Literature DB >> 34076762

Reinterventions following laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration. A review of prospective data from 5740 patients.

Hwei Jene Ng1, Ahmad H M Nassar2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Complications following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and common bile duct exploration (CBDE) for the management of gallstones or choledocholithiasis impact negatively on patients' quality of life and may lead to reinterventions. This study aims to evaluate the causes and types of reintervention following index admission LC with or without CBDE.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database of LC and CBDE performed by a single surgeon was analysed. Preoperative factors, difficulty grading and perioperative complications requiring reintervention and readmissions were examined.
RESULTS: Reinterventions were required in 112 of 5740 patients (2.0%), 89 (1.6%) being subsequent to complications. The reintervention cohort had a median age of 64 years, were more likely to be females (p < 0.0023) and to be emergency admissions (67.9%, p < 0.00001) with obstructive jaundice (35.7%, p < 0.00001). 46.4% of the reintervention cohort had a LC operative difficulty grade IV or V and 65.2% underwent a CBDE. Open conversion was predictive of the potential for reintervention (p < 0.00001). The most common single cause of reintervention was retained stones (0.5%) requiring ERCP followed by bile leakage (0.3%) requiring percutaneous drainage, ERCP and relaparoscopy. Relaparoscopy was necessary in 17 patients and open surgery in 13, 6 of whom not resulting from complications. There were 5 deaths.
CONCLUSION: This large series had a low incidence of reinterventions resulting from complications in spite of a high workload of index admission surgery for biliary emergencies and bile duct stones. Surgical or endoscopic reinterventions following LC alone occurred in only 0.8%. The most common form of reintervention was ERCP for retained CBD stones. This important outcome parameter of laparoscopic biliary surgery can be optimised through early diagnosis and timely reintervention for complications.
© 2021. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bile duct exploration; Complications; Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Reintervention

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34076762      PMCID: PMC9001563          DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08568-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


Background

Complications following laparoscopic cholecystectomy and intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) with or without common bile duct exploration (CBDE) pose various diagnostic and management challenges to the surgeon and impact negatively on the patient’s quality of life. The nature and severity of a complication will dictate the urgency with which it is to be investigated and determine whether conservative management will be sufficient to remedy that complication. Occasionally, reintervention is necessary to either improve the outcome or to avoid serious life threatening consequences. Reintervention following LC and CBDE ranges from placing one suture to control port site bleeding to laparotomy and biliary reconstruction for a bile duct injury. Although most studies addressing biliary surgery report their complications and reinterventions, the last large study focusing on reinterventions as an outcome parameter following LC was published in 2002 [1]. We aim to review the causes of reinterventions following index admission LC, IOC and, when necessary, CBDE in a large series performed by a single surgeon providing a specialised acute biliary service with a high emergency workload. The secondary aim was to report the causes of reinterventions in patients who have not suffered any complications, a group that is usually overlooked in the literature.

Methods

A prospectively maintained database of emergency and elective patients undergoing LC with or without CBDE performed by a single surgeon (AHMN) or by his trainees under direct on table supervision between 1992 and 2020 was reviewed. Data on patient demographics, type of admission, clinical presentation, admission to referral and referral to surgery intervals, operative difficulty grading, open conversion, perioperative complications, reinterventions, readmissions within one year and the 30-day mortality were analysed. The operative difficulty grade was based on the Nassar Scale [2-4]. This is a five grade system of describing the operative findings according to the adhesions around the gallbladder, the state of the cystic pedicle and the condition of the gallbladder. The objective assessment of operative complexity facilitates audit, research, assessment of training and comparison between studies. The referral pathways and operative techniques have been described in detail in previous studies [5-8]. Informed consent was obtained from all patients with emphasis on the specialisation of the unit with regard to the management of suspected bile duct stones. Ethical approval was not required as the management protocols were in line with the guidelines and recommendations of national and international societies. Statistical analysis: Categorical variables are expressed as n and percentage (%) and continuous as mean ± standard deviation. Student’s t test was used for continuous variables and Chi-square or Fisher's Exact test for categorical variables. P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. All analyses were performed using IBM SPSS 22.

Results

Of the 5740 patients, 112 (2.0%) patients required 157 postoperative reinterventions using different modalities. The complication rate in the whole series was 4.9%, but only 89 patients (1.6%) had suffered operative or postoperative complications requiring 110 reinterventions. 23 patients (0.4%) needed 47 reinterventions indicated by reasons other than complications. 39 reinterventions occurred in 4422 patients who underwent LC without CBDE (0.8%). Of these surgical reintervention was only resorted to in 10 patients (0.2%). The median age was 64 years (21–88 years) and the male to female ratio was 1:1.6. 67.9% of this patient cohort was emergency admissions. The primary admission diagnosis was jaundice in 35.7% and 32 (28.6%) had previous emergency biliary admissions, most before being referred to the biliary unit. The original operation was performed within five days of admission in 86.6% of the patients. Demographic characteristics and preoperative data of this cohort are shown in Table 1.
Table 1

Demographic and preoperative data of patients needing postoperative reintervention

Preoperative characteristicsReinterventions (n = 112) (%)
Gender
 Male43 (38.4%)
 Female69 (61.6%)
Type of admissions
 Emergency76 (67.9%)
 Electives36 (32.1%)
Source of referral
 Other surgical teams52 (46.4%)
 Biliary team37 (33.0%)
 Other hospitals17 (15.2%)
 Physicians6 (5.4%)
Primary admission diagnosis
 Jaundice40 (35.7%)
 Chronic biliary colic33 (29.5%)
 Cholangitis12 (10.7%)
 Acute biliary colic13 (11.6%)
 Acute pancreatitis7 (6.3%)
 Acute cholecystitis7 (6.3%)
Diagnosis of previous biliary admissionsN = 32 (28.6%)
 Jaundice10 (31.3%)
 Acute pain10 (31.3%)
 Acute cholecystitis10 (31.3%)
 Acute pancreatitis2 (6.3%)
Interval between referral/ admission to surgery (day)
 0–168 (60.7%)
 2–529 (25.9%)
 6–1010 (8.9%)
  > 101 (0.9%)
 No records4 (3.6%)
Demographic and preoperative data of patients needing postoperative reintervention 46.4% of the patients requiring reintervention had operative difficulty grades IV or V (compared to only 15.7% in the rest of the series). Most LC/CBDEs were performed by the consultant. In this cohort, 65.2% had CBDE; 51 (69.9%) via choledochotomy and 22 (30.1%) by transcystic exploration. The perioperative findings are summarised in Table 2.
Table 2

Perioperative characteristics of patients needing postoperative reintervention

Operative CharacteristicsPatients (n = 112) (%)
Operative difficulty grade
 Grade 113 (11.6%)
 Grade 226 (23.2%)
 Grade 321 (18.8%)
 Grade 440 (35.7%)
 Grade 512 (10.7%)
Operator
 Consultant93 (83.0%)
 Trainee19 (17.0%)
CBD exploration
 Yes73 (65.2%)
 No39 (34.8%)
Conversion to open5 (4.5%)
Length of surgery, median (range)120 (32–390) minutes
Mortality5 (4.5%)
Length of hospital stay, median (range)16 (1–160) days
Readmissions27 (24.1%)
Number of episodes, median (range)2 (1–8)
Presentation to resolution, median (range)5 (1–56) weeks
Perioperative characteristics of patients needing postoperative reintervention It is interesting that acute cholecystitis and gallbladder empyema were not significant risk factors for reintervention, while the presence of Hartmann’s pouch stones or contracted gallbladder were significant. Five patients (4.6%) in this reintervention cohort had been converted from laparoscopic to open surgery: 3 due to dense adhesion and 2 due to multiple large impacted CBD stones. Three subsequently underwent ERCP for retained CBD stones and two needed percutaneous drainage of subphrenic abscesses. ERCP was the most common postoperative biliary reintervention. 64 (1.1%) patients required a total of 97 ERCPs post LC or CBDE. 15 of these patients did not have ERCP as a result of complications: eight were in the course of managing pancreatic cancers/ periampullary lesions discovered on IOC, five for the management of benign biliary strictures and two for the removal of stents. ERCP was required in 26 patients to extract retained CBD stones (21 after CBDE and 5 after LC) and in 2 for suspected CBD stones. 13 ERCPs were needed for the management of bile leakage and one to remove a biliary drain that had retracted into the abdomen. Other causes are summarised in Table 3.
Table 3

Causes for surgical reintervention

ReinterventionCausesClavien-Dindo ClassificationNumber (N = 157)
ERCPRetained stone after CBDEGrade 3a21 + 12**
Retained stone after LCGrade 3a5
Pancreatic cancer*Grade 3a7
Periampullary tumour*Grade 3a3
Benign stricture*Grade 3a5 + 9**
Bile leakGrade 3a13
Suspected retained stoneGrade 3a2
Removal of stent*Grade 3a14
Biliary drain relatedGrade 3a1
Equivocal cholangiogramGrade 3a2
Pancreatic necrosisGrade 3a1
Post-op jaundiceGrade 3a1
Mirizzi Syndrome IIIGrade 3a1
RelaparoscopyT-tube relatedGrade 3b5
Bile leakGrade 3b5
Bleeding from omentumGrade 3b2
Removal of drainGrade 3b1
Restenting CBDGrade 3b1
Perforated duodenal ulcerGrade 3b1
Abscess collectionGrade 3b1
Relaparoscopy with ileostomy formationColonic leak from cholecystocolic fistulaGrade 3b1
Biliary bypassMirizzi Syndrome IV*Grade 3b1
Mirizzi Syndrome IIIGrade 3b1
Biliary reconstructionCBD injuryGrade 3b2
Gallbladder cancer*Grade 3b1
Whipple’s procedurePeriampullary tumour*Grade 3b2
Pancreatic cancer*Grade 3b2
LaparotomyMesenteric ischaemiaGrade 52
Perforated large bowelGrade 52
Percutaneous drainageAbscess collectionGrade 3a9
Bile leakGrade 3a8
GastroscopyRemoval of stent*Grade 3a2
T-tube relatedGrade 3a1
Suture under local anaesthesiaPort site bleedingGrade 3a5
ReventilationChest infectionGrade 4a2
HypoxiaGrade 4a1
Chest drainPneumothoraxGrade 3a1
Embolisation under interventional radiologyHepatic artery aneurysm*Grade 51

*Reinterventions not due to postoperative complications (47 reinterventions in 23 patients)

**Repeated procedure (12 to remove further retained CBD stone, 9 to remove/change stent for benign stricture)

Causes for surgical reintervention *Reinterventions not due to postoperative complications (47 reinterventions in 23 patients) **Repeated procedure (12 to remove further retained CBD stone, 9 to remove/change stent for benign stricture) Further surgical intervention was necessary in 30 (0.5%) patients: 17 relaparoscopies and 13 by open surgery. Reoperation by open surgery included 6 patients who had not had any complications: five with incidental pancreatic, periampullary and gallbladder cancers discovered on IOC during LC and CBDE and one with Type IV Mirizzi Syndrome requiring bilioenteric bypass. All the initial procedures had been concluded laparoscopically and the patients were subsequently referred to specialised units for resection and/or biliary reconstruction. Three patients had complications requiring remedial open surgery at specialist liver units. Two required biliary reconstruction the day after LC due to iatrogenic CBD injuries. One patient had an exploration and T-Tube placement for a Type III Mirizzi Syndrome and subsequently developed bile leakage and bleeding requiring reoperation and biliary bypass. Two patients with peripheral vascular disease developed acute total mesenteric ischaemia a few days after laparoscopic biliary surgery, and laparotomies revealed non-salvageable total bowel infarction. Two had laparotomies for colonic perforations: one with an iatrogenic injury due to adhesiolysis and one with a coincidental perforation of an undiagnosed colonic tumour, both developed severe sepsis. Five patients who had CBDE required relaparoscopy for biliary drain-related complications: two for retracted T-tubes, one for difficulty in removing a T- tube, one to replace a faulty friable T-tube and one to remove the remnant of a transcystic tube broken during removal. Other causes are summarised in Table 3. Radiologically guided percutaneous drainage of postoperative abdominal collections was carried out in 17 (0.3%) patients: nine for intra-abdominal abscesses and eight for bile leaks.

Haemostasis

Five patients (0.1%) required simple suturing of bleeding from port sites under local anaesthesia: three at the right subcostal port, one at the umbilical port and one at the right flank port. Two patients with haematological disorders had bleeding from the omentum and the epigastric port and required relaparoscopy for haemostasis. All were elective cases. Reventilation was necessary for three patients (0.1%) post LC either due to severe chest infections (n = 2) or due to hypoxia and confusion following initial extubation requiring reventilation for 24 h. All three patients were emergency admission and all recovered well.

Readmission rate

29 readmissions occurred in the biliary re-intervention group (25.9%). These resulted from bile leaks in nine patients, retained stone in eight, abdominal collections in four, management of benign stricture in three, T-tube complications in two, abdominal pain in two and one for removal of a retracted drain. Five 30-day mortalities occurred in this reintervention cohort including the four who suffered mesenteric ischaemia and colonic perforations. Another patient died at a specialist centre from haemorrhage following attempted embolisation of a hepatic artery aneurysm which was suspected during uneventful LC with IOC and subsequently confirmed on CT scan and angiography.

Discussion

This study has a reintervention rate due to postoperative complications of 1.6% in spite of a high emergency workload, routine cholangiography, the adoption of index admission surgery for all comers and single session management of bile duct stones. Although most reinterventions occurred in patients who had undergone bile duct explorations with or without biliary drainage, the incidence of those directly related to biliary drainage was much lower than in studies advocating primary closure of choledochotomies. Reinterventions following single session bile duct exploration have to be seen in the context of the complications and reinterventions associated with the currently used staged management of bile duct stones. The reintervention rate in our cohort of patients undergoing LC alone was 0.8%. A comparison between the group of patients needing reinterventions and the rest of the series shows that certain preoperative characteristics have predictive significance, e.g. emergency admission and presentation with jaundice. Certain operative findings during the original procedure such as difficulty grades 4 and 5, a contracted gallbladder, bile duct stones necessitating bile duct exploration and the need for open conversion also have significant associations with reintervention (Table 4).
Table 4

Demographic, preoperative and operative data of patients requiring postoperative reintervention compared to the rest of series

CharacteristicsReinterventions(n = 112) (%)No reinterventions(n = 5627) (%)P ValueOR (95% CI)
Genderp < 0.00231.80 (1.22–2.65)
 Male43 (38.4%)1444 (25.7%)
 Female69 (61.6%)4173 (74.2%)
 Emergency admission76 (67.9%)2478 (44.0%)p < 0.000012.68 (1.80–4.00)
Primary admission diagnosis
 Jaundice40 (35.7%)897 (15.9%)p < 0.000012.93 (1.98–4.34)
 Chronic biliary colic33 (29.5%)3067 (54.5%)p < 0.000010.35 (0.23–0.53)
 Cholangitis12 (10.7%)115 (2.0%)p < 0.000015.75(3.07–10.76)
Operative difficulty grade
 Grade 113 (11.6%)1885 (33.5%)p < 0.000010.26 (0.15–0.47)
 Grade 226 (23.2%)1717 (30.5%)p = 0.09620.69 (0.44–1.07)
 Grade 321 (18.8%)1132 (20.1%)P = 0.72060.92 (0.57–1.48)
 Grade 440 (35.7%)784 (13.9%)p < 0.000013.43 (2.31–5.09)
 Grade 512 (10.7%)101 (1.8%)p < 0.000016.57(3.50–12.33)
CBD exploration73 (65.2%)1245 (22.1%)p < 0.000016.59 (4.44–9.77)
Gallbladder condition
 Acute cholecystitis5 (4.5%)306 (5.4%)p = 0.65210.81 (0.33–2.01)
 Chronic cholecystitis47 (42.0%)3862 (68.6%)p < 0.000010.33 (0.23–0.48)
 Empyema12 (10.7%)397 (7.1%)p = 0.13611.58 (0.86–2.90)
 Contracted21 (18.8%)624 (11.1%)p = 0.01101.85 (1.14–3.00)
 Hartmann’s pouch stone6 (5.4%)41 (0.7%)p < 0.000018.01 (3.33–19.30)
 Mucocoele10 (8.9%)288 (5.1%)p = 0.07191.82 (0.94–3.52)
Conversion to open5 (4.5%)23 (0.4%)p < 0.0000111.39 (4.25–30.52)
Length of surgery, median (range)120 (32–390) min60 (15–630) min
Mortality5 (4.5%)3 (0.1%)p < 0.0000187.60 (20.67–371.26)
Length of hospital stay, median (range)16 (1–160) days4 (1–100) days
Readmissions27 (24.1%)153 (2.7%)p < 0.0000111.36 (7.16–18.04)
Demographic, preoperative and operative data of patients requiring postoperative reintervention compared to the rest of series A systematic review was conducted in 2018 including 233 studies to identify range and consistency of definition of reported complications following LC. The study found open conversions to be the most common reported complications (58% of studies) followed by bile leakage in 38% and bile duct injury in 32%. 42% of the included studies reported reinterventions following LC [9]. This demonstrates that despite LC being the standard treatment for gallstone disease, further reintervention for postoperative complications is occasionally required and should, therefore, be included in the consent process. Although the current study had a high workload of biliary emergencies and subsequently a high percentage of difficult cholecystectomies, the morbidity rates for the whole study [6] were lower than many published studies [10-16]. Laparoscopic CBDEs were also performed in the emergency cohort with a low reintervention rate compared to other studies on CBDE [11-18] as shown in Table 5.
Table 5

Comparison of postoperative reintervention for complications in studies reporting laparoscopic bile duct exploration. P/C- percutaneous drainage

Study yearAawsaj (11)2016Martin(16)1998Vidagany(12) 2016Jameel(13)2008Santo(14)2012Lauter(15)2000Tan(36)2010Rhodes(37) 1998Current study
Total patients29630016071575145401318
Bile duct exploration techniqueTranscystic63173926262728870
Failed transcystic converted to choledochotomy22-11
Choledochotomy2111271606220251812448
Pre-operative ERCP17223712528890
T-tube1561121424812226
Clearance rate84.8%90.0%96.2%88.7%78.9%85.0%86.0%75.0%97.9%
Morbidity rate13.5%7.3%15.0%16.9%11.8%19.7%8.0%17.5%18.7%
Reintervention rate17.6%12.0%10.6%7.0%15.8%17.6%17.8%25.0%6.1%
Reintervention post transcystic bile duct explorationsERCP163832515
Relaparoscopy33
Laparotomy31-
Others1 P/C5 P/C
Reintervention post choledochotomy bile duct explorationERCP489845432
Relaparoscopy456219
Laparotomy17
Others3 haemostasis3 P/C1 intervention radiology

2 gastroscopy

1 chest drain

3 P/C

1 reventilation

Comparison of postoperative reintervention for complications in studies reporting laparoscopic bile duct exploration. P/C- percutaneous drainage 2 gastroscopy 1 chest drain 3 P/C 1 reventilation The benefits of delivering an emergency biliary service in this study are reflected in a low reintervention rate for cholecystectomies done without bile duct explorations. In a cohort of 32,785 LCs, Ros et al. [1] reported a significantly higher incidence of 1% reinterventions during readmissions within one year of discharge between 1992 and 1995. In addition, reoperations post bile duct surgery, reconstruction or anastomosis between the bile duct and gastrointestinal tract, and reoperation for unspecified reasons were found increased upon the introduction of LC. There was a tenfold increase in endoscopic and percutaneous reinterventions compared to open cholecystectomy. However, the data were collected from 1987 to 1995 when most surgeons performing LC were in the learning phase of the new technique. In the current study, where IOC is routinely performed, less than 1.6% of the patients who underwent LC with or without CBDE had complications requiring reintervention including postoperative ERCP in only 1.1% of the series. On the other hand, Ragulin-Coyne et al. [19] found that routine IOC was associated with a higher rate of complications and additional cost. However, their complications were mainly due to post-operative infections (4.3%) and the additional reintervention procedures (included ERCP in 15.8% and CBDE in 2.6%). It is likely, therefore, that routine IOC ± CBDE, as would be the case in a specialised unit, would have prevented most of these reinterventions. Li J et al. [20] suggested that where routine IOC was performed, one ERCP was avoided for every 18.5 IOCs performed. Preoperative ERCP remains the main method of clearing CBD stones in most units. However, our results showed that one session laparoscopic management of biliary stones is associated with lower morbidity than published results of ERCP, a finding which was consistent with several studies [18-23]. Kadam et al. [21] reported lower morbidity for LC and CBDE, with bile leakage occurring in 6.7%, while two-stage ERCP/ stenting + LC was associated with 16.7% pancreatitis and 6.7% cholangitis. There was a high rate of reintervention in the ERCP group with 2.3 procedures per patient. A systematic review by Kenny et al. [22] concluded that a single-stage approach to managing symptomatic gallstones and CBD stones is the preferred procedure. Rogers et al. [23] prospectively randomised LC and laparoscopic CBDE against ERCP and found that CBDE eliminated the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis and the need for further procedures. Gupta et al. [24] also found that ERCP involved more reinterventions than one-stage treatment of bile duct stones. Laparoscopic CBDE also reduces the incidence of recurrent stones, thus avoiding inevitable future reinterventions [25, 26]. In spite of its benefits, biliary drainage is still a main cause of morbidity following bile duct exploration. In this series of 5740 LC, 527 (9.2%) had CBDE with biliary drainage (transcystic or T-tubes) resulting in 6 reinterventions (1%): 5 relaparoscopies and 1 ERCP. However, biliary drainage following choledochotomy helped to minimise the risk of bile leakage, and to obtain postoperative cholangiography. In this study biliary drains were used to clear a few retained stones, flushing the bile duct after Glucagon administration and to dissolve blood clots in the bile duct using Alteplase, a fibrinolytic agent, thus avoiding invasive reinterventions. The use of the T-tube track to remove retained stones was first reported in 1978 by Burhenne [27], but endoscopic reinterventions have reduced the reliance on this technique. On the other hand biliary drains can result in complications. Gillatt et al. [28] reported bile leakage upon removal of the T-tube in 18% but only one of 39 patients required reoperation due to bile peritonitis. Sharma et al. [29] reported one patient (2.5%) and Wills et al. [30] had T-tube complications in 15.3% with a quarter requiring surgical reinterventions. Biliary drain complications are thus associated with a low reintervention rate reflecting the fact that most such complications can be managed conservatively. 12 patients (0.02%) in this series were found to have pancreatic, periampullary or gallbladder cancers that required postoperative reintervention. Eight needed ERCP for stenting and 4 underwent Whipple’s procedures. In systematic reviews, unsuspected gallbladder cancer was found by Choi et al. [31] in 0.7% and by Soreide et al. [32] in 0.25%–0.89% routine LCs. The incidence of bile duct injury varies in the literatures [31-35]. In the current study, two CBD injuries (0.03%) occurred and were identified intraoperatively. IOC outlined the biliary anatomy and helped to avoid making the injury worse. Biliary stents and abdominal drains were inserted and the patients were referred to a tertiary liver surgery unit where uneventful biliary reconstruction was carried out within 24 h. Tornqvist et al. [36] quoted an incidence of bile duct injury between 0.2% and 0.9%, while Viste et al. [37] reported a frequency of 0.4% of main bile duct injury. The low biliary injury rate seems to have been contributed to, at least in part, by routine IOC, which in the context of a specialised service is safe in all elective and emergency patients.

Conclusion

Reintervention resulting from complications occurred in only 1.6%, in spite of the policy of index admission surgery for all comers including emergency admissions and single session management of bile duct stones. Surgical or endoscopic reinterventions following LC alone occurred in 0.8%. Some preoperative and operative characteristics are predictive of reintervention and may guide preventive strategies. The most common form of reintervention was ERCP for retained CBD stones. This important outcome parameter of laparoscopic biliary surgery can be optimised through early diagnosis and timely reintervention for complications.
  33 in total

1.  Optimising laparoscopic cholangiography time using a simple cannulation technique.

Authors:  Ahmad H M Nassar; Gamal El Shallaly; Ahmed H Hamouda
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-04-04       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Systematic review of management of incidental gallbladder cancer after cholecystectomy.

Authors:  K Søreide; R V Guest; E M Harrison; T J Kendall; O J Garden; S J Wigmore
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  Complications of T-tube drainage of the common bile duct.

Authors:  D A Gillatt; R E May; R Kennedy; A J Longstaff
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1985-11       Impact factor: 1.891

4.  Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: our first 50 cases.

Authors:  Ker-Kan Tan; Vishalkumar Girishchandra Shelat; Kui-Hin Liau; Chung-Yip Chan; Choon-Kiat Ho
Journal:  Ann Acad Med Singapore       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 2.473

5.  Reintervention after laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy in Sweden 1987-1995: analysis of data from a hospital discharge register.

Authors:  Axel Ros; Bengt Haglund; Erik Nilsson
Journal:  Eur J Surg       Date:  2002

6.  One-session laparoscopic management of Mirizzi syndrome: feasible and safe in specialist units.

Authors:  Ahmad H M Nassar; Mahmoud K Nassar; Ines C Gil; Hwei J Ng; Ahmad M Yehia
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Treatment of gallbladder stone with common bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era.

Authors:  Wei-jie Zhang; Gui-fang Xu; Qin Huang; Kun-lun Luo; Zhi-tao Dong; Jie-ming Li; Guo-zhong Wu; Wen-xian Guan
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Recurrence of choledocholithiasis following endoscopic bile duct clearance: Long term results and factors associated with recurrent bile duct stones.

Authors:  Christos Konstantakis; Christos Triantos; Vasileios Theopistos; Georgios Theocharis; Ioannis Maroulis; Georgia Diamantopoulou; Konstantinos Thomopoulos
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2017-01-16

9.  Optimising the outcomes of index admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy and bile duct exploration for biliary emergencies: a service model.

Authors:  Ahmad H M Nassar; Hwei J Ng; Zubir Ahmed; Arkadiusz Peter Wysocki; Colin Wood; Ayman Abdellatif
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-08-28       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Effect of intended intraoperative cholangiography and early detection of bile duct injury on survival after cholecystectomy: population based cohort study.

Authors:  Björn Törnqvist; Cecilia Strömberg; Gunnar Persson; Magnus Nilsson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-10-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.