Literature DB >> 6386094

Choledochoscopy: are stones missed? A controlled study.

P C Gartell, F P McGinn.   

Abstract

Although the choledochoscope has been available for several years, its use had not achieved universal acceptance. Enthusiasts claim that the incidence of retained stones in the common bile duct would be reduced by using the instrument, but no controlled study by the same team has been reported. Patients undergoing biliary surgery by one surgical team in Southampton were operated upon in one of three hospitals. The choledochoscope was available for use at only one hospital, but the other two were otherwise fully equipped, and no selection of patients was made for any particular hospital. Over a period of 7 years, 707 patients underwent elective or emergency cholecystectomy. Routine choledochography was performed and stones were found or suspected in the bile ducts in 103 (14.6 per cent). The choledochoscope was used in 54 of the bile duct explorations and in 10 patients residual calculi following routine exploration were identified by the instrument. Postoperative T-tube choledochography was performed in 35 patients following choledochoscopy, 31 with choledocholithiasis at operation, and no unsuspected retained stones were demonstrated. In the 49 patients undergoing duct exploration by the same team without the choledochoscope, 32 were found to have choledocholithiasis. Thirty-six postoperative choledochograms were performed and six patients were found to have retained stones. There were no additional complications attributed to the use of the instrument. We conclude that the use of the choledochoscope should reduce the incidence of retained bile duct stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6386094     DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800711010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  9 in total

1.  Choledochoscopy during biliary surgery for reducing the risk of overlooked stones.

Authors:  T Takada; H Yasuda; K Uchiyama; H Hasegawa; J Shikata
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  An assessment of operative choledochoscopy-A worthwhile procedure or not? Choledochoscopy? Post-exploratory fluorocholangiography? Or both?

Authors:  F McGinn; P Gartell
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  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

4.  A scientific evaluation of operative choledochoscopy in acute cholangitis.

Authors:  W Y Lau; K K Chong; S T Fan; K W Chu; W C Yip; G P Poon; K K Wong
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  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

6.  Outcome of surgery for failed endoscopic extraction of common bile duct stones in elderly patients.

Authors:  B R Davidson; A Lauri; R Horton; A Burroughs; J Dooley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  Operative choledochoscopy in common bile duct surgery.

Authors:  B S Ashby
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  Percutaneous post-operative choledochofiberscopic lithotripsy for residual biliary stones.

Authors:  C G Ker; J S Chen; K T Lee; P C Sheen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Complications analysis with postoperative choledochoscopy for residual bile duct stones.

Authors:  Jing Kong; Shuo-Dong Wu; Guo-Zhe Xian; Su Yang
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.352

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.