Literature DB >> 23982367

Association between cholecystectomy with vs without intraoperative cholangiography and risk of common duct injury.

Kristin M Sheffield1, Taylor S Riall, Yimei Han, Yong-Fang Kuo, Courtney M Townsend, James S Goodwin.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Significant controversy exists regarding routine intraoperative cholangiography in preventing common duct injury during cholecystectomy.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between intraoperative cholangiography use during cholecystectomy and common duct injury. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study of all Texas Medicare claims data from 2000 through 2009. We identified Medicare beneficiaries 66 years or older who underwent inpatient or outpatient cholecystectomy for biliary colic or biliary dyskinesia, acute cholecystitis, or chronic cholecystitis. We compared results from multilevel logistic regression models to the instrumental variable analyses.
INTERVENTIONS: Intraoperative cholangiography use during cholecystectomy was determined at the level of the patients (yes/no), hospitals (percentage intraoperative cholangiography use for all cholecystectomies at the hospital), and surgeons (percentage use for all cholecystectomies performed by the surgeon). Percentage of use at the hospital and percentage of use by surgeon were the instrumental variables. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patients with claims for common duct repair operations within 1 year of cholecystectomy were considered as having major common duct injury.
RESULTS: Of 92,932 patients undergoing cholecystectomy, 37,533 (40.4%) underwent concurrent intraoperative cholangiography and 280 (0.30%) had a common duct injury. The common duct injury rate was 0.21% among patients with intraoperative cholangiography and 0.36% among patients without it. In a logistic regression model controlling for patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics, the odds of common duct injury for cholecystectomies performed without intraoperative cholangiography were increased compared with those performed with it (OR, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.35-2.36]; P < .001). When confounding was controlled with instrumental variable analysis, the association between cholecystectomy performed without intraoperative cholangiography and duct injury was no longer significant (OR, 1.26 [95% CI, 0.81-1.96]; P = .31). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: When confounders were controlled with instrumental variable analysis, there was no statistically significant association between intraoperative cholangiography and common duct injury. Intraoperative cholangiography is not effective as a preventive strategy against common duct injury during cholecystectomy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23982367      PMCID: PMC3971930          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.276205

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  30 in total

1.  Rationale and use of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Steven M Strasberg; L Michael Brunt
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  Routine versus selective intraoperative cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a survey of 2,130 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A Nickkholgh; S Soltaniyekta; H Kalbasi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-05-12       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods.

Authors:  Thérèse A Stukel; Elliott S Fisher; David E Wennberg; David A Alter; Daniel J Gottlieb; Marian J Vermeulen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-01-17       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Iatrogenic bile duct injury: a population-based study of 152 776 cholecystectomies in the Swedish Inpatient Registry.

Authors:  Anne Waage; Magnus Nilsson
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2006-12

5.  Biliary tract complications in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A multicenter study of 148 biliary tract injuries in 26,440 operations.

Authors:  J Regöly-Mérei; M Ihász; Z Szeberin; J Sándor; M Máté
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Intraoperative cholangiography lowers the risk of bile duct injury during cholecystectomy.

Authors:  L W Traverso
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-10-23       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Long-term results of surgical repair of bile duct injuries following laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  S R Johnson; A Koehler; L K Pennington; D W Hanto
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  Bile duct injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: results of an Italian national survey on 56 591 cholecystectomies.

Authors:  Gennaro Nuzzo; Felice Giuliante; Ivo Giovannini; Francesco Ardito; Fabrizio D'Acapito; Maria Vellone; Marino Murazio; Giovanni Capelli
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2005-10

9.  Routine cholangiography is not warranted during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  D G Clair; D L Carr-Locke; J M Becker; D C Brooks
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1993-05

10.  Complications of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in Switzerland. A prospective 3-year study of 10,174 patients. Swiss Association of Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery.

Authors:  K Z'graggen; H Wehrli; A Metzger; M Buehler; E Frei; C Klaiber
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  21 in total

1.  Diminished Survival in Patients with Bile Leak and Ductal Injury: Management Strategy and Outcomes.

Authors:  Zhi Ven Fong; Henry A Pitt; Steven M Strasberg; Andrew P Loehrer; Jason K Sicklick; Mark A Talamini; Keith D Lillemoe; David C Chang
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  Visualizing biliary tracts with isosulphan blue to prevent injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a preliminary cadaveric study.

Authors:  Orhan Veli Ozkan; Orhan Yagmurkaya; Muhammed Feyzi Sahin; Ahmet Selcuk Gurler; Hudaverdi Kucuker
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 1.246

3.  SAGES clinical spotlight review: intraoperative cholangiography.

Authors:  William W Hope; Robert Fanelli; Danielle S Walsh; Vimal K Narula; Ray Price; Dimitrios Stefanidis; William S Richardson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Bile duct injury: to err is human; to refer is divine.

Authors:  Saket Kumar; Pavan Kumar; Abhijit Chandra
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2019-04-11

Review 5.  Quality of Life and Medico-Legal Implications Following Iatrogenic Bile Duct Injuries.

Authors:  Deepak Hariharan; Emmanouil Psaltis; John H Scholefield; Dileep N Lobo
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 6.  Population-Based Studies Should not be Used to Justify a Policy of Routine Cholangiography to Prevent Major Bile Duct Injury During Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A Peter Wysocki
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Anesthesia technique, mortality, and length of stay after hip fracture surgery.

Authors:  Mark D Neuman; Paul R Rosenbaum; Justin M Ludwig; Jose R Zubizarreta; Jeffrey H Silber
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Black bile of melancholy or gallstones of biliary colics: historical perspectives on cholelithiasis.

Authors:  Klaus Bielefeldt
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-08-08       Impact factor: 3.199

9.  Pancreatectomy predicts improved survival for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: results of an instrumental variable analysis.

Authors:  Bradley D McDowell; Cole G Chapman; Brian J Smith; Anna M Button; Elizabeth A Chrischilles; James J Mezhir
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Severity of Acute Cholecystitis and Risk of Iatrogenic Bile Duct Injury During Cholecystectomy, a Population-Based Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Björn Törnqvist; Anne Waage; Zongli Zheng; Weimin Ye; Magnus Nilsson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.352

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.