Literature DB >> 7517657

Useful predictors of bile duct stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. McGill Gallstone Treatment Group.

A N Barkun1, J S Barkun, G M Fried, G Ghitulescu, O Steinmetz, C Pham, J L Meakins, C A Goresky.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The authors determined the most useful predictors of common bile duct (CBD) stones as diagnosed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).
METHODS: Prospective and retrospective collection of historical, biochemical and ultrasonographic data was used. Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis was used to determine optimal biochemical cut-off values. Multivariate analysis using logistic regression with generation of the best model identifying independent predictors of CBD stones also was employed. Prospective validation of the model was performed on an independent group of patients.
RESULTS: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies were performed before LC in 106 patients, and after LC in 33. Only four of ten clinical variables evaluated independently predicted the presence of CBD stones. The optimal model predicted a 94% probability of CBD stones in a patient older than 55 years of age who presented with an elevated bilirubin (over 30 mumol/L) and positive ultrasound findings (a dilated CBD, and a CBD stone seen on ultrasound). This model was validated prospectively in a subsequent series of 49 patients in which the probability of CBD stone was only 8% when all four predictors were absent.
CONCLUSIONS: The identified independent clinical predictors of a CBD stone helps select a population of symptomatic gallstone bearers who benefit most from cholangiographic assessment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7517657      PMCID: PMC1234284          DOI: 10.1097/00000658-199407000-00006

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


  47 in total

1.  Operative cholangiography: a reappraisal based on a review of 400 cholangiograms.

Authors:  I Faris; J P Thomson; D J Grundy; L P Le Quesne
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1975-12       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Operative cholangiography; the case for its broadened use in biliary tract surgery.

Authors:  J H Isch
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1973-07

3.  Gallstone migration as a cause of acute pancreatitis.

Authors:  J M Acosta; C L Ledesma
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1974-02-28       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Operative cholangiography: 1,000 cases.

Authors:  C A Schulenburg
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1969-05       Impact factor: 3.982

5.  Primer on certain elements of medical decision making.

Authors:  B J McNeil; E Keller; S J Adelstein
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1975-07-31       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  High-resolution real-time ultrasound in the evaluation of the normal and obstructed biliary tract.

Authors:  P L Cooperberg
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Exploration of the common bile duct--the relevance of the clinical picture and the importance of peroperative cholangiography.

Authors:  B Cranley; H Logan
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1980-12       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Gallstone pancreatitis: pathophysiology.

Authors:  T R Kelly
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1976-10       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The new 'gold standard'?

Authors:  N J Soper; P T Stockmann; D L Dunnegan; S W Ashley
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1992-08

10.  Preoperative evaluation of the risk of common bile duct stones.

Authors:  F Lacaine; M B Corlette; H Bismuth
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1980-09
View more
  63 in total

1.  Helical computed tomographic cholangiography versus endosonography for suspected bile duct stones: a prospective blinded study in non-jaundiced patients.

Authors:  M Polkowski; J Palucki; J Regula; A Tilszer; E Butruk
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Common bile duct stones: magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography vs. endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for detection.

Authors:  A N Barkum
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2000 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  Early endoscopic management of acute gallstone pancreatitis--an evidence-based review.

Authors:  A N Barkun
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  A simple scoring system for predicting bile duct stones in patients with cholelithiasis.

Authors:  H M Soltan; L Kow; J Toouli
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 5.  Management of suspected stones in the common bile duct.

Authors:  Majid A Almadi; Jeffrey S Barkun; Alan N Barkun
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2012-04-16       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Optimal surgical technique, use of intra-operative cholangiography (IOC), and management of acute gallbladder disease: the results of a nation-wide survey in the UK and Ireland.

Authors:  P Sanjay; C Kulli; F M Polignano; I S Tait
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  Practical recommendations for the prediction and management of common bile duct stones in patients with gallstones.

Authors:  N A Kama; M Atli; M Doganay; M Kologlu; E Reis; M Dolapci
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2001-06-12       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Management of common bile duct stones.

Authors:  Eric S Hungness; Nathaniel J Soper
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Dynamic analysis of commonly used biochemical parameters to predict common bile duct stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  Stéphane Bourgouin; Xavier Truchet; Gatien Lamblin; Jérôme De Roulhac; Jean-Philippe Platel; Paul Balandraud
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Clinical models are inaccurate in predicting bile duct stones in situ for patients with gallbladder.

Authors:  B Topal; S Fieuws; K Tomczyk; R Aerts; W Van Steenbergen; C Verslype; F Penninckx
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-04-04       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.