Ke-Yue Li1, Cheng-Xian Shi2, Ke-Li Tang2, Jian-Zhao Huang2, De-Lin Zhang2. 1. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, 550002, Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China. keyuelee@sohu.com. 2. Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, 550002, Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and surgical outcomes of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and open common bile duct exploration for treatment of common bile duct stones. METHODS: In total, 210 patients were prospectively randomized into 3 groups: laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and open common bile duct exploration. The primary outcome measures were the common bile duct stone clearance rate and the complication rate. The secondary outcome measures were mortality, total costs, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The success rates in the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration group (97.14%, 68 out of 70) and open common bile duct exploration group (98.57%, 69/70) were significantly higher than that in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography group (85.71%, 60/70, both p < 0.05). The complication rates in the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration group (2.86%, 2/70) and open common bile duct exploration group (1.43%, 1/70) were significantly lower than that in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography group (14.29%, 10/70, both p < 0.05). The success rate and complication rate were not significantly different between the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration group and open common bile duct exploration group (both p > 0.05). CONCLUSION:Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration provides an alternative therapeutic approach that was safer and more reliable, allowed for earlier recovery, and provided more cost-effective treatment of common bile duct stones.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety, and surgical outcomes of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and open common bile duct exploration for treatment of common bile duct stones. METHODS: In total, 210 patients were prospectively randomized into 3 groups: laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and open common bile duct exploration. The primary outcome measures were the common bile duct stone clearance rate and the complication rate. The secondary outcome measures were mortality, total costs, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The success rates in the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration group (97.14%, 68 out of 70) and open common bile duct exploration group (98.57%, 69/70) were significantly higher than that in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography group (85.71%, 60/70, both p < 0.05). The complication rates in the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration group (2.86%, 2/70) and open common bile duct exploration group (1.43%, 1/70) were significantly lower than that in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography group (14.29%, 10/70, both p < 0.05). The success rate and complication rate were not significantly different between the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration group and open common bile duct exploration group (both p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration provides an alternative therapeutic approach that was safer and more reliable, allowed for earlier recovery, and provided more cost-effective treatment of common bile duct stones.
Entities:
Keywords:
Advantages; Common bile duct stones; Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration; Patients
Authors: Luigi Boni; Bright Huo; Laura Alberici; Claudio Ricci; Sofia Tsokani; Dimitris Mavridis; Yasser Sami Amer; Alexandros Andreou; Thomas Berriman; Gianfranco Donatelli; Nauzer Forbes; Stylianos Kapiris; Cüneyt Kayaalp; Leena Kylänpää; Pablo Parra-Membrives; Peter D Siersema; George F Black; Stavros A Antoniou Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-10-13 Impact factor: 3.453