BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is associated with an increased risk of intraoperative injury involving the bile ducts, bowel, and vascular structures compared with open cholecystectomy (OC). Population-based studies are required to estimate the magnitude of the increased risk, to determine whether this is changing over time, and to identify ways by which this might be reduced. METHODS: Suspected cases of intraoperative injury associated with cholecystectomy in Western Australia in the period 1988 to 1994 were identified from routinely collected hospital statistical records and lists of persons undergoing postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The case records of suspect cases were reviewed to confirm the nature and site of injury. Ordinal logistic regression was used to estimate the risk of injury associated with LC compared with OC after adjusting for confounding factors. RESULTS: After the introduction of LC in 1991, the proportion of all cholecystectomy cases with intraoperative injury increased from 0.67% in 1988-90 to 1.33% in 1993-94. Similar relative increases were observed in bile duct injuries, major bile leaks, and other injuries to bowel or vascular structures. Increases in intraoperative injury were observed in both LC and OC. After adjustment for age, gender, hospital type, severity of disease, intraoperative cholangiography, and calendar period, the odds ratio for intraoperative injury in LC compared with OC was 1.79. Operative cholangiography significantly reduced the risk of injury. CONCLUSION: Operative cholangiography has a protective effect for complications of cholecystectomy. Compared with OC, LC carries a nearly twofold higher risk of major bile, vascular, and bowel complications. Further study is required to determine the extent to which potentially preventable factors contribute to this risk.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggest that laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is associated with an increased risk of intraoperative injury involving the bile ducts, bowel, and vascular structures compared with open cholecystectomy (OC). Population-based studies are required to estimate the magnitude of the increased risk, to determine whether this is changing over time, and to identify ways by which this might be reduced. METHODS: Suspected cases of intraoperative injury associated with cholecystectomy in Western Australia in the period 1988 to 1994 were identified from routinely collected hospital statistical records and lists of persons undergoing postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. The case records of suspect cases were reviewed to confirm the nature and site of injury. Ordinal logistic regression was used to estimate the risk of injury associated with LC compared with OC after adjusting for confounding factors. RESULTS: After the introduction of LC in 1991, the proportion of all cholecystectomy cases with intraoperative injury increased from 0.67% in 1988-90 to 1.33% in 1993-94. Similar relative increases were observed in bile duct injuries, major bile leaks, and other injuries to bowel or vascular structures. Increases in intraoperative injury were observed in both LC and OC. After adjustment for age, gender, hospital type, severity of disease, intraoperative cholangiography, and calendar period, the odds ratio for intraoperative injury in LC compared with OC was 1.79. Operative cholangiography significantly reduced the risk of injury. CONCLUSION: Operative cholangiography has a protective effect for complications of cholecystectomy. Compared with OC, LC carries a nearly twofold higher risk of major bile, vascular, and bowel complications. Further study is required to determine the extent to which potentially preventable factors contribute to this risk.
Authors: M S Woods; L W Traverso; R A Kozarek; J H Donohue; D R Fletcher; J G Hunter; M Oddsdottir; R L Rossi; J Tsao; J Windsor Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 1995-10 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: J Cocks; W Johnson; R Cade; B Collopy; H Ewing; J Rogerson; D Rosengarten; G Thompson; P Turner; R Wale Journal: Aust N Z J Surg Date: 1993-09
Authors: A M Davidoff; T N Pappas; E A Murray; D J Hilleren; R D Johnson; M E Baker; G E Newman; P B Cotton; W C Meyers Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1992-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Genevieve B Melton; Keith D Lillemoe; John L Cameron; Patricia A Sauter; JoAnn Coleman; Charles J Yeo Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Lawrence W Way; Lygia Stewart; Walter Gantert; Kingsway Liu; Crystine M Lee; Karen Whang; John G Hunter Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: William C Chapman; Michael Abecassis; William Jarnagin; Sean Mulvihill; Steven M Strasberg Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2003 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Juliane Bingener-Casey; Melanie L Richards; William E Strodel; Wayne H Schwesinger; Kenneth R Sirinek Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2002 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 3.452