for treating concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in five databases, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, VIP, and Wanfang, for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort and retrospective studies published up to February 2024. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. The primary outcomes were CBD stone clearance rate and postoperative complications morbidity. Secondary outcomes included conversion to other procedures and length of hospital stay. Statistical analyses were performed using R (v.4.3.2) with weighted mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) calculated for continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 17 studies involving 2120 patients have been included, with 898 patients receiving single-stage and 1222 patients undergoing two-stage treatment. Of these studies, 9 were RCTs and 8 were retrospective cohort study. The one-stage group demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of CBD stone clearance (OR=2.07, p=0.0004), overall morbidity (OR=0.35, p<0.0001), post-operative pancreatitis (OR=0.49, p=0.006), conversion to other procedures (OR=0.38, p=0.0006), and length of hospital stay (MD=- 2.6456, 95% CI -3.5776; -1.7136, p<0.0001). No significant differences were observed in post-operative cholangitis (OR=0.44, p=0.12), post-operative bleeding (OR=0.76, p=0.47), or bile leakage (OR=1.28, p=0.54). For patients with concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones, the one-stage approach combining ERCP and LC appears safer and more effective, with advantages including higher stone clearance rates, reduced postoperative complications (particularly pancreatitis), shorter hospital stays, fewer residual stones, and decreased need for additional procedures. However, additional high-quality clinical trials are needed to establish the optimal treatment approach for various patient scenarios.

Intraoperative imaging and management of common duct stones during subtotal cholecystectomy.

Subtotal cholecystectomy is advocated in patients with severe inflammation and distorted anatomy preventing safe removal of the entire gallbladder. Not well documented in this surgically complex population is the feasibility of intraoperative imaging and management of common bile duct (CBD) stones. We evaluated these operative maneuvers in our subtotal cholecystectomy patients. We retrospectively reviewed all cholecystectomy cases from 2014 to 2023 at a single Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center using VASQIP (VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program), selecting subtotal cholecystectomy cases for detailed analysis. We reviewed operative reports, imaging and laboratory studies, and clinical notes to understand biliary imaging, stone management, complications, and late outcomes including retained stones (within 6months), and recurrent stones (beyond 6months). 419 laparoscopic (n = 406) and open (n = 13) cholecystectomies were performed, including 40 subtotal cholecystectomies (36 laparoscopic, 4 laparoscopic converted to open). Among these 40 patients IOC was attempted in 35 and completed in 26, with successful stone management in 11 (9 common bile duct exploration [CBDE], 2 intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP]). In follow-up, 3 additional patients had CBD stones managed by ERCP, including 1 with a negative IOC and 2 without IOC. Thus, 14 (35%) of 40 patients had CBD stones. Of note, IOC permitted identification and oversewing or closure of the cystic duct in 32 patients. There were no major bile duct injuries and one cystic duct stump leak (2.5%) that resolved spontaneously. Subtotal cholecystectomy patients had a high incidence of bile duct stones, with most detected and managed intraoperatively with CBDE, making a strong argument for routine IOC and single-stage care. When intraoperative imaging is not possible, postoperative imaging should be considered. Routine imaging, biliary clearance, and cystic duct closure during subtotal cholecystectomy is feasible in most patients with low rates of retained stones and bile leaks.

Single stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. Lesson learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Choledocholithiasis, a common complication of gallstone disease, poses significant risks including cholangitis and pancreatitis. Various treatment approaches exist, including single-stage and two-stage techniques, with recent literature suggesting advantages of the single-stage approach in terms of outcomes and cost-effectiveness. This study evaluates the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of single-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (LC + iERCP) compared to the previously adopted two-stage approach. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing single-stage LC + iERCP for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022). Data on demographics, preoperative assessments, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were collected and compared with an historical control group undergoing the two-stage approach (LC + preopERCP). Hospitalization costs were also compared between the two groups. A total of 190 patients were included, with 105 undergoing single-stage LC + iERCP. The single-stage approach demonstrated successful completion without cystic duct cannulation, with no conversions to open surgery. Operative time was comparable to the two-stage approach, while hospital stay, and costs were significantly lower in the single-stage group. Complication rates were similar between the groups. Single-stage LC + iERCP appears to be a feasible, effective, and safe approach for treating cholecysto-choledocholithiasis, offering potential benefits in terms of reduced hospital stay, OR occupation time, and costs compared to the two-stage approach. Integration of this approach into clinical practice warrants consideration, unless there are logistical challenges that cannot be overcome or lack of endoscopic expertise also for treating challenging urgent cases.

Current Management of Choledocholithiasis-narrative Review Article

The most common management of choledocholithiasis involves the two-step method that involves the use of pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in six weeks’ time. But since the introduction of laparoscopic surgery, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration has been used as a single step method to treat this condition. Another method involves intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the same setting. As there is no consensus on management, we have conducted this review article to look at the various management options for choledocholithiasis.

CHOLECYSTECTOMY WITH INTRAOPERATIVE ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY: DOES THE ORDER MATTER?

The recommended treatment for cholecystocholedocholithiasis is cholecystectomy (CCT) associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). CCT with intraoperative ERCP is associated with higher success rates and lower hospital stays and hospital costs. However, some case series do not describe the exact methodology used: whether ERCP or CCT was performed first. Verify if there is a difference, in terms of outcomes and complications, when intraoperative ERCP is performed immediately before or after CCT. This is a retrospective case-control study analyzing all patients who underwent CCT with intraoperative ERCP between January 2021 and June 2022, in a tertiary hospital in southern Brazil, for the treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Out of 37 patients analyzed, 16 (43.2%) underwent ERCP first, immediately followed by CCT. The overall success rate for the cannulation of the bile duct was 91.9%, and bile duct clearance was achieved in 75.7% of cases. The post-ERCP pancreatitis rate was 10.8%. When comparing the "ERCP First" and "CCT First" groups, there was no difference in technical difficulty for performing CCT. The "CCT First" group had a higher rate of success in bile duct cannulation (p=0.020, p<0.05). Younger ages, presence of stones in the distal common bile duct and shorter duration of the procedure were factors statistically associated with the success of the bile duct clearance. Lymphopenia and cholecystitis as an initial presentation, in turn, were associated with failure to clear the bile duct. There was no significant difference in terms of complications and success in clearing the bile ducts among patients undergoing CCT and ERCP in the same surgical/anesthetic procedure, regardless of which procedure was performed first. Lymphopenia and cholecystitis have been associated with failure to clear the bile duct.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis − The same operator: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Background Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) plus either intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (intraERCP) or laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) are one-stage, minimally invasive procedures to treat cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. This study aimed to compare the safety, efficacy, and surgical outcomes of the LC-intraERCP and LC-LCBDE for patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. Both authors completely performed both procedures. Patients and methods This multicenter randomized controlled trial included 218 patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiasis randomized to LC-intraERCP (n = 109) and LC-LCBDE (n = 109) treatment groups between February 2019 and October 2022. The primary outcome was a technical success, while conversion to open surgery, operative time, morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay, and cost were considered secondary outcomes. Results Both groups had no significant differences in success (94.5% for LC-intraERCP and 87.2% for LC-LCBDE) and morbidity rate. The conversion to open surgery, the mean operative time, the length of hospital stay, and the cost were significantly lower in the LC-intraERCP. There was no mortality in either group. Conclusion LC-intraERCP is safer and more effective than LC-LCBDE for treating cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. Moreover, it is associated with reduced hospital stay and cost.

One-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography bile duct stone extraction is a feasible option in Indonesia within the National Health Insurance System.

Bile duct stones are a widespread condition that can pose a significant risk to life due to the occurrence of complications. In recent years, there has been a growing inclination toward the use of one-stage minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of this condition. However, it is important to note that in developing countries, such as Indonesia, where the National Healthcare Insurance System is established, the implementation of these procedures is still relatively uncommon due to limitations in healthcare facilities. This study presents a case series involving 13 patients who underwent a consecutive initial attempt of one-stage Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy with subsequent Intraoperative Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (LC-ERCP) for the extraction of bile duct stones. These patients were among the 124 individuals treated for bile duct stones at our hospital for one year (June 2022 to May 2023). All the participants in this study were covered by the National Health Insurance. Among the 124 patients diagnosed with bile duct stones, thirteen (10.5%) were subjected to an initial attempt of one-stage LC-ERCP procedure, which had a success rate of 76.4%. However, three of them experienced difficulties during the cannulation of bile duct, leading to the failure of this approach. The patients included in the study had a mean age of 46.5years, with average serum levels of total bilirubin and direct bilirubin measuring 2.1 and 1.4mg/dL, respectively. The average duration of successful and unsuccessful procedures was 121.5min and 183.3min, respectively. The average length of postoperative hospital stay was 3.5days, and no instances of mortality or complications were recorded during the study. One-stage LC-ERCP procedure offered a promising treatment option for bile duct stones in Indonesia, particularly for patients registered under the National Healthcare Insurance System. This approach could serve as a viable alternative for facilities that lack proficiency in LC-CBDE skills. Furthermore, the ability to perform ERCP in a supine position is crucial in achieving a high success rate. The results of this study showed the need for advancements in Indonesian public healthcare facilities to meet the growing demand for improved treatment modalities.

Comparison of one-stage treatment versus two-stage treatment for themanagement of patients with common bile duct stones: Ameta-analysis.

Cholelithiasis is a frequently occurring disease in clinic. Due to changes in people's living environments, dietary habits and the aging population, cholelithiasis incidence is increasing. Currently, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the preferredtreatment for gallbladder stones, but the surgical method for patients withcholedocholithiasis is controversial. An endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (pERCP) is performed preoperatively, followed by LC as the general treatment method. However, pERCP still has some disadvantages, such as prolonged hospital stay, increased incidence of postoperative pancreatitis, and increased duration of anesthesia. Therefore, intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (iERCP) is proposed. To compare the efficacy and safety of one-stage treatment and two-stage treatment for the management of patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched through October 2022. The search terms include cholangiolithiasis/bile duct stones/calculi, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography/ERCP, endoscopic sphincterotomy/EST, laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV), and laparoscopic cholecystectomy/LC. For the treatment of patients with cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis in adults, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LC with iERCP vs. pERCP followed by LC were conducted. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers. We used Revman version 5.3 to analyze the collected data. The trials were grouped according to the evaluation results such as the overall mortality rate, overall morbidity rate, clearance rate of choledocholithiasis, incidence of pancreatitis, the length of hospitalization, and the length of operation. 9 RCTs (950 participants) were included in this meta-analyses. The overall morbidity rate in LC + iERCP group is lower than that in LC + pERCP group (RR: 0.57, 95% CI = 0.41-0.79, p = 0.0008). The clearance rate of choledocholithiasis in LC + iERCP group was almost the same as that in LC + pERCP group (RR: 1.03, 95% CI = 0.98-1.08, p = 0.28). The incidence of pancreatitis in LC + iERCP group is lower than that in LC + pERCP group (RR: 0.29, 95% CI = 0.13-0.67, p = 0.004). The length of operation of the LC + iERCP group seems to be similar to that of the LC + pERCP group (MD: 16.63 95% CI = -5.98-39.24, p = 0.15). LC + iERCP group has a shorter length of hospitalization than that in LC + pERCP group (MD:-2.68 95% CI = -3.39--1.96, p < 0.00001). LC + iERCP group has lowerpostoperative second ERCP rate than that in LC + pERCP group (RR: 0.13, 95% CI = 0.03-0.57, p = 0.006). Our study suggest that LC + iERCP may be a better option than LC + pERCP in the management of patients with both cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. This procedure can reduce the overall incidence of postoperative complications, especially the occurrence of postoperative pancreatitis. It could shorten the length of hospital stay, reduce postoperative second ERCP rate.

Efficacy analysis of hybrid operating room-based laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of cholelithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis - A case-control study.

The objective is to compare the therapeutic effects of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in hybrid operating room and ERCP + LC under traditional conditions in the treatment of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Data of 82 patients with cholelithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis treated by our centre from November 2018 to March 2021 were retrospectively analysed. Amongst them, 40 patients treated with LC combined with intraoperative ERCP in a hybrid operating room were placed into Group A, and 42 patients treated with ERCP first followed by LC under traditional conditions were placed into Group B. The differences in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, surgical success rate, stone clearance rate, pain score, exhaust time, ambulation time, post-operative complications, length of hospital stay, hospitalisation cost and other indicators between the two groups were compared. There were no significant differences in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, surgical success rate and stone clearance rate between the two groups (P > 0.05), while there were significant differences in post-operative pain score, exhaust time, ambulation time, length of hospital stay, hospitalisation cost and complications (P < 0.05). LC combined with intraoperative ERCP in hybrid operating room for the treatment of cholelithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis has a better therapeutic effect than traditional ERCP followed by LC, which is worthy of further popularization. Notably, the reasonable selection should be made based on patients' own conditions and hospital facilities.

Leveraging access to technology and enhanced surgical technique (LATEST) in laparoscopic bile duct exploration (LBDE)

Single-stage management of choledocholithiasis with concomitant gallstones consists of performing either laparoscopic bile duct exploration (LBDE) or intra-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography at the same time as laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Transductal LBDE is associated with significantly higher post-operative morbidity, longer operative times and longer hospital stay when compared to transcystic LBDE. The aim of this study was to report the transcystic exploration rate and post-operative outcomes from LBDE before and after implementation of the LATEST (Leveraging Access to Technology and Enhanced Surgical Technique) principles. Methods: A retrospective review of 481 consecutive patients between February 1998 and July 2021 was performed. Patients were assigned into two groups determined by whether they were operated before or after the implementation of LATEST. Data collected included pre-operative demographic information, medical co-morbidity, pre-operative investigations, and intra-operative findings (including transcystic exploration rate, negative choledochoscopy rate, use of holmium laser lithotripsy and operative time). Outcomes of this study were the transcystic exploration rate, stone clearance rate, conversion to open surgery, post-operative morbidity and mortality, and length of post-operative hospital stay. Results: The pre-LATEST group contained 237 patients and the LATEST group comprised of 244 patients. Ultra-thin choledochoscopes and holmium laser lithotripsy were used more frequently in the LATEST group (41.4% and 18.4%, respectively). Enhanced surgical techniques (correction of the cystic duct-CBD junction and the trans-infundibular approach) were also performed more frequently in the LATEST group. More patients in the LATEST group received transcystic LBDE (86.1% vs 11.0%, p < 0.0001). The LATEST group had significantly higher stone clearance rates (98.8% vs 93.7%, p = 0.0034), reduced post-operative morbidity and shorter post-operative hospital stay (4 days vs 1 day, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: LATEST describes four key factors that can be used when performing LBDE. The adoption of LATEST in LBDE is associated with an increased stone clearance, a higher transcystic exploration rate and reduced post-operative morbidity.

Comparing One-Stage vs Two-Stage Approaches for the Management of Choledocholithiasis

BackgroundThe management of symptomatic choledocholithiasis remains a controversial issue. At present, the three most common management options for choledocholithiasis include a preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy and stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy, then by either an intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy or a laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. The purpose of this study was to assess the consequences of the decision to pursue each of these three methods. MethodsWe conducted a review of the existing data comparing these three management options. The literature from 2009 to 2021 pertaining to these three methods was reviewed for data on duct clearance, morbidity, mortality, recurrence rate, length of stay, and operative time. Next, we constructed decision trees for each method using a utility score analysis, and these utility scores were used to create a sensitivity analysis based on stone clearance rate. ResultsLaparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography had a utility score of 0.9910, a stone clearance rate of 95.5%, a morbidity of 6.3%, and a mortality of 0.2%. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with laparoscopic cholecystectomy had a utility score of 0.9629, a stone clearance rate of 85.5%, a morbidity of 13.3%, and a mortality of 0.8%. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration had a utility score of 0.9882, a stone clearance rate of 88.3%, a morbidity of 12.9%, and a mortality of 0.3%. ConclusionWe have shown that a laparoscopic cholecystectomy with an intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is associated with the best overall outcomes.

Comparative Study of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreatography versus Surgical Open and Laparoscopic Exploration of CBD in Management of CBD Stones

Introduction and Aim: Choledocholithiasis are common presentations in daily surgical practice. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains the gold standard management approach. However, researching new approaches is continuing due to their associated complications. The current study aimed to address the efficacy, safety, and outcomes of different treatment modalities to recognize the most appropriate technique for patients with choledocholithiasis.&#x0D; Patients and methods: The current work included 60 patients with choledocholithiasis. They were divided randomly into three equal groups. Group I for intraoperative ERCP plus LC, group II for LCBDE plus LC, and group-III for open common bile duct exploration plus cholecystectomy. Each patient was subjected to full history taking, physical examination, and different investigations (laboratory and radiological). The postoperative follow-up had been performed in the clinical and radiological follow-up.&#x0D; Results: The three groups were comparable regarding patient age, sex, body mass index, operative time, size of the common bile duct, stone number per patient, postoperative pain score, duration of hospital stay, satisfaction score. The success rate was 75%, 70% &amp; 85% of the group I, II &amp; III, respectively; while the mortality rate was 5%,10% &amp; 0% in groups I, II, and III. However, there was a statistically significant higher frequency of morbidity among Group-I than the other two groups (30% in group I compared to 5% for each of the second and third groups). Also, there was a higher rate of retained stones (25%, 30%) for groups I &amp; II with no retained stones among the third group (open surgery). There was no significant difference between groups regarding complications.&#x0D; Conclusion: The three approaches have comparable outcomes in success, mortality, morbidity, failure, and complications. The clearance and retained stone rates after primary intervention showed significant improvement in the open surgery group compared to the other groups.

Single-stage intraoperative ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus preoperative ERCP Followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

ObjectivesThe optimal treatment strategy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis is still controversial. We conducted an up-to-date meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of the intra- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) + LC procedure with the traditional pre-ERCP + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) procedure in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis.MethodsWe searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases up to September 2020. Published randomized controlled trials comparing intra-ERCP + LC and pre-ERCP + LC were considered. This meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager Version 5.3, and outcomes were documented by pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsEight studies with a total of 977 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding CBD stone clearance (RR = 1.03, P = .27), postoperative papilla bleeding (RR = 0.41, P = .13), postoperative cholangitis (RR = 0.87, P = .79), and operation conversion rate (RR = 0.71, P = .26). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the intra-ERCP + LC group (MD = −2.75, P < .05), and intra-ERCP + LC was associated with lower overall morbidity (RR = 0.54, P < .05), postoperative pancreatitis (RR = 0.29, P < .05) and cannulation failure rate (RR = 0.22, P < .05).ConclusionsIntra-ERCP + LC was a safer approach for patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis. It could facilitate intubation, shorten hospital stay, and lower postoperative complications, especially postoperative pancreatitis, and reduce stone residue and reduce the possibility of reoperation for stone removal.

Inpatient Choledocholithiasis Management: a Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Management Algorithms

BackgroundCholedocholithiasis is commonly encountered. It is frequently managed with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (either preoperative, intraoperative, or postoperative relative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy). The purpose of this study is to determine the most cost-effective method to manage inpatient choledocholithiasis. MethodsA decision tree model was created to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with a ceiling willingness to pay threshold assumed of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year. Model parameters were determined through review of published literature and institutional data. Costs were from the perspective of the healthcare system with a time horizon of 1 year. Sensitivity analyses were performed on model parameters. ResultsIn the base case analysis, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was cost-effective, resulting in 0.9909 quality-adjusted life years at an expected cost of $18,357. Intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography yielded more quality-adjusted life years (0.9912) at a higher cost ($19,717) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4,789,025, exceeding the willingness to pay threshold. Both preoperative and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies were eliminated for being both more costly and less effective. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration remained cost-effective if the probability of successful biliary clearance was above 0.79, holding all other variables constant. If its base cost remained below $18,400 and intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography base cost rose above $18,200, then laparoscopic common bile duct exploration remained cost-effective. ConclusionLaparoscopic common bile duct exploration is the most cost-effective method to manage choledocholithiasis. Efforts to ensure availability of local expertise and resources for this procedure are warranted.

Creation of a Pediatric Choledocholithiasis Prediction Model.

Definitive non-invasive detection of pediatric choledocholithiasis could allow more efficient identification of those patients who are most likely to benefit from therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for stone extraction. To craft a pediatric choledocholithiasis prediction model using a combination of commonly available serum laboratory values and ultrasound results. A retrospective review of laboratory and imaging results from 316 pediatric patients who underwent intraoperative cholangiogram or ERCP due to suspicion of choledocholithiasis were collected and compared to presence of common bile duct stones on cholangiography. Multivariate logistic regression with supervised machine learning was used to create a predictive scoring model. Monte-Carlo cross-validation was used to validate the scoring model and a score threshold that would provide at least 90% specificity for choledocholithiasis was determined in an effort to minimize non-therapeutic ERCP. Alanine aminotransferase (ALT), total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, and common bile duct diameter via ultrasound were found to be the key clinical variables to determine the likelihood of choledocholithiasis. The dictated specificity threshold of 90.3% yielded a sensitivity of 40.8% and overall accuracy of 71.5% in detecting choledocholithiasis. Positive predictive value was 71.4% and negative predictive value was 72.1%. Our novel pediatric choledocholithiasis predictive model is a highly specific tool to suggest ERCP in the setting of likely choledocholithiasis.

Single-stage management of choledocholithiasis: intraoperative ERCP versus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the criterion standard for treating patients with symptomatic gallstone disease; however, the optimal technique for extracting common bile duct stones remains unclear. Recent studies have noted improved outcomes with single-stage techniques, such as intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (iERCP) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); however only few studies have directly compared those two single-stage techniques. Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, we retrospectively analyzed the postoperative outcomes of all patients who underwent single-stage LC for choledocholithiasis from 2005 to 2017. Using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, as well as International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes, we stratified patients into two cohorts: those who underwent iERCP and LCBDE. Applying univariate techniques, we evaluated baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes for both cohorts. Our primary outcomes of interest were 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality; our secondary outcomes included rates of reoperation, readmission, operative time, and hospital length of stay. Of the 1814 single-stage LC patients during our 13-year study period, 1185 (65.3%) underwent LCBDE; 629 (34.6%) underwent iERCP. Our univariate analysis showed that the two cohorts were homogeneous in terms of baseline characteristics, including demographics, preoperative comorbidities, laboratory values, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores. 30-day postoperative morbidity (including infectious and noninfectious complications) and overall mortality between groups were low and comparable. The mean operative time was slightly longer with LCBDE (125.1 ± 62.0 min) than iERCP (113.5 ± 65.2 min; P < 0.001), however the mean hospital length of stay, readmission rate, and reoperation rate were similar. We found that both iERCP and LCBDE resulted in low, comparable rates of morbidity and mortality. Centers with readily available endoscopic expertise might favor iERCP for its ease of access and shorter operative time. However, LCBDE remains an appropriate technique for patients with choledocholithiasis, especially when immediate endoscopic intervention is unavailable.

Single-stage approach for the management of choledocolithiasis with concomitant cholelithiasis. Implementation of a protocol in a secondary hospital

BackgroundCurrent evidence shows that single-stage treatment of concomitant choledocholithiasis and cholelithiasis is as effective and safe as two-stage treatment. However, several studies suggest that single-stage approach requires shorter hospitalization time and is more cost-effective than the two-stage approach, even though it requires considerable training. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of a protocol for managing concomitant choledocholithiasis and cholelithiasis using single-stage treatment. MethodsA prospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis who were treated with the single-stage treatment – transcystic instrumentation, choledocotomy or intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) – between September 2010 and June 2017 was assessed. The primary outcomes were complications, hospital stay, operative time and recurrence rate. Results164 patients were enrolled. 141 (86%) were operated laparoscopically. Preoperatively diagnosed stones were not found by intraoperative imaging or disappeared after “flushing” in 38 patients (23.2%). Surgical approach was transcystic in 45 patients (27.41%), choledochotomy in 74 (45.1%), intraoperative ERCP in 4 (2.4%), and bilioenteric derivation in 3 (1.8%). Mean hospitalization stay was 4.4 days. Mean operative time was 166 min 27 patients (16.5%) had complications and 1 patient was exitus (0.6%). Recurrence rate was 1.2%. ConclusionsSingle-stage approach is a safe and effective management option for concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocolithiasis. Furthermore, a significant number of common bile duct stones pass spontaneously to duodenum or can benefit from a transcystic approach, with presumable low morbidity and cost-efficiency.

Synchronous laparoscopic cholecystectomy and intra-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography: should it be the standard of care?

Introduction: Up to 20 % of patients diagnosed with chronic calcular cholecystitis have concomitant CBD stones. Management included open and laparoscopic CBD exploration, endoscopic approach; pre-operative or intra-operative ERCP. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of 120 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and intra-operative ERCP at Gastrointestinal surgery center, Mansoura university between 2012 and 2017. LC was done first. Intra-operative cholangiography (IOC) was attempted in all cases. Results: Median age was 32 years. Median CBD stone size was 8 mm. Median number of stones was 1 (1–3). The median operative time for both LC and ERCP was 75 minutes. Transcystic IOC was successful in 97.5% of cases where passed CBD stone was confirmed in 9 patients therefore avoiding unnecessary ERCP. We had 4 cases of failed endoscopic cannulation (3.6%), 2 of them underwent laparoscopic CBD exploration and the other 2 underwent open CBD exploration. We failed to completely clear the CBD endoscopically in 3 cases. Conclusion: LC with intra-operative ERCP is safe and feasible where combining laparoscopy and endoscopy enhances the outcomes of both.

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of 4 Combinations of Laparoscopic and Intraoperative Techniques for Management of Gallstone Disease With Biliary Duct Calculi

Several techniques are used for surgical treatment of gallstone disease with biliary duct calculi, but the safety and efficacy of these approaches have not been compared. To compare the efficacy and safety of 4 surgical approaches to gallstone disease with biliary duct calculi. MEDLINE, Scopus, and ISI-Web of Science databases, articles published between 1950 and 2017 and searched from August 12, 2017, to September 14, 2017. Search terms used were LCBDE, LC, preoperative, ERCP, postoperative, period, cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic, retrograde, rendezvous, intraoperative, one-stage, two-stage, single-stage, gallstone, gallstones, calculi, stone, therapy, treatment, therapeutics, surgery, surgical, procedures, clinical trials as topic, random, and allocation in several logical combinations. Randomized clinical trials comparing at least 2 of the following strategies: preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (PreERCP) plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC); LC with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCDBE); LC plus intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (IntraERCP); and LC plus postoperative ERCP (PostERCP). A frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis was performed. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to show the probability that each approach would be the best for each outcome. Primary outcomes were the safety to efficacy ratio using overall mortality and morbidity rates as the main indicators of safety and the success rate as an indicator of efficacy. Secondary outcomes were acute pancreatitis, biliary leak, overall bleeding, operative time, length of hospital stay, total cost, and readmission rate. The 20 trials comprised 2489 patients (and 2489 procedures). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus IntraERCP had the highest probability of being the most successful (SUCRA, 87.2%) and safest (SUCRA, 69.7%) with respect to morbidity. All approaches had similar results regarding overall mortality. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus LCBDE was the most successful for avoiding overall bleeding (SUCRA, 83.3%) and for the shortest operative time (SUCRA, 90.2%) and least total cost (SUCRA, 98.9%). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus IntraERCP was the best approach for length of hospital stay (SUCRA, 92.7%). Inconsistency was found in operative time (indirect estimate, 19.05; 95% CI, 2.44-35.66; P = .02) and total cost (indirect estimate, 17.06; 95% CI, 3.56-107.21; P = .04). Heterogeneity was observed for success rate (τ, 0.8), operative time (τ, >1), length of stay (τ, >1), and total cost (τ, >1). The combined LC and IntraERCP approach had the greatest odds to be the safest and appears to be the most successful. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus LBCDE appears to reduce the risk of acute pancreatitis but may be associated with a higher risk of biliary leak.

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

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. 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. 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). 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). We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. 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. 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.