BACKGROUND:Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) followed by a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is generally accepted as the treatment of choice for patients with choledochocystolithiasis who are eligible for surgery. Previous studies have shown that LC after ES is associated with a high conversion rate. The aim of the present study was to assess the complexity of LC after ES compared with standard LC for symptomatic uncomplicated cholecystolithiasis. METHODS: The study population consisted of two patient cohorts: patients who had undergone a previous ERCP with ES for choledocholithiasis (PES) and patients with cholecystolithiasis who had no previous intervention prior to LC (NPES). RESULTS: The PES group consisted of 93 patients and the NPES group consisted of 83 consecutive patients. Patients in the PES group had higher risks for longer [more than 65 min, odds ratio (OR) = 4.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79-9.91)] and more complex [higher than 6 points, on a 0-10 scale, OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.43-6.81)] surgery. The conversion rate in the PES and NPES group (6.5% versus 2.4%, respectively) and the complication rate (12.9% versus 9.6%, respectively) were not significantly different. DISCUSSION: A laparoscopic cholecystectomy after ES is lengthier and more difficult than in uncomplicated cholelithiasis and should therefore be performed by an experienced surgeon.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) followed by a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is generally accepted as the treatment of choice for patients with choledochocystolithiasis who are eligible for surgery. Previous studies have shown that LC after ES is associated with a high conversion rate. The aim of the present study was to assess the complexity of LC after ES compared with standard LC for symptomatic uncomplicated cholecystolithiasis. METHODS: The study population consisted of two patient cohorts: patients who had undergone a previous ERCP with ES for choledocholithiasis (PES) and patients with cholecystolithiasis who had no previous intervention prior to LC (NPES). RESULTS: The PES group consisted of 93 patients and the NPES group consisted of 83 consecutive patients. Patients in the PES group had higher risks for longer [more than 65 min, odds ratio (OR) = 4.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79-9.91)] and more complex [higher than 6 points, on a 0-10 scale, OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.43-6.81)] surgery. The conversion rate in the PES and NPES group (6.5% versus 2.4%, respectively) and the complication rate (12.9% versus 9.6%, respectively) were not significantly different. DISCUSSION: A laparoscopic cholecystectomy after ES is lengthier and more difficult than in uncomplicated cholelithiasis and should therefore be performed by an experienced surgeon.
Authors: Yuichi Yamashita; Tadahiro Takada; Yoshifumi Kawarada; Yuji Nimura; Masahiko Hirota; Fumihiko Miura; Toshihiko Mayumi; Masahiro Yoshida; Steven Strasberg; Henry A Pitt; Eduardo de Santibanes; Jacques Belghiti; Markus W Büchler; Dirk J Gouma; Sheung-Tat Fan; Serafin C Hilvano; Joseph W Y Lau; Sun-Whe Kim; Giulio Belli; John A Windsor; Kui-Hin Liau; Vibul Sachakul Journal: J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg Date: 2007-01-30
Authors: James Y W Lau; Chon-Kar Leow; Terence M K Fung; Bing-Yee Suen; Ly-Mee Yu; Paul B S Lai; Yuk-Hoi Lam; Enders K W Ng; Wan Yee Lau; Sydney S C Chung; Joseph J Y Sung Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Robert P Sutcliffe; Marianne Hollyman; James Hodson; Glenn Bonney; Ravi S Vohra; Ewen A Griffiths Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: S Vaccari; M Minghetti; A Lauro; M I Bellini; A Ussia; S Khouzam; I R Marino; M Cervellera; V D'Andrea; V Tonini Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2022-03-22 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Siobhan Mckay; Jonathan Super; Ravi Marudanayagam; Markos Daskalakis; Rajwinder Nijjar; John Isaac; Martin Richardson; Rishi Singhal Journal: Turk J Surg Date: 2022-03-28
Authors: S C Donkervoort; K Kortram; L M Dijksman; M A Boermeester; B van Ramshorst; D Boerma Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-04-29 Impact factor: 4.584