BACKGROUND: Preceding endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) in patients with choledochocystolithiasis impedes laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and increases risk of conversion. We studied the influence of time interval between ERC and LC on the course of LC. METHODS: All patients treated for choledochocystolithiasis with ERC and LC during 1996-2001 were studied retrospectively, comparing the course of LC in three time interval groups; LC < 2, 2-6, and > 6 weeks after ERC. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: adhesions, bile duct injury, operating time, and conversion-rate. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were studied (group 1, n = 23; group 2, n = 15; group 3, n = 45). Adhesions, operation time, and bile duct damage did not significantly differ between the groups. The conversion rate in group 2 is significantly higher compared to group 1 (p = 0.027, OR 11 (1.13-106.8)) CONCLUSIONS: A higher conversion rate of LC is found 2-6 weeks after ERC compared to LC within 2 weeks. However, further research is needed to gain more reliable data on whether this is caused by timing.
BACKGROUND: Preceding endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) in patients with choledochocystolithiasis impedes laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and increases risk of conversion. We studied the influence of time interval between ERC and LC on the course of LC. METHODS: All patients treated for choledochocystolithiasis with ERC and LC during 1996-2001 were studied retrospectively, comparing the course of LC in three time interval groups; LC < 2, 2-6, and > 6 weeks after ERC. PRIMARY OUTCOMES: adhesions, bile duct injury, operating time, and conversion-rate. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were studied (group 1, n = 23; group 2, n = 15; group 3, n = 45). Adhesions, operation time, and bile duct damage did not significantly differ between the groups. The conversion rate in group 2 is significantly higher compared to group 1 (p = 0.027, OR 11 (1.13-106.8)) CONCLUSIONS: A higher conversion rate of LC is found 2-6 weeks after ERC compared to LC within 2 weeks. However, further research is needed to gain more reliable data on whether this is caused by timing.
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
Authors: Orhan Alimoglu; Orhan V Ozkan; Mustafa Sahin; Adem Akcakaya; Ramazan Eryilmaz; Gurhan Bas Journal: World J Surg Date: 2003-02-27 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Djemila Boerma; Erik A J Rauws; Yolande C A Keulemans; Ignace M C Janssen; Clemens J M Bolwerk; Ron Timmer; Egge J Boerma; Huug Obertop; Kees Huibregtse; Dirk J Gouma Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-09-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: K H Lai; L F Lin; G H Lo; J S Cheng; R L Huang; C K Lin; J S Huang; P I Hsu; N J Peng; L P Ger Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Sandra C Donkervoort; Lea M Dijksman; Lincey C F de Nes; Pieter G Versluis; Joris Derksen; Michael F Gerhards Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-03-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: R Costi; D DiMauro; A Mazzeo; A S Boselli; S Contini; V Violi; L Roncoroni; L Sarli Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2006-11-16 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: M Eikermann; R Siegel; I Broeders; C Dziri; A Fingerhut; C Gutt; T Jaschinski; A Nassar; A M Paganini; D Pieper; E Targarona; M Schrewe; A Shamiyeh; M Strik; E A M Neugebauer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-10-06 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Anandi H W Schiphorst; Marc G H Besselink; Djamila Boerma; Robin Timmer; Marinus J Wiezer; Karel J van Erpecum; Ivo A M J Broeders; Bert van Ramshorst Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-02-13 Impact factor: 4.584