Dataset Information

The lost stone - Laparoscopic exploration of abscess cavity and retrieval of lost gallstone post cholecystectomy: A case series and review of the literature.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered the gold standard operation for symptomatic gallstones. Gallbladder perforation occurs in 6-40% of operations. It can lead to spillage of gallstones into the abdominal cavity with possible consequences of long-term complications. We report two cases where a unique use of laparoscopic technique was used to explore abscess cavity and retrieve lost gallstones without penetrating the peritoneal cavity.

Case presentation

We report two cases of peri-hepatic abscess treated with laparoscopic cavity exploration, using 5?mm and 10?mm ports, to retrieve lost gallstones. It was done without entering the peritoneal cavity.

Discussion

Today, minimally invasive technique is used in a variety of surgical cases. We report a novel technique, using laparoscopic skills, to drain abscesses caused by lost gallstones post LC without entering the peritoneal cavity. The use of minimally invasive surgery techniques in order to explore abscess cavities not only help us to extract the cause of the abscess but also prevents another surgery in the abdominal cavity.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic exploration of an abscess cavity is a feasible and safe technique treating long-term complications of gallbladder perforation post LC.

SUBMITTER: Kaplan U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6203240 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The lost stone - Laparoscopic exploration of abscess cavity and retrieval of lost gallstone post cholecystectomy: A case series and review of the literature.

Kaplan Uri U Shpoliansky Gregory G Abu Hatoum Ossama O Kimmel Boaz B Kopelman Doron D

International journal of surgery case reports 20181019

<h4>Background</h4>Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is considered the gold standard operation for symptomatic gallstones. Gallbladder perforation occurs in 6-40% of operations. It can lead to spillage of gallstones into the abdominal cavity with possible consequences of long-term complications. We report two cases where a unique use of laparoscopic technique was used to explore abscess cavity and retrieve lost gallstones without penetrating the peritoneal cavity.<h4>Case presentation</h4>We rep ...[more]

PMID: 30368124

Similar Datasets

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:BackgroundIntraoperative laparoscopic ultrasonography (LUS) or intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) can be used for visualisation of the biliary tract during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this systematic review was to compare use of LUS with IOC.MethodsPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched (last update: April 2024). PICO: P = patients undergoing intraoperative imaging of the biliary tree during laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstone disease; I = intervention: LUS; C = comparison: IOC; O = outcomes: mortality, bile duct injury, retained gallstone, conversion to open cholecystectomy, procedural failure, operation time including imaging time. Included articles were critically appraised using checklists. Conclusions were based on studies without major risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models. Certainty of evidence was assessed according to GRADE.ResultsSixteen non-randomised studies met the PICO. Two before/after studies (594 versus 807 patients) contributed to conclusions regarding mortality (no events; very low certainty evidence), bile duct injury (1 versus 0 events; very low certainty evidence), retained gallstone (2 versus 2 events; very low certainty evidence), and conversion to open cholecystectomy (6 versus 21 events; risk ratio: 0.38 (95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.95); I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence). Seven additional studies, using intra-individual comparisons, contributed to conclusions regarding procedural failure; risk ratio: 1.12 (95% confidence interval: 0.70-1.78; I2 = 83%; very low certainty evidence). No studies reported operation time. Mean imaging time for LUS and IOC, reported in 12 studies, was 4.8‒10.2 versus 10.9‒17.9 min (mean difference: - 7.8 min (95% confidence interval: - 9.3 to - 6.3); I2 = 95%; moderate certainty evidence).ConclusionIt is uncertain whether there is any difference in mortality/bile duct injury/retained gallstone using LUS compared with IOC, but LUS may be associated with fewer conversions to open cholecystectomy and is probably associated with shorter imaging time.

Project description:BackgroundLaparoscopic cholecystectomy has become the standard surgical approach in the treatment of cholelithiasis. Diverse surgical techniques and different imaging modalities have been described to evaluate the biliary anatomy and prevent or early detect bile duct injuries. X-ray intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) and near infrared indocyanine green fluorescent cholangiography (NIR-ICG) are safe and feasible techniques to assess biliary anatomy. The aim of this systematic review will be to evaluate if NIR-ICG can visualize extrahepatic biliary anatomy more efficiently and safer than IOC in minimally invasive cholecystectomy for gallstone disease.MethodsLiterature search will be performed via MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science Core Collection from 2009 to present. All randomized controlled clinical trials and prospective non-randomized controlled trials which report on comparison of NIR-ICG versus IOC will be included. All patients over 18 years old who require elective or urgent minimally invasive cholecystectomy (undergoing NIR-ICG during this procedure) due to gallstone disease both acute and chronic will be included. Since BDI has a low incidence, the primary outcome will be the ability to visualize extrahepatic biliary anatomy and the time to obtain relevant images of these structures. Two researchers will individually screen the identified records, according to a list of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Bias of the studies will be evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa score for non-randomized studies and with The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials. Quality of evidence for all outcomes will be determined with the GRADE system. The data will be registered in a predesigned database. If selected studies are sufficiently homogeneous, we will perform a meta-analysis of reported results. In the event of a substantial heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis will be provided. Subgroup analysis will be used to investigate possible sources of heterogeneity.DiscussionUnderstanding the benefits of this technique is critical to ensuring policymakers can make informed decisions as to where preventive efforts should be focused regarding specific imaging techniques. If ICG is proven to be faster and non-invasive, its routine use could be encouraged.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020177991 .

Dataset Information

The lost stone - Laparoscopic exploration of abscess cavity and retrieval of lost gallstone post cholecystectomy: A case series and review of the literature.

Background

Case presentation

Discussion

Conclusion

Publications

The lost stone - Laparoscopic exploration of abscess cavity and retrieval of lost gallstone post cholecystectomy: A case series and review of the literature.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets