BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The management of recurrent bile duct strictures is a challenge for surgeons. This study reports the experience of revision surgery in patients referred following the failure of primary repair, and compares the outcome with that in patients who underwent management of recurrent stricture following primary repair at our institution. METHODS: Over a period of 15 years, 300 patients with postcholecystectomy benign biliary stricture underwent surgical repair at our institution; 36 patients (12%) were referred after a failed primary repair. RESULTS: In 25 (69%) patients, the primary repairs were done at peripheral hospitals. Twelve (33%) had had an early repair, at the time of cholecystectomy while 24 (67%) had a delayed repair at a later date; 83% and 67% of the patients who had undergone early and delayed repair, respectively, had not had a preoperative cholangiogram. Primary repairs performed were a bilioenteric anastomosis (22; 61%) or an end-to-end bile duct repair (14; 39%). Twenty-seven (75%) patients presented within 90 days after the primary repair, and the median interval to recurrent symptoms was 45 days (range, 1 day to 6.1 years). The median delay in referral after the development of symptoms of restricture was 175 days (range, 30 days to 22 years). Twenty-three (64%) patients had high strictures (Bismuth types III-V). All patients underwent a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. At a median follow-up of 37 months (range, 12-144 months), 33 of 35 evaluable patients (94%) with recurrent stricture had an excellent/good outcome compared to 223 of 242 evaluable patients (92%) who had had their primary repair at our institution. Ten (4%) patients had a poor result following primary repair at our center. There was a significant difference in the stricture repair-to-recurrence interval between those patients referred to us with recurrent strictures and those who failed after primary repair at our institution (median interval, 1.5 vs 20 months; P = 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: Patients referred with recurrent strictures had had their primary repair at peripheral settings; the failures were technical, presenting early (median, 1.5 months) with recurrent symptoms, compared to findings in patients with recurrent strictures following primary repair at our center. The long-term outcome following the repair of the primary and the recurrent strictures was no different in our experience.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The management of recurrent bile duct strictures is a challenge for surgeons. This study reports the experience of revision surgery in patients referred following the failure of primary repair, and compares the outcome with that in patients who underwent management of recurrent stricture following primary repair at our institution. METHODS: Over a period of 15 years, 300 patients with postcholecystectomy benign biliary stricture underwent surgical repair at our institution; 36 patients (12%) were referred after a failed primary repair. RESULTS: In 25 (69%) patients, the primary repairs were done at peripheral hospitals. Twelve (33%) had had an early repair, at the time of cholecystectomy while 24 (67%) had a delayed repair at a later date; 83% and 67% of the patients who had undergone early and delayed repair, respectively, had not had a preoperative cholangiogram. Primary repairs performed were a bilioenteric anastomosis (22; 61%) or an end-to-end bile duct repair (14; 39%). Twenty-seven (75%) patients presented within 90 days after the primary repair, and the median interval to recurrent symptoms was 45 days (range, 1 day to 6.1 years). The median delay in referral after the development of symptoms of restricture was 175 days (range, 30 days to 22 years). Twenty-three (64%) patients had high strictures (Bismuth types III-V). All patients underwent a Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. At a median follow-up of 37 months (range, 12-144 months), 33 of 35 evaluable patients (94%) with recurrent stricture had an excellent/good outcome compared to 223 of 242 evaluable patients (92%) who had had their primary repair at our institution. Ten (4%) patients had a poor result following primary repair at our center. There was a significant difference in the stricture repair-to-recurrence interval between those patients referred to us with recurrent strictures and those who failed after primary repair at our institution (median interval, 1.5 vs 20 months; P = 0.001) CONCLUSIONS:Patients referred with recurrent strictures had had their primary repair at peripheral settings; the failures were technical, presenting early (median, 1.5 months) with recurrent symptoms, compared to findings in patients with recurrent strictures following primary repair at our center. The long-term outcome following the repair of the primary and the recurrent strictures was no different in our experience.
Authors: Ashraf A Helmy; Mostafa A Hamad; Ahmed M Aly; Tahra Sherif; Mostafa Hashem; Dalia Ah El-Sers; Mohammad Semieka Journal: Ann Surg Innov Res Date: 2011-10-10