Literature DB >> 12831488

Selective cholangiography in 600 patients undergoing cholecystectomy with 5-year follow-up for residual bile duct stones.

H Charfare1, S Cheslyn-Curtis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The need for cholangiography to identify possible bile duct stones in all patients undergoing cholecystectomy is controversial. AIMS: To assess the results of a policy for selective pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and to determine the incidence of postoperative symptomatic bile duct stones. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1993 and 1998, 600 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy under one consultant surgeon. Patients were selected for pre-operative or postoperative ERC based on symptoms, liver function tests and/or abnormalities on ultrasonography. A general practitioner questionnaire was used to assess follow-up of patients with postoperative stones.
RESULTS: Of 600 patients, 107 (18%) with a median age of 57 years and male:female ratio of 1:2.1 were selected to undergo pre-operative ERC; of these, 41 patients (38%) had bile duct stones. Postoperative ERC was performed in 30 patients (5%) and stones were identified in seven (23.3%). Three patients (0.5%) had stones removed within 15 days of operation and four (0.7%) between 2.6 months and 1.8 years. Median follow-up was 5.0 years (range, 2.5-7.5 years). The overall incidence of bile duct stones was 48 cases (8%). The stone rate was 11% in males and 7.3% in females. Stones were successfully extracted at ERC in 43 patients (89.6%).
CONCLUSIONS: A policy of selective pre-operative ERC is the most effective technique for identifying and removing bile duct stones and the incidence of symptomatic gallstones following laparoscopic cholecystectomy is very low. With an overall stone rate of 8%, routine peroperative cholangiography is unnecessary and, in a surgical unit providing an ERC service, laparoscopic exploration of the bile duct is not a technique required for the management of bile duct stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12831488      PMCID: PMC1964365          DOI: 10.1308/003588403321661316

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  6 in total

1.  [Therapeutic splitting as standard treatment for cholelithiasis].

Authors:  U T Hopt; U Adam
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  Selection criteria for preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography before laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones: results of a retrospective, single center study between 1996-2002.

Authors:  Laszlo Lakatos; Gabor Mester; Gyorgy Reti; Attila Nagy; Peter Laszlo Lakatos
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-12-01       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Mild acute biliary pancreatitis vs cholelithiasis: are there differences in the rate of choledocholithiasis?

Authors:  Rosa Bertolín-Bernades; Luis Sabater-Ortí; Julio Calvete-Chornet; Bruno Camps-Vilata; Norberto Cassinello-Fernández; Miguel Oviedo-Bravo; Purificación Ivorra-García Monco; Raúl Cánovas-de Lucas; Salvador Lledó-Matoses
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  The standard of laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  R Bittner
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2004-05-14       Impact factor: 3.445

5.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in elderly patients.

Authors:  Gurkan Yetkin; Mehmet Uludag; Sibel Oba; Bulent Citgez; Inci Paksoy
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2009 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

6.  The Routine Use of Cholangiography for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in the Modern Era.

Authors:  Evangelos S Photi; Ahmed El-Hadi; Stephanie Brown; Leyla Swafe; Sarah Ashford-Wilson; Jennifer Barwell; Imogen Koopmans; Michael P N Lewis
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2017 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 2.172

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.