Literature DB >> 15095079

Laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct in difficult choledocholithiasis.

C K Tai1, C N Tang, J P Y Ha, C H Chau, W T Siu, M K W Li.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This review investigated the role played by laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LECBD) in the management of difficult choledocholithiasis.
METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed a prospective database of LECBD for difficult choledocholithiasis during the period 1995 to 2003.
RESULTS: Of the 97 LECBDs performed in the authors' center from 1995 to 2003, 25 were performed for difficult choledocholithiasis. Difficult choledocholithiasis was defined as failure of endoscopic stone retrieval for the following reasons: access and cannulation difficulty, the difficult nature of common bile duct (CBD) stones, and the presence of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related complications. There were seven unsuccessful cannulations because of previous gastrectomy (n = 5) and periampullary diverticulum (n = 2). Among the 18 patients with failed endoscopic extraction, there were 10 impacted stones, 2 incomplete stone clearances after multiple attempts, 2 type 2 Mirizzi syndromes, 1 proximal stent migration, 1 repeated post-ERCP pancreatitis, 1 situs inversus, and 1 stricture at the distal common bile duct. There were 14 male and 11 female patients with a mean age of 67.8 +/- 15 years. Initial presentations included cholangitis (n = 14, 56%), biliary colic (n = 3, 12%), jaundice/deranged liver function ( n = 5, 20%), cholecystitis (n = 2, 8%), and pancreatitis (n = 1, 4%). Regarding the approach for LECBD, there were 2 transcystic duct explorations and 23 choledochotomies. The mean operative time was 149.4 +/- 49.3 min, and there were three conversions (12%). The stone clearance rate was 100%, and no recurrence was detected during a mean follow-up period of 16.8 months. Five complications were encountered, which included bile leak (3 patients) and wound infection (2 patients). When the results were compared with the remaining 72 LECBDs for nondifficult stones during the same period, the complication rate, conversion rate, and rate of residual stones were similar despite a longer operation time (149.4 +/- 49.4 min vs 121.6 +/- 50.5 min).
CONCLUSION: When ERCP is impossible or stone retrieval is incomplete, LECBD is the solution to difficult CBD stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15095079     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-003-8216-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  18 in total

Review 1.  Comparison of endoscopic sphincterotomy and laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct.

Authors:  S E Tranter; M H Thompson
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  [Cholecystectomy by coelioscopy].

Authors:  F Dubois; G Berthelot; H Levard
Journal:  Presse Med       Date:  1989-05-13       Impact factor: 1.228

3.  Endoscopic biliary drainage for severe acute cholangitis.

Authors:  E C Lai; F P Mok; E S Tan; C M Lo; S T Fan; K T You; J Wong
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1992-06-11       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Distal common bile duct stricture and secondary biliary cirrhosis due to choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  T C Simmons
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 1.798

5.  ERCP in post-Billroth II gastrectomy patients: emphasis on technique.

Authors:  L F Lin; C P Siauw; K S Ho; J C Tung
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones.

Authors:  M Rhodes; L Sussman; L Cohen; M P Lewis
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-01-17       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Do juxtapapillary diverticula of the duodenum interfere with cannulation at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography? A prospective study.

Authors:  C S Chang-Chien
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  Controlled trial of urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment for acute pancreatitis due to gallstones.

Authors:  J P Neoptolemos; D L Carr-Locke; N J London; I A Bailey; D James; D P Fossard
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1988-10-29       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  E.A.E.S. multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage vs single-stage management of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi.

Authors:  A Cuschieri; E Lezoche; M Morino; E Croce; A Lacy; J Toouli; A Faggioni; V M Ribeiro; J Jakimowicz; J Visa; G B Hanna
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Surgery vs endoscopy as primary treatment in symptomatic patients with suspected common bile duct stones: a multicenter randomized trial. French Associations for Surgical Research.

Authors:  B Suc; J Escat; D Cherqui; G Fourtanier; J M Hay; A Fingerhut; B Millat
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1998-07
View more
  23 in total

Review 1.  Management of common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Eric S Hungness; Nathaniel J Soper
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.452

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

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

3.  Laparoscopic treatment for unsuspected common bile duct stones by transcystic sphincter of Oddi pneumatic balloon dilation and pressure-washing technique.

Authors:  Luigi Masoni; Francesco Saverio Mari; Vincenzo Pietropaolo; Maurizio Onorato; Massimo Meucci; Antonio Brescia
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Transcylindrical gas-free cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholelithiasis, cholecystitis, and choledocholithiasis.

Authors:  Enrique-Javier Grau-Talens; Manuel Giner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Advantages of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Ke-Yue Li; Cheng-Xian Shi; Ke-Li Tang; Jian-Zhao Huang; De-Lin Zhang
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2017-07-31       Impact factor: 1.704

6.  Treatment of common bile duct stones in Sweden 1989-2006: an observational nationwide study of a paradigm shift.

Authors:  Birger Sandzén; Markku M Haapamäki; Erik Nilsson; Hans C Stenlund; Mikael Oman
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in patients with previous upper abdominal operations.

Authors:  Keong Won Yun; Young Joon Ahn; Hae Won Lee; In Mok Jung; Jung Kee Chung; Seung Chul Heo; Ki-Tae Hwang; Hye Seong Ahn
Journal:  Korean J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg       Date:  2012-11-30

8.  Successful ERCP for management of traumatic pancreatic disruption in a patient with situs inversus.

Authors:  Vishal Sharma; Sarthak Malik; Harshal S Mandavdhare; Harjeet Singh
Journal:  Intractable Rare Dis Res       Date:  2018-02

9.  A decade of washing out common bile duct stones with papillary balloon dilatation as a one-stage procedure during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A E B Sjer; D M Boland; P J J van Rijn; S Mohamad
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Effect of medical or surgical admission on outcome of patients with gallstone pancreatitis and common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Jennifer LaFemina; Suzanne M Sokal; Yuchiao Chang; Deborah McGrath; David L Berger
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2008-07-12       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.