Transductal versus transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: an institutional review of over four hundred cases
Top Cited Papers
- 1 January 2021
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Surgical Endoscopy
- Vol. 35 (1), 437-448
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07522-7
Abstract
Background Many studies have failed to demonstrate significant differences between single- and two-staged approaches for the management of choledocholithiasis with concomitant gallstones in terms of post-operative morbidity. However, none of these studies paid specific attention to the differences between the methods of accessing the bile duct during laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to report outcomes of transcystic versus transductal laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) from our experience of over four hundred cases. Methods Retrospective review of 416 consecutive patients who underwent LCBDE at a single-centre between 1998 and 2018 was performed. Data collected included pre-operative demographic information, medical co-morbidity, pre-operative investigations, intra-operative findings (including negative choledochoscopy rates, use of holmium laser lithotripsy and operative time) and post-operative outcomes. Results Transductal LCBDE via choledochotomy was achieved in 242 patients (58.2%), whereas 174 patients (41.8%) underwent transcystic LCBDE. Stone clearance rates, conversion to open surgery and mortality were similar between the two groups. Overall morbidity as well as minor and major post-operative complications were significantly higher in the transductal group. The main surgery-related complications were bile leak (5.8% vs 1.1%, p = 0.0181) and pancreatitis (7.4% vs 0.6%, p = 0.0005). Median length of post-operative stay was also significantly greater in the transductal group. Conclusion This study represents the largest single study to date comparing outcomes from transcystic and transductal LCBDE. Where possibly, the transcystic route should be used for LCBDE and this approach can be augmented with various techniques to increase successful stone clearance and reduce the need for choledochotomy.Keywords
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- Meta-analysis of one- vs. two-stage laparoscopic/endoscopic management of common bile duct stonesHPB, 2012
- Two-stagevssingle-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stonesWorld Journal of Gastroenterology, 2012
- Managing concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era: A systematic reviewAsian Journal of Endoscopic Surgery, 2011
- Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: A definition and grading of severity by the International Study Group of Liver SurgerySurgery, 2011
- A Randomized, Clinical Trial to Compare Endoscopic Sphincterotomy and Subsequent Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy with Primary Laparoscopic Bile Duct Exploration During Cholecystectomy in Higher Risk Patients with CholedocholithiasisJournal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques, 2009
- Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomised control trialsSurgical Endoscopy, 2007
- Thirteen years’ experience with laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration for stonesSurgical Endoscopy, 2006
- Postoperative ERCP Versus Laparoscopic Choledochotomy for Clearance of Selected Bile Duct CalculiAnnals of Surgery, 2005
- Epidemiology and natural history of common bile duct stones and prediction of diseaseGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2002
- Epidemiology and natural history of common bile duct stones and prediction of diseaseGastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2002