Literature DB >> 3606239

A scientific evaluation of operative choledochoscopy in acute cholangitis.

W Y Lau, K K Chong, S T Fan, K W Chu, W C Yip, G P Poon, K K Wong.   

Abstract

A prospective study to determine the safety and effectiveness of choledochoscopy in acute cholangitis and acute suppurative cholangitis due to common bile duct stones was conducted on 70 patients. Common bile duct pressures determined on the first 20 patients showed that choledochoscopy was unlikely to cause cholangiovenous reflux. Laboratory and clinical parameters revealed that choledochoscopy did not cause septicemia, worsen cholangitis, or provoke acute pancreatitis. There was no iatrogenic injury during choledochoscopy, and the choledochoscopic views were minimally affected by cholangitis. Choledochoscopy detected overlooked stones after conventional methods of exploration of common bile ducts in 14.3% of patients and it helped to remove impacted stones in 2.9% of patients. As a result, the incidence of retained stones after choledochoscopy was 1.4%. Time spent in choledochoscopy was short, and the total postoperative septic complication rate was only 10%. There was no operative mortality. It is concluded that choledochoscopy is safe and effective in cholangitis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3606239      PMCID: PMC1493117          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-198708000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  26 in total

1.  WOUND SEPSIS AFTER CLEAN OPERATIONS.

Authors:  U LJUNGQVIST
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1964-05-16       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Operative and postoperative cholecystocholangiography.

Authors:  H I Goldberg
Journal:  Semin Roentgenol       Date:  1976-07       Impact factor: 0.800

3.  Prevention of wound sepsis in gastro-intestinal surgery.

Authors:  M R Keighley
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1977-05       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Failure of operative cholangiography to prevent retained common duct stones.

Authors:  R C Hall; P Sakiyalak; S K Kim; L S Rogers; W R Webb
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1973-01       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Choledochoscopy in exploration of the common bile duct.

Authors:  D Finnis; T Rowntree
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1977-09       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  Choledochoscopy and operative fluorocholangiography in the prevention of retained bile duct stones.

Authors:  G Berci; M Shore; L Morgenstern; A Hamlin
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  1978-07       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Operative choledochoscopy.

Authors:  A Kappas; J Alexander-Williams; M R Keighley; G T Watts
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Evaluation of operative choledochoscopy.

Authors:  M R Keighley; A Kappas
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1980-03

9.  Choledochoscopy: a comparison of a rigid and a flexible fibreoptic instrument.

Authors:  A Iseli; V C Marshall
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1978-02-11       Impact factor: 7.738

10.  Operative choledochoscopy. Results of a prospective study in several institutions.

Authors:  P F Nora; G Berci; R A Dorazio; G Kirshenbaum; J M Shore; R K Tompkins; S D Wilson
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1977-01       Impact factor: 2.565

View more
  2 in total

1.  Open common bile duct exploration--end of an epoch?

Authors:  S T O'Sullivan; D J Hehir; G C O'Sullivan; W O Kirwan
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  1996 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.568

2.  OUR EXPERIENCE WITH DIAGNOSTIC AND THERAPEUTIC CHOLEDOCHOSCOPY.

Authors:  K M Harikrishnan; S Selvaraj; G Rajgopal
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2017-06-26
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.