Dataset Information

Laparoscopic Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration: Advantages over Laparoscopic Choledochotomy.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The ideal treatment for choledocholithiasis should be simple, readily available, reliable, minimally invasive and cost-effective for patients. We performed this study to compare the benefits and drawbacks of different laparoscopic approaches (transcystic and choledochotomy) for removal of common bile duct stones.

Methods

A systematic search was implemented for relevant literature using Cochrane, PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE and Wanfang databases. Both the fixed-effects and random-effects models were used to calculate the odds ratio (OR) or the mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for this study.

Results

The meta-analysis included 18 trials involving 2,782 patients. There were no statistically significant differences between laparoscopic choledochotomy for common bile duct exploration (LCCBDE) (n = 1,222) and laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) (n = 1,560) regarding stone clearance (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.07; P = 0.11), conversion to other procedures (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.21-1.79; P = 0.38), total morbidity (OR 1.65, 95% CI 0.92-2.96; P = 0.09), operative time (MD 12.34, 95% CI -0.10-24.78; P = 0.05), and blood loss (MD 1.95, 95% CI -9.56-13.46; P = 0.74). However, the LTCBDE group showed significantly better results for biliary morbidity (OR 4.25, 95% CI 2.30-7.85; P<0.001), hospital stay (MD 2.52, 95% CI 1.29-3.75; P<0.001), and hospital expenses (MD 0.30, 95% CI 0.23-0.37; P<0.001) than the LCCBDE group.

Conclusions

LTCBDE is safer than LCCBDE, and is the ideal treatment for common bile duct stones.

SUBMITTER: Feng Q

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5036868 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Laparoscopic Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration: Advantages over Laparoscopic Choledochotomy.

Feng Qian Q Huang Yong Y Wang Kai K Yuan Rongfa R Xiong Xiaoli X Wu Linquan L

PloS one 20160926 9

<h4>Purpose</h4>The ideal treatment for choledocholithiasis should be simple, readily available, reliable, minimally invasive and cost-effective for patients. We performed this study to compare the benefits and drawbacks of different laparoscopic approaches (transcystic and choledochotomy) for removal of common bile duct stones.<h4>Methods</h4>A systematic search was implemented for relevant literature using Cochrane, PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE and Wanfang databases. Both the fixed-effects and ...[more]

PMID: 27668730

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:A history of abdominal biliary tract surgery has been identified as a relative contraindication for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), and there are very few reports about laparoscopic procedures in patients with a history of abdominal biliary tract surgery. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes of 227 consecutive patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations at our institution between December 2013 and June 2019. A total of 110 consecutive patients underwent LCBDE, and 117 consecutive patients underwent open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE). Patient demographics and perioperative variables were compared between the two groups. RESULTS:The LCBDE group performed significantly better than the OCBDE group with respect to estimated blood loss [30 (5-700) vs. 50 (10-1800) ml; p?=?0.041], remnant common bile duct (CBD) stones (17 vs. 28%; p?=?0.050), postoperative hospital stay [7 (3-78) vs. 8.5 (4.5-74) days; p?=?0.041], and time to oral intake [2.5 (1-7) vs. 3 (2-24) days; p?=?0.015]. There were no significant differences in the operation time [170 (60-480) vs. 180 (41-330) minutes; p?=?0.067]. A total of 19 patients (17%) in the LCBDE group were converted to open surgery. According to Clavien's classification of complications, the LCBDE group had significantly fewer postoperative complications than the OCBDE group (40 vs. 57; p?=?0.045). There was no mortality in either group. Multiple previous operations (??2 times), a history of open surgery, and previous biliary tract surgery (including bile duct or gallbladder?+?bile duct other than cholecystectomy alone) were risk factors for postoperative adhesion (p?=?0.000, p?=?0.000, and p?=?0.000, respectively). CONCLUSION:LCBDE is ultimately the least invasive, safest, and the most effective treatment option for patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations and is especially suitable for those with a history of cholecystectomy, few previous operations (<?2 times), or a history of laparoscopic surgery.

Project description:Abstract Background Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure (LCBDE‐PC) exhibits more benefits than other surgeries for patients with choledocholithiasis. It remains unclear whether it is feasible for and beneficial to elderly individuals. This study aimed to clarify and stratify elderly patients who would benefit from LCBDE‐PC. Methods A retrospective study of 1240 patients with choledocholithiasis who underwent laparoscopic procedures between 2011 and 2019 was conducted. Patients were divided into the young group (<65 years old, n = 708) and the elderly group (≥65 years old, n = 532). Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure was successfully performed in 90.20% of the elderly and 94.20% of the young. No significant differences were observed between the two groups regarding reoperation, postoperative bile leakage, residual stones, drainage removal, and postoperative mortality. Compared with the young, the elderly had longer postoperative hospital stay (p = 0.035) and delayed postoperative eating time (p = 0.036) in the matched cohort. Independent risk factors for failed LCBDE‐PC were preoperative pancreatitis (p = 0.018), year of the surgeon's experience (p = 0.008), preoperative C‐reactive protein level (p = 0.034), preoperative total bilirubin (p = 0.021), impacted common bile duct (CBD) stones (p = 0.006), blood loss (p = 0.001), and edema of the CBD (p = 0.001). A novel nomogram for predicting failed LCBDE‐PC in elderly individuals exhibited a sufficient discriminative ability according to the estimated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.869 (95% CI: 0.817–0.921, p < 0.01). Conclusion Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure is safe, feasible, and effective for elderly individuals with choledocholithiasis. Elderly patients with a high risk of failed LCBDE‐PC should be cautious of undergoing LCBDE‐PC. LCBDE‐PC is a safe, effective, and feasible procedure for treating choledocholithiasis in elderly patients. The novel nomogram, based on abdominal pain, year of the surgeon's experience, pancreatitis, preoperative laboratory data, impacted CBD stones, maximal stone diameter, blood loss, stone clearance, and CBD edema, had relatively good accuracy in assessing the failure risk of LCBDE‐PC, which could enable clinicians to perform better risk stratification in elderly patients when starting treatment.

Project description:BackgroundEndoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) with stone extraction and papillotomy with subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy-the two-step approach-is the standard treatment of common bile duct stones in many countries. However, ERC is associated with a high risk of complications and more than half of patients require multiple ERCs. Meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials find no major differences of the two-step approach in comparison with laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative laparoscopic stone clearance-the one-step approach. Currently, there are insufficient data to ascertain superiority.MethodsThe preGallstep trial is an investigator-initiated, multicentre randomised feasibility and pilot clinical trial with blinded outcome assessment. Eligible patients are patients with common bile duct stones (identified by magnetic resonance cholagiopancreatography), age 18 years or above with the possibility to perform both interventions within a reasonable time. We intent to randomise 150 participants allocated 1:1. The experimental intervention is the one-step approach. This consists of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The control intervention is the two-step approach which consists of ERC plus sphincterotomy (first step) and subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (second step). Feasibility outcomes include the proportion of eligible patients not wanting to participate, reasons for rejection to participate, difficulties during the informed consent procedure, difficulties with randomisation, difficulties with data management, difficulties with blinding patient charts and forms and difficulties with maintaining blinding for the outcome assessors. The primary pilot outcome is the proportion of participants with at least one postoperative complication according to the Clavien-Dindo score grade II and above until 90 days after randomisation. This outcome will be used for a future sample size calculation of a larger pragmatic trial. Further, a range of clinical explorative outcomes will be assessed.DiscussionAs no sample size is estimated in this trial, there is a risk of wrongly assessing the effect on the patient-related outcome. The surgical procedures cannot be blinded. However, blinding will be employed in all other aspects of the trial, including the establishment of a blinded outcome adjudication committee with three independent assessors. Heterogeneity in screening, randomisation, diagnostics, treatment procedures, interventions and follow-up across trial sites may cause challenges in conducting a larger pragmatic trial. To monitor inter-site differences, we have implemented a central data monitoring scheme.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identification: NCT04801238 , Registered on 16 March 2021.

Project description: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.MethodsA 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.ResultsThe 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).ConclusionsLATEST 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.

Dataset Information

Laparoscopic Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration: Advantages over Laparoscopic Choledochotomy.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Laparoscopic Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration: Advantages over Laparoscopic Choledochotomy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets