| Literature DB >> 28417651 |
Xiang-Yang Li1, Xin Zhao1, Peng Zheng1, Xiao-Ming Kao1, Xiao-Song Xiang1, Wu Ji1.
Abstract
Aim To report our experience regarding management of cholecystoenteric fistula (CEF) and identify the most effective diagnostic methods and surgical treatment. Methods In total, 10,588 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystolithiasis from January 2000 to December 2014 at the Research Institute of General Surgery, Jinling Hospital (Nanjing, China). Twenty-nine patients were diagnosed with CEF preoperatively or intraoperatively. Data were retrospectively collected on demographics, preoperative diagnostics, intraoperative findings, laparoscopic procedures, complications, and follow-up. Results Twenty-nine patients (female/male ratio, 2.2; mean age, 68.7 years) with CEF were evaluated. Twenty-three (79.3%) patients had a cholecystoduodenal fistula (CDF), four (13.8%) had a cholecystocolonic fistula (CCF), one (3.4%) had a cholecystogastric fistula, and one (3.4%) had a CDF combined with a CCF. Only nine (31.0%) patients obtained a preoperative diagnosis. All patients initially underwent laparoscopic treatment, but five (17.2%) underwent conversion to open surgery; three of these five developed postoperative morbidity or mortality, and the other two had an uneventful postoperative course. Among patients managed successfully by laparoscopy, the hospital stay ranged from 3 to 6 days (mean, 4 days). All patients were asymptomatic at a mean follow-up of 13 months (range, 3-21 months). Conclusion Ultrasound and computed tomography can provide valuable diagnostic clues for CEF. Laparoscopic management of CEF in experienced hands is safe, feasible, and associated with rapid postoperative recovery.Entities:
Keywords: Cholecystoenteric fistula; management; diagnosis; laparoscopic
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28417651 PMCID: PMC5536399 DOI: 10.1177/0300060517699038
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Int Med Res ISSN: 0300-0605 Impact factor: 1.671
Accessory examinations of the 29 patients in the present study.
| Examinations | Signs | n (%) |
|---|---|---|
| US (n = 29) | Thick-walled gallbladder | 17 (58.6) |
| Atrophic cholecystitis | 12 (41.4) | |
| Combination of above two signs | 5 (17.2) | |
| Pneumobilia | 2 (6.9) | |
| CT (n = 15) | Unidentified borderline between gallbladder and part of intestinal tract | 12 (80.0) |
| Pneumobilia | 5 (33.3) | |
| ERCP (n = 7) | Fistula communication observed with contrast enhancement and/or the orifice of the fistula is identified with bile excretion | 4 (57.1) |
| Gastroscopy (n = 5) | Presence of stone and identification of orifice of the fistula | 1 (20.0) |
| Colonoscopy (n = 3) | Observation of the opening of the fistula and bile excretion | 1 (33.3) |
| Inflammatory reaction at the hepatic flexure of the colon | 2 (66.7) |
US: ultrasound, CT: computed tomography, ERCP: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Figure 1.Ultrasound and computed tomography findings of cholecystoenteric fistula.
(a) Ultrasound suggested atrophic cholecystitis (arrow) and pneumobilia (arrowhead).
(b). Computed tomography showed pneumobilia (white arrows).
(c). An ill-defined border between the gallbladder and duodenum (white arrow), atrophic cholecystitis, and cholecystolithiasis were simultaneously present (arrowhead).
Comparison between open and laparoscopic surgery.
| Conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery | Laparoscopic surgery | |
|---|---|---|
| Operation time (min, | 150 ± 30 | 85 ± 30 |
| Blood loss (ml, | 120 ± 60 | 45 ± 25 |
| Hospitalization (days) | 7–15 | 3–6 |
| Complications (%) | 60 | 0 |
| Mortality (%)** | 2 | 0 |
P < 0.01, **P < 0.0001.