Literature DB >> 17458591

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

Rosa Bertolín-Bernades1, 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.   

Abstract

The rate of choledocholithiasis at the time of elective surgery after mild acute biliary pancreatitis is still unclear because it decreases rapidly after the onset. The aims of this study are as follows: (1) To investigate whether the incidence of choledocholithiasis in mild biliary pancreatitis is higher than in patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis. (2) To evaluate the usefulness of intraoperative cholangiography in the diagnosis of unsuspected choledocholithiasis in mild pancreatitis. Prospective study including 130 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery and classified into two groups: mild biliary pancreatitis (n = 44) and symptomatic cholelithiasis (n = 86). Choledocholithiasis was evaluated by endoscopic cholangiopancreatography, magnetic resonance, and intraoperative cholangiography. Preoperatively, choledocholithiasis was identified in five patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis and two with biliary pancreatitis (5.81 vs 4.54%; p = 0.472). In 117 cases (90%), intraoperative cholangiography was successfully performed, identifying unsuspected choledocholithiasis in five patients of the colelithiasis group and in three in the group of pancreatitis (5.81 vs 6.81%; p = 0.492). The total number of patients with choledocholithiasis in the whole series was 15 (11.5%); 11.6% in colelithiasis group vs 11.4% in biliary pancreatitis group; p = 0.605. The rate of choledocholithiasis was not significantly different between the groups of patients with mild acute biliary pancreatitis and symptomatic cholelithiasis. Intraoperative cholangiography identified unsuspected choledocholithiasis in 6.81% of patients with mild acute biliary pancreatitis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17458591     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-007-0148-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  22 in total

1.  Where do ERCP, endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and intraoperative cholangiography fit in the management of acute biliary pancreatitis? A decision analysis model.

Authors:  M R Arguedas; A W Dupont; C M Wilcox
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 10.864

Review 2.  Algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis.

Authors:  N Alexakis; J P Neoptolemos
Journal:  Scand J Surg       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.360

3.  Gallstone pancreatitis: a prospective study on the incidence of cholangitis and clinical predictors of retained common bile duct stones.

Authors:  L Chang; S K Lo; B E Stabile; R J Lewis; C de Virgilio
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 10.864

4.  Etiology and pathogenesis of acute biliary pancreatitis.

Authors:  J M Acosta; C A Pellegrini; D B Skinner
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1980-07       Impact factor: 3.982

5.  The role of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the management of patients with gallstone pancreatitis.

Authors:  Martin A Makary; Mark D Duncan; John W Harmon; Paul D Freeswick; Jeffrey S Bender; Mark Bohlman; Thomas H Magnuson
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy without routine operative cholangiography does not result in significant problems related to retained stones.

Authors:  D J A Thornton; A Robertson; D J Alexander
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-12-31       Impact factor: 4.584

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

Authors:  H Charfare; S Cheslyn-Curtis
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  Gallstone pancreatitis: pathophysiology.

Authors:  T R Kelly
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1976-10       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Gallstone pancreatitis: biliary tract pathology in relation to time of operation.

Authors:  H H Stone; T C Fabian; W E Dunlop
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Role of ERCP in the management of predicted mild acute biliary pancreatitis.

Authors:  Yuk-Pang Yeung; Siu-Fai Lo; Andrew Wai-Chun Yip
Journal:  Asian J Surg       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.767

View more
  3 in total

1.  SAGES guidelines for the clinical application of laparoscopic biliary tract surgery.

Authors:  D Wayne Overby; Keith N Apelgren; William Richardson; Robert Fanelli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-08-13       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 2.  Recurrent acute biliary pancreatitis: the protective role of cholecystectomy and endoscopic sphincterotomy.

Authors:  E J M van Geenen; D L van der Peet; C J J Mulder; M A Cuesta; M J Bruno
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-03-06       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Cholecystectomy and sphincterotomy in patients with mild acute biliary pancreatitis in Sweden 1988 - 2003: a nationwide register study.

Authors:  Birger Sandzén; Markku M Haapamäki; Erik Nilsson; Hans C Stenlund; Mikael Oman
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-10-23       Impact factor: 3.067

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.