Qingfan Pu1, Chuanrong Zhang2, Zhenfeng Huang2, Yu Zeng2. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou University of Medical Science, No. 108, Wansong Road, Ruian, 325200, China. puqingfan@sina.com. 2. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou University of Medical Science, No. 108, Wansong Road, Ruian, 325200, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy has been proposed for the management of recurrent hepatolithiasis, but no comparative study of its relative efficacy versus laparotomy has been performed, and the patient selection criteria for laparoscopy are not clear. This study aimed to investigate the therapeutic effect of laparoscopy versus laparotomy for repeated hepatolithiasis and to highlight how to select patients best suited for laparoscopy. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of 94 patients who underwent laparotomy or laparoscopy for recurrent hepatolithiasis between January 2010 and May 2014. The clinical data of 53 patients who underwent open biliary exploration (laparotomy group) and 41 patients who underwent laparoscopic biliary exploration (laparoscopy group) for recurrent hepatolithiasis were retrospectively analyzed and compared. RESULTS: Intestinal adhesions to the porta hepatis occurred in 62 (66%) patients. There was no difference in operating time between the two groups. In comparing the laparoscopic group versus the laparotomy group, the intraoperative blood loss was less (P = .001), the incidence of postoperative ascites (9.8 vs. 30.2%, P = .016) and/or pleural effusion (7.3 vs. 28.3%, P = .010) was lower, and the stone clearance rates were comparable. Wound morbidity appeared peculiarly in 15 (28.3%) patients among the laparotomy group. The postoperative hospital stay in the laparoscopy group was shorter than that in the laparotomy group (P = .000). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy is a safe and effective treatment for recurrent hepatolithiasis patients who are scheduled for bile duct exploration.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy has been proposed for the management of recurrent hepatolithiasis, but no comparative study of its relative efficacy versus laparotomy has been performed, and the patient selection criteria for laparoscopy are not clear. This study aimed to investigate the therapeutic effect of laparoscopy versus laparotomy for repeated hepatolithiasis and to highlight how to select patients best suited for laparoscopy. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of 94 patients who underwent laparotomy or laparoscopy for recurrent hepatolithiasis between January 2010 and May 2014. The clinical data of 53 patients who underwent open biliary exploration (laparotomy group) and 41 patients who underwent laparoscopic biliary exploration (laparoscopy group) for recurrent hepatolithiasis were retrospectively analyzed and compared. RESULTS: Intestinal adhesions to the porta hepatis occurred in 62 (66%) patients. There was no difference in operating time between the two groups. In comparing the laparoscopic group versus the laparotomy group, the intraoperative blood loss was less (P = .001), the incidence of postoperative ascites (9.8 vs. 30.2%, P = .016) and/or pleural effusion (7.3 vs. 28.3%, P = .010) was lower, and the stone clearance rates were comparable. Wound morbidity appeared peculiarly in 15 (28.3%) patients among the laparotomy group. The postoperative hospital stay in the laparoscopy group was shorter than that in the laparotomy group (P = .000). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy is a safe and effective treatment for recurrent hepatolithiasis patients who are scheduled for bile duct exploration.