Open Choledocholithotomy Research Articles

Primary Closure vs T-Tube Drainage Following Open Choledochotomy for CBD (Common Bile Duct) Stones.

Choledocholithiasis affects 10%-15% of individuals with gallbladder stones. Approximately 7%-15% of cholecystectomy patients develop common bile duct (CBD) stones. It occurs more frequently in older age groups. It may result in a complete or partial blockage of the bile duct and present as pancreatitis or cholangitis due togallstones. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of primary closure of duct and T-tube drainage after open choledochotomy and to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of primary closure. From January 2018 to December 2021, this descriptive study was carried out in the surgical departmentof the Hayatabad Medical Complex in Peshawar. In total, 60 patients who had open choledocholithotomy after a failed endoscopic extraction were included in this study. Of these, 30 (50%) patients got primary duct closure after choledochotomy, while 30 (50%) patients had T-tube insertion. Among the total of 60 patients (primary closure: 30 and T-tube drainage: 30 patients), 10 (16%) were males, while 50 (84%) were female patients. The mean age was recorded as 45.9±13.9, and the mean hospital stay in days in both groups was 4.87±1.4 (T-tube: 5.24±1.50 and primary closure: 4.50±1.3). Complications developed in group A were a biliary leak in three (10%) patients, postoperative jaundice in two (6.5%) patients, wound infection in three (10%), intra-abdominal collection in three (10%) patients, and dislodgement of a tube in two (6.5%), while 17 (57%) patients had no complications developed. If the duct is free of stones, as determined by preoperative choledochoscopy, primary closure of the common bile duct (CBD) is a safe, cost-effective procedure with less morbidity than regular T-tube drainage after open choledochotomy.

Role of Drain in the Wound for Prevention of Superficial Surgical Site Infection Following Open Choledocholithotomy

Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are still a major problem in surgical practice. Despite the preventive strategies such as antibiotic prophylaxis and anti-septic skin cleansing, the SSI rate remains above 15 % after general abdominal surgery. This complication is also common after open choledocholithotomy. Several studies have shown that wound drainage is beneficial for reducing infection; however, there is a paucity of data regarding its benefit in open choledocholithotomy. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of placing a drain in the subcutaneous plane in order to reduce superficial SSI after open choledocholithotomy. Methods: Following convenience sampling, a total of 44 patients who underwent open choledocholithotomy from March 2019 to July 2021 were included in the study. Patients were divided into two groups. A subcutaneous closed suction drain was inserted in 19 patients (group I) and no subcutaneous drain was placed in 25 patients (group II). Daily drain collection was recorded in the case group. All the patients were examined and evaluated postoperatively for detection of wound seromas, superficial SSIs, and wound dehiscence. Data analysis and presentation made by statistical software SPSS 22 windows version 10. Results: It was observed that 10.5% of patients had SSI in group I and 60.0% in group II. The difference was statistically significant (p=0.001) between the two groups. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 11.58±2.91 days in group I and 15.04±5.78 days in group II. The difference in length of postoperative hospital stay was statistically significant between the two groups. Organisms isolated from bile culture and wound swab culture both are dominated by Escherichia coli. Conclusion: The placement of a drain in the wound in open choledocholithotomy showed a positive impact on the prevention of superficial surgical site infection. It also significantly reduces the length of hospital stay and SSSI rate.

Epidemiological Survey of Different Treatments for Choledocholithiasis in Taiwan: A Nationwide, Population-Based Cohort Analysis.

(1) Background: Open, laparoscopic, and endoscopic choledocholithotomy (OC, LC, and EC, respectively) are accepted choledocholithiasis treatment modalities. However, an assessment of the nationwide trends in their outcomes is lacking. This nationwide population-based analysis evaluated treatment outcomes of choledocholithiasis in Taiwan; (2) Methods: A total of 13,139,306 individuals were randomly enrolled from the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID) between 2000 to 2013 for cohort analysis. All patients with newly diagnosed choledocholithiasis aged 18 years or older who were treated during the study period were enrolled and allocated to the OC, LC, EC, or combined endoscopy and open choledocholithotomy (CEOC) groups. Age, readmission, retained stone, comorbidities, hospital stay, medical cost, complications, mortality were analyzed; (3) Results: A total of 58,064 individuals met the inclusion criteria, including 46.54%, 1.10%, 47.52%, and 4.85% who underwent OC, LC, EC, and CEOC, respectively. The endpoint characteristics showed that the LC group had higher readmission, longer hospital stay, and higher medical cost. Cox regression analysis showed that the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of complications for EC was 1.259 times higher than that for OC. The adjusted HRs of readmission within 90 days for LC, EC, and CEOC were higher than that of OC. The adjusted HR of retreatment with surgery was higher in LC. The adjusted HR of retreatment with endoscopy was higher in CEOC. The adjusted HR of mortality in EC was 1.603 times that of OC; (4) Conclusions: Different choledocholithiasis treatments lead to different outcomes. However, further studies on other large or national data sets are required to support these findings.

Management of Choledocholithiasis - Should We Remove the Bile Duct?

Retrieval of stone by endoscopic papillotomy, laparoscopic choledochotomy or open choledochotomy is the treatment of choice for choledocholithiasis. Published literature shows that the recurrence rate is 4% to 24% with existing method of treatment. We have treated 8 patients who admitted with recurrent choledocholithiasis in the department of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic and Liver Transplant Surgery, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU), Bangladesh in the period of January 2016 to December 2019. None had intrahepatic duct abnormality or stones. All patients underwent either ERCP stenting, open choledocholithotomy or both 16 to 84 months back. Management policy is designed and outcome is observed on these patients. There were 3 males and 5 females; age ranges 18 to 60 years. The common bile duct (CBD) diameter of all patient ranges from 15 to 24mm. The shape of CBD is different from normal variant; S shaped, saculated, grossly dilated with terminal narrowing. Considering the anatomical abnormality and recurrence of disease we have removed the abnormal part of common bile duct along with stones and the operation was completed by Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. All patients were completely symptom free for 6 to 48 months after surgery. Removal of abnormal part of common bile duct with reconstruction in the form of Roux-en-Y hepatico-jejunostomy may be considered for treating choledocholithiasis with abnormal CBD (abnormally dilated, abnormally shaped, angulated or sacculated) however, long-term follow up is required for final comment.

A case report of spontaneous passage of large (>1.5 cm) common bile duct calculi (4 in number) through faeces

Gallbladder (GB) stones are commonly associated with common bile duct stones (CBDS). While they may remain asymptomatic, some may present with symptoms like biliary colic, jaundice and cholecystitis. Most of these stones in the CBD, if small, pass through faeces. Passing larger stones through faeces is relatively rare and if it does occur, is usually associated with fatal complications like acute pancreatitis. The authors reported a case wherein symptomatic large CBD stones were spontaneously passed through faeces and the patient was relieved of the symptoms and did not suffer any further complications. Choledocholithiasis is usually managed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or by laparoscopic or open choledocholithotomy. Spontaneous passage of small CBD and GB calculi through faeces although common is associated often with the development of pancreatitis. Passage of large CBD calculi (size >1.5 cm) through faeces is rarely seen.

Primary closure of common bile duct versus T-tube placement after open choledocholithotomy

Background: Choledocholithiasis is primarily managed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) but in certain situation particularly large and impacted common duct stone, the procedure may not succeed and this small group of patients require either open or laparoscopic common bile duct exploration followed by T-tube insertion. Usually T-Tube cholangiogram is performed on 10th postoperative day and tube is removed on 12-14th day. Alternatively, primary closure of duct after post exploratory choledochoscopy to ensure duct clearance with or without biliary stent can be done.Methods: This study was performed on 25 patients of failed endoscopic extraction, subjected to open choledocholithotomy. Group A (n=7) had T-tube insertion whereas group B (n=18) had primary closure of duct after choledochotomy.Results: 19 patients had calculus cholecystitis whereas 6 patients had prior cholecystectomy and later developed choledocholithiasis. 52% patients had impacted stone and 40% had large stone as a cause of ERCP failure. Postoperative pyrexia, cholangitis, septicemia, sub-hepatic bilious drainage and postoperative hospital stay was higher in T-tube group as compared to primary closure group.Conclusions: Primary closure over the biliary stent after cholecystectomy and/or choledocholithotomy has less morbidity as compared to T-tube insertion and hence should be preferred choice in choledocholithiasis, provided stone free duct is ensured peroperative using choledochoscopy.

How I do it: laparoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones

The standard treatment for patients with symptomatic gallstones is laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In patients undergoing LC the prevalence of common bile duct (CBD) stones ranges between 8% and 15% and it increases with advancing age, reaching up to 60% in elderly patients. Every patient who is candidate for LC should be evaluated for the presence of CBD stones and these should be treated if the diagnosis is confirmed. In the literature, the procedure of choice for CBD stones treatment is still debated. In many centers, pre- or postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) and LC (two-stage endo-laparoscopic management) is considered standard practice instead of open choledocholithotomy and cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic single-stage management of gallstones and CBD stones has demonstrated equivalent outcomes to the two-stage endo-laparoscopic approach in randomized controlled trials but with shorter hospital stay and fewer interventions. Moreover, the two-stage endo-laparoscopic management of CBD stones and gallstones may be associated with a higher additional procedures rate, and possibly increased costs, as compared to single-stage laparoscopic management. Another option is single-stage endo-laparoscopic management of gallstones and CBD stones, performing ERCP/ES during the same LC anesthesia (so called, “Rendez-Vous” procedure). Excluding patients with cholangitis, who should be managed by emergency ERCP with ES and stones removal, in the elective setting the ultimate choice for one procedure or the other largely depends on the local resources and expertise that are available in the individual center, notwithstanding the scientific evidence in favour of single-stage laparoscopic management. The authors report the surgical techniques that they follow during LC for CBD exploration and stones’ removal by laparoscopic trans-cystic or choledochotomy approach.

Is it time to write obituary for open choledocholithotomy in the present era of endoscopic management? Outcome of surgery for failed endoscopic extraction, retrospective study

Background: Between 05 to 20 percent of patients undergoing cholecystectomy for gallstones, have choledocholithiasis. Treatment of the common bile duct (CBD) stones can be conducted as open cholecystectomy and open CBD exploration or laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic CBD exploration (LC + LCBDE) versus pre- or post-cholecystectomy endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in two stages, usually combined with either sphincterotomy or sphincteroplasty (papillary dilatation) for CBD clearance. The merits and demerits of individual techniques are yet to be settled.Methods: We reviewed the outcome of patients operated at our centre after failed endoscopic clearance of CBD stones. Over a period of 03 years, total 2145 laparoscopic/open cholecystectomies were performed at our institute. In the same time period, 14 patients (06 males and 08 females) presented with choledocholithiasis after failed ERCP extraction (median age 59 years, range 29-62 years). All the patients had undergone ERCP and ± sphincterotomy/sphincteroplasty with failed clearance. None of the patient had undergone a cholecystectomy previously.Results: We performed open choledocholithotomy with T-tube drainage plus cholecystectomy in all the patients. There were no deaths and only one major complication. Surgery resulted in complete duct clearance in 93% of patients.Conclusions: Open surgery can be performed safely and effectively in patients with retained bile duct stones and surgery can be offered as primary modality of treatment over combined endoscopic management after appropriated patient selection.

Common bile duct clearance of stones by open surgery, laparoscopic surgery, and endoscopic approaches (comparative study)

Background and aim of the work Around 10–18% of patients undergoing cholecystectomy for gallstones have common bile duct (CBD) stones. Treatment can be provided as open cholecystectomy plus open CBD exploration, laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC+LCBDE), or precholecystectomy or postcholecystectomy endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) in two stages for CBD clearance. The aim of this study is to compare the CBD clearance rate by each procedure in a well-equipped tertiary center. Patients and methods A total of 250 patients with choledocholithiasis were included from the General Surgery Department, Sohag and Assiut University Hospitals, and managed randomly by either conventional surgery, endoscopic, or laparoscopic procedures. Results The ages of our patients ranged from 20 to 60 years (mean=40 years), with a slight female predominance (1.6 : 1); most of them presented with calcular obstruction (54.3%). However, there were also other presentations such as colic, cholangitis, or accidental discovery in 14.3, 10, and 21.5%, respectively. Patients were categorized randomly into three groups: group I included 100 patients (40%) who were treated by open choledocholithotomy and T-tube insertion; the operative time was 90 (60–180) min, with the success rate of the attempted procedures reaching 100%, and CBD clearance of stones was achieved in 95% of cases (five cases of missed stones). Hospital stay was 8 (5–12) days, with no mortality, and morbidity rate reached 15% in the form of wound infection, bile leak, and missed stone. The patient could return to work after 2 weeks (12–20 days). Group II included 100 patients (40%) treated by endoscopic sphincterotomy; basket extraction was performed in 45%, balloon in 25%, the combined maneuver in 15%, and mechanical lithotripsy in 13%, with failure of the technique in two cases (2%); the duration of the procedure was about 30 (20–45) min, with a success rate of attempted procedures of 98%, and CBD clearance of stones was achieved by 100%, with no mortality; the morbidity rate was 9% in the form of cholangitis (3%) and mild pancreatitis with hyperamylasemia (6%). The period of hospital stay was 1 (1–2) days and the patient returned to work after 3 (2–5) days. Group III included 50 patients (20%) treated by laparoscopic approaches: transcystic approaches in five cases and transcholedochotomy approaches in 45 cases. Choledochoscopic exploration was performed in almost all cases (45 cases) to detect, extract the stones, and test CBD clearance, and there was conversion to open techniques in one case. The time needed for this procedure was 123 (70–292) min, with CBD clearance of stones in 96% (two cases of missed stone), with no mortality, and a morbidity rate of about 10% in the form of mild hyperamylasemia, fever, and missed stone. The period of hospital stay was 3.2 (2–4) days, with return to work after 7 (5–10) days. Conclusion Both ERCP/LC and LCBDE were highly effective in CBD clearance, and equal in terms of the overall cost and patient acceptance. However, the overall duration of hospitalization was shorter for LCBDE with elimination of the potential risks of ERCP-associated pancreatitis, further procedures, and anesthesia risks. It is feasible, cost-effective, and ultimately should be available for most patients in each specialized center.

Is primary closure of common bile duct a rational method after choledocholithotomy, in a low resource setting?

Aims-Background Biliary obstruction, which is the interruption of bile flow from the liver to the small intestine, can occur at any level within the biliary system, Choledocholithiasis being one of the commonest causes. One of the surgical approaches to this condition is open choledocholithotomy and drainage. The aims of this study were to compare the outcomes after primary closure of common bile duct with T-tube insertion after choledocholithotomy. The objectives were to describe the demographic profile, to evaluate days of hospital stay, complications, incidence of retained stones and cost factor associated with procedure.

Duplication of the extrahepatic bile duct

Duplication of the extrahepatic bile duct is an extremely rare anomaly. There are five types of this anomaly, with type V being the least common variant. Only two cases of type V (one each of type Va and type Vb) have been reported. Here we report the second case of type Va duplication of the common bile duct presenting with choledocholithiasis. The patient underwent open choledocholithotomy and T-tube choledochostomy after failed endoscopic stone clearance. Duplication of the bile duct was detected on T-tube cholangiogram, which was confirmed by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreaticography (MRCP). No associated pancreaticobiliary maljunction was found on the imaging.

Comparative prospective randomized trial: laparoscopic versus open common bile duct exploration

Introduction: Single-stage laparoscopic procedures for common bile duct (CBD) stones are an alternative treatment option to two-stage endo-laparoscopic treatment and to open choledocholithotomy. Several reports have demonstrated the feasibility, safety, efficiency and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic techniques. Aim: To analyse the safety and benefits of laparoscopic compared to open common bile duct (CBD) exploration. Material and methods: The prospective randomized trial included a total of 256 patients with CBD stones operated from 2005 to 2009 in a single centre. The male/female ratio was 82/174, with a median age 62.3 ±5.8 years (range 27 to 87 years). There were two groups of patients. Group I: laparoscopic CBD exploration (138 patients). Group II: open CBD exploration (118 patients). Patient comorbidity was assessed by means of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification; ASA II – 109 patients, ASA III – 59 patients. Bile duct stones were visualized preoperatively by means of US examination in 129 patients, by means of ERCP in 26 patients, and by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in 72 patients. Preoperative evaluation was done through medical history, biochemical tests and ultrasonography. Results: The mean duration of laparoscopic procedures was 82 min (range 40-160 min). The mean duration of open procedures was 90 min (range 60-150 min). Mean blood loss was much lower in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (20 ±2 v.s 285 ±27), p < 0.01. Postoperative complications were observed in 7 patients of the laparoscopic group and in 15 patients in the open group (p < 0.01). Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was performed through a trans-cystic approach in 76 patients and via choledochotomy in 62 patients. The transcystic approach was successful in 76 patients (74.5%). External drainage was used in 25 (32.8%) patients with the transcystic approach. Conclusions: Laparoscopic CBD exploration can be performed with high efficiency, and minimal morbidity and mortality. Laparoscopic procedures have advantages over open ones in terms of postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay.

Comparative Evaluation of Two Laparoscopic Procedures for Treating Common Bile Duct Stones

Cholesystolithiasis is often associated with common bile duct stones (CBDS). In order to assess the choice of surgery in terms of effectiveness and complications in the treatment of CBDS, we have compared three surgical procedures, viz., laparoscopic choledocholithotomy T-tube drainage (LCH-TD), laparoscopic cholecystectomy with endoscopic sphincterotomy (LC-EST), and the traditional open choledocholithotomy with T-tube drainage (OCHTD). This study is a retrospective comparative analysis of LCH-TD (77 patients), LC-EST (43 patients), and OCHTD (60 patients) for CBDS. The success of the surgical procedures was assessed in terms of recovery duration, hospitalization, and post-operative complications. Both the micro-invasive procedures, LCH-TD and LC-EST, with a success rate of 92.5%, are found to be superior to the traditional OCHTD. Between the two micro-invasive procedures, patients in LCH-TD group had shorter operation time and hospital stay, and fewer post-operative complications. Although the size of the stones is comparable between these two groups, the CBD diameter was significantly larger in patients who underwent LCH-TD. In comparison to OCHTD, both LCH-TD and LC-EST are micro-invasive, safe, and suitable for routine use in patients with CBDS. Moreover, when the CBD diameter is wider than 1cm, LCH-TD is strongly advocated.

Closure of the Common Duct -Endonasobiliary Drainage Tubes vs. T Tube: A Comparative Study

For the last century T tube drainage of the bile duct has remained standard practice following choledochlithotomy. It vents the biliary tree, provides route for cholangiography and management of residual stones. However, T tubes are associated with significant complications. This retrospective study compared the use of Endonasobiliary drainage tubes and the T tube in 66 patients who underwent open choledocholithotomy for effectiveness and complications. Both groups were statistically comparable. Only 15.15% patients in the Endonasobiliary drainage group, while 45.45% patients in the T tube group developed complications. Severe complications such as biliary peritonitis and intraperitoneal collections were noted only in the T tube group. The Endonasobiliary drainage tube was removed significantly earlier and patients from this group were discharged earlier as compared to those in the T tube. The Endonasobiliary drainage tube is as effective as the T tube in postoperative biliary drainage and allows cholangiograms to be performed. Its use is associated with less complications and it can be removed safely earlier than the T tube. Thus patients have a shorter time with tubes and can be discharged home earlier.

Primary Closure of the Common Duct over Endonasobiliary Drainage Tubes

The T-tube remains the standard method of intraductal drainage after open choledochotomy for choledocholithiasis. We studied the use of an endonasobiliary drainage (ENBD) tube as an alternative to the T-tube for postoperative intraductal drainage. A series of 20 patients with documented choledocholithiasis in whom endoscopic methods of stone retrieval failed to clear the common bile duct (CBD) were selected for the study. All patients had ENBD tubes placed preoperatively at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography and then were subjected to open choledocholithotomy with primary closure of the choledochotomy over the ENBD. The age of the patients in the study group ranged from 18 to 75 years. Three patients (15%) had acute cholangitis at the time of surgery. Stones were confirmed at surgery in 85% of the patients, and the size of the CBD was found to range from 1.0 to 2.3 cm. All 20 patients underwent closure of the common duct over an ENBD tube without any difficulty. None of the patients experienced biliary complications such as bile leaks, biliary peritonitis, biliary fistula, pancreatitis, or cholangitis. No patient had any residual stone as documented by postoperative cholangiograms. Abdominal drains remained in place for 2 to 4 days, and the ENBD tubes were removed between days 6 and 8. The length of the postoperative hospital stay varied from 7 to 15 days, with 65% of the patients going home before postoperative day 8.

Clinical application of laparoscopic bile duct exploration: an analysis of 340 cases

目的 评价腹腔镜胆道探查的优越性.方法前瞻性设计,将诊断为胆总管结石或合并胆囊结石的病人分成四组:腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石(一期缝合)组;腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石(置T管)组;传统开腹胆总管一期缝合组;传统开腹置T管组.对于手术效果进行统计分析.结果四组胆漏发生率分别为5.0%、3.3%、5.0%、3.8%,术后肠道恢复平均时间分别为2.1 d、2.6 d、3.3 d、3.5 d.结论腹腔镜胆总管结石胆道探查术具有并发症率低、住院时间短、痛苦少、恢复快等优点,是一种安全、有效的好方法。

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration.

To explore the feasibility of laparoscopic techniques for the removal of common bile duct (CBD) stones. Retrospective analysis. University hospital, Sweden. 39 patients who underwent laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, either by a transcystic technique or by choledochotomy, between September 1992 and April 1995. Cholecystectomy, intraoperative cholangiography, and removal of CBD-stones by a transcystic technique (n=22), laparoscopic choledocholithotomy (n=11), or after conversion to open choledocholithotomy (n=6). Stone clearance rates, operative time, complications, and postoperative hospital stay. Stone removal was achieved in 32/39 patients (82%) by a laparoscopic approach. Reasons for failure were early in our experience, and the result of technical difficulties or stones that were too large for the transcystic approach, or with impacted stones at choledochotomy. Postoperative morbidity was low (n=4, 10%) with no mortality. Common bile duct stones can be removed in a large proportion of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, either by a laparoscopic transcystic technique or through a laparoscopic choledochotomy. The laparoscopic techniques need further evaluation, preferably in prospective multicentre trials comparing other treatment strategies including endoscopic sphincterotomy.

An alternative approach of choledocholithotomy via laparoscopic choledochotomy.

To evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic choledocholithotomy via choledochotomy for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. A prospective series of 1332 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomies, with a mean follow-up of 21.2 months. University-affiliated referral center. Forty-three patients (3%) with documented common bile duct stones from January 1991 to February 1995. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy with choledochotomy and T tube drainage were performed in 40 patients. Postoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy after laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed in three patients. Documented removal of common bile duct stones and procedure-related complications. Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy via choledochotomy was successful in 35 (88%) of 40 patients in whom this procedure was attempted. The mean (+/- SD) operation time was 191.3 +/- 75.4 minutes, and the mean (+/- SD) length of postoperative stay was 10.4 +/- 2.7 days. Seven complications (18%) were recorded, including three major complications (8%) and two retained stones (5%). Laparoscopic choledocholithotomy via choledochotomy can be performed safely, without increasing the morbidity rate as compared with that of open choledocholithotomy. Thus, some of the advantages of minimally invasive surgery are preserved.

Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones. A multi-institutional SAGES study. Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (CBDE) was the subject of a multi-institutional study on 226 patients from 19 major hospital centers. Female patients predominated (2.3:1); the average age was 54; 75% of cases were chronic, and the remainder were acute. Although 97% had preoperative ultrasonograms, only 12% showed a stone in the dilated common bile duct. The alkaline phosphatase was elevated in 41% and the serum bilirubin in 28% of cases. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with sphincterotomy (ERC-ES) was performed in 8.5%; there was a successful stone extraction in less than half the cases. Cholangiography was performed in 99.5%, and in 94% of those cases, stones were found. In 83% of cases, stones were removed through the transcystic approach, and in 17% removal was throughout the CBD. In the majority of cases, the choledochoscope and wire basket (34%), irrigation (33%), or a combination of both was employed. In the transcystic group, 5% were converted to open procedures due to technical difficulty, as contrasted with the trans-CBD route, where the conversion rate was 19%. There were two ductal injuries. Minor complications occurred in 5.7% within 24 h; there was one death (0.4%). Within 30 days, the morbidity rate was 7% and there were no deaths. Retained stones were discovered in 2.6% of cases. Laparoscopic CBDE is a feasible approach for CBD stones which permits a definitive procedure in one stage, without pre- or postoperative ES. It is a skill which should be mastered by the biliary surgeon. Further improvement in instrumentation and technique should make the laparoscopic approach not only comparable but preferable to the standard open choledocholithotomy.

The Role of Cholangiography in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy

Cholangiography is not routinely performed in open surgery, but there are reasons why it should be in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. These include finding common duct stones, identifying the cystic-common duct junction, and noting an inadvertent injury. Thirty-six (7.0%) of 516 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were converted to open surgery; 24 before attempting cholangiography and 12 based on roentgenographic findings. In 73 patients (14.1%), cholangiography showed abnormal findings. Common duct injury was identified in one patient and common duct stones were found in 35. Twenty-one patients were treated laparoscopically and eight underwent open choledocholithotomy. In 22 patients, a short cystic duct was seen that might otherwise have been overlooked, and possible injury was avoided. Cholangiography should be attempted routinely, so that in cases with abnormal findings, open cholecystectomy may be considered.