Dataset Information

Posterior infundibular dissection: safety first in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is still fraught with bile duct injuries (BDI). A number of methods such as intra-operative cholangiography, use of indocyanine green (ICG) with infrared imaging, and the critical view of safety (CVS) have been suggested to ensure safer Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).To these, we add posterior infundibular dissection as the initial operative maneuver during LC. Here, we report specific technical details of this approach developed over 30 years with no bile duct injuries and update our experience in 1402 LC.

Methods

In this manuscript, we present a detailed and illustrated description of a posterior infundibular dissection as the initial approach to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This technique developed after thirty years of experience with LC and have used it routinely over the past ten years with no bile duct injury.

Results

Between January of 2010 and December 2019, 1402 Laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed using the posterior infundibular approach. Operations performed on elective basis constituted 80.3% (1122/1402) and 19.97% were emergent (280/1402). One intra-operative cholangiogram was performed after a posterior sectoral duct was identified. There was one conversion to open cholecystectomy due to bleeding. There were 4 bile leaks that were managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP). There were no bile duct injuries.

Conclusion

Adopting an initial posterior mobilization of the gallbladder infundibulum lessens the need for medial and cephalad dissection to the node of Lund, allowing for a safer laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In fact the safety of the technique comes from the initial dissection of the lateral border of the infundibulum. The risk of BDI can be reduced to null as was our experience. This approach does not preclude the use of other intra-operative maneuvers or methods.

SUBMITTER: Iskandar M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8116291 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceRobotic-assisted cholecystectomy is rapidly being adopted into practice, partly based on the belief that it offers specific technical and safety advantages over traditional laparoscopic surgery. Whether robotic-assisted cholecystectomy is safer than laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains unclear.ObjectiveTo determine the uptake of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy and to analyze its comparative safety vs laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cohort study used Medicare administrative claims data for nonfederal acute care hospitals from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019. Participants included 1 026 088 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries 66 to 99 years of age who underwent cholecystectomy with continuous Medicare coverage for 3 months before and 12 months after surgery. Data were analyzed August 17, 2022, to June 1, 2023.ExposureSurgical technique used to perform cholecystectomy: robotic-assisted vs laparoscopic approaches.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was rate of bile duct injury requiring definitive surgical reconstruction within 1 year after cholecystectomy. Secondary outcomes were composite outcome of bile duct injury requiring less-invasive postoperative surgical or endoscopic biliary interventions, and overall incidence of 30-day complications. Multivariable logistic analysis was performed adjusting for patient factors and clustered within hospital referral regions. An instrumental variable analysis was performed, leveraging regional variation in the adoption of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy within hospital referral regions over time, to account for potential confounding from unmeasured differences between treatment groups.ResultsA total of 1 026 088 patients (mean [SD] age, 72 [12.0] years; 53.3% women) were included in the study. The use of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy increased 37-fold from 211 of 147 341 patients (0.1%) in 2010 to 6507 of 125 211 patients (5.2%) in 2019. Compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy, robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was associated with a higher rate of bile duct injury necessitating a definitive operative repair within 1 year (0.7% vs 0.2%; relative risk [RR], 3.16 [95% CI, 2.57-3.75]). Robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was also associated with a higher rate of postoperative biliary interventions, such as endoscopic stenting (7.4% vs 6.0%; RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.16-1.33]). There was no significant difference in overall 30-day complication rates between the 2 procedures. The instrumental variable analysis, which was designed to account for potential unmeasured differences in treatment groups, also showed that robotic-assisted cholecystectomy was associated with a higher rate of bile duct injury (0.4% vs 0.2%; RR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.14-2.63]).Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study's finding of significantly higher rates of bile duct injury with robotic-assisted cholecystectomy compared with laparoscopic cholecystectomy suggests that the utility of robotic-assisted cholecystectomy should be reconsidered, given the existence of an already minimally invasive, predictably safe laparoscopic approach.