Floyd W van de Graaf1, Ina Zaïmi2, Laurents P S Stassen3, Johan F Lange2. 1. Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: f.vandegraaf@erasmusmc.nl. 2. Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC - University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), a substantial increase in bile duct injury (BDI) incidence was noted. Multiple methods to prevent this complication have been developed and investigated. The most suitable method however is subject to debate. In this systematic review, the different modalities to aid in the safe performance of LC and prevent BDI are delineated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search for articles describing methods for the prevention of BDI in LC was conducted using EMBASE, Medline, Web of science, Cochrane CENTRAL and Google scholar databases from inception to 11 June 2018. RESULTS: 90 studies were included in this systematic review. Overall, BDI preventive techniques can be categorized as dedicated surgical approaches (Critical View of Safety (CVS), fundus first, partial laparoscopic cholecystectomy), supporting imaging techniques (intraoperative radiologic cholangiography, intraoperative ultrasonography, fluorescence imaging) and others. Dedicated surgical approaches demonstrate promising results, yet limited research is provided. Intraoperative radiologic cholangiography and ultrasonography demonstrate beneficial effects in BDI prevention, however the available evidence is low. Fluorescence imaging is in its infancy, yet this technique is demonstrated to be feasible and larger trials are in preparation. CONCLUSION: Given the low sample sizes and suboptimal study designs of the studies available, it is not possible to recommend a preferred method to prevent BDI. Surgeons should primarily focus on proper dissection techniques, of which CVS is most suitable. Additionally, recognition of hazardous circumstances and knowledge of alternative techniques is critical to complete surgery with minimal risk of injury to the patient.
BACKGROUND: Since the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), a substantial increase in bile duct injury (BDI) incidence was noted. Multiple methods to prevent this complication have been developed and investigated. The most suitable method however is subject to debate. In this systematic review, the different modalities to aid in the safe performance of LC and prevent BDI are delineated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search for articles describing methods for the prevention of BDI in LC was conducted using EMBASE, Medline, Web of science, Cochrane CENTRAL and Google scholar databases from inception to 11 June 2018. RESULTS: 90 studies were included in this systematic review. Overall, BDI preventive techniques can be categorized as dedicated surgical approaches (Critical View of Safety (CVS), fundus first, partial laparoscopic cholecystectomy), supporting imaging techniques (intraoperative radiologic cholangiography, intraoperative ultrasonography, fluorescence imaging) and others. Dedicated surgical approaches demonstrate promising results, yet limited research is provided. Intraoperative radiologic cholangiography and ultrasonography demonstrate beneficial effects in BDI prevention, however the available evidence is low. Fluorescence imaging is in its infancy, yet this technique is demonstrated to be feasible and larger trials are in preparation. CONCLUSION: Given the low sample sizes and suboptimal study designs of the studies available, it is not possible to recommend a preferred method to prevent BDI. Surgeons should primarily focus on proper dissection techniques, of which CVS is most suitable. Additionally, recognition of hazardous circumstances and knowledge of alternative techniques is critical to complete surgery with minimal risk of injury to the patient.
Authors: Shilpa Reddy; Camila Lopes Vendrami; Pardeep Mittal; Amir A Borhani; Courtney C Moreno; Frank H Miller Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2021-02-12
Authors: Antonio Marmolejo Chavira; Jorge Farell Rivas; Ana Paula Ruiz Funes Molina; Sergio Ayala de la Cruz; Alejandro Cruz Zárate; Alfonso Bandin Musa; Víctor José Cuevas Osorio Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2021-02-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Dragos Serban; Dumitru Cristinel Badiu; Dragos Davitoiu; Ciprian Tanasescu; Mihail Silviu Tudosie; Alexandru Dan Sabau; Ana Maria Dascalu; Corneliu Tudor; Simona Andreea Balasescu; Bogdan Socea; Daniel Ovidiu Costea; Anca Zgura; Andreea Cristina Costea; Laura Carina Tribus; Catalin Gabriel Smarandache Journal: Exp Ther Med Date: 2021-12-30 Impact factor: 2.447
Authors: Ahmad H M Nassar; Hwei J Ng; Arkadiusz Peter Wysocki; Khurram Shahzad Khan; Ines C Gil Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mihai-Calin Pavel; Mar Achalandabaso Boira; Yasir Bashir; Robert Memba; Erik Llácer; Laia Estalella; Elisabeth Julià; Kevin C Conlon; Rosa Jorba Journal: Syst Rev Date: 2022-03-03
Authors: Lucia Ilaria Sgaramella; Angela Gurrado; Alessandro Pasculli; Nicola de Angelis; Riccardo Memeo; Francesco Paolo Prete; Stefano Berti; Graziano Ceccarelli; Marco Rigamonti; Francesco Giuseppe Aldo Badessi; Nicola Solari; Marco Milone; Fausto Catena; Stefano Scabini; Francesco Vittore; Gennaro Perrone; Carlo de Werra; Ferdinando Cafiero; Mario Testini Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2020-08-11 Impact factor: 4.584