不同手术方案在复杂胆总管结石患者中的效果研究*

目的探讨内窥镜括约肌切开术(EST)或内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)和腹腔镜胆总管探查术(LCBDE)联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床治疗效果。方法选取2013年6月-2015年6月该院收治的复杂胆总管结石患者80例为研究对象,根据患者采取的手术方案,将患者分为EST+LC组(38例)和LCBDE+LC+ERCP组(42例)。比较两组患者的一般临床资料、治疗效果、术后并发症发生率及肝功能相关指标情况。结果 LCBDE+LC+ERCP组结石最大直径、胆总管直径均大于EST+LC组,其结石数量明显多于EST+LC组,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。与EST+LC组相比,ERCP+LC+LCBDE组单次手术成功率较高,手术时间短,但其手术费用亦较高,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05);取石成功率、中转开腹率及住院时间在两组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。ERCP+LC+LCBDE组术后并发症发生率为21.43%(9/42),EST+LC组术后并发症发生率为26.32%(10/38),两组间差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。两组患者术后1 d的血清直接胆红素、丙氨酸转氨酶及天冬氨酸转氨酶均轻度升高,术后3 d两组患者各指标均恢复正常水平。结论 LCBDE+LC+ERCP以及EST+LC两种手术方案均是治疗复杂胆总管结石的有效方法,其中LCBDE+LC+ERCP手术成功率高,手术时间较短,对较大的结石更有优势。     

腹腔镜胆总管探查取石与内镜ERCP/EST联合LC治疗胆囊疾病合并胆总管结石的临床对比研究

【目的】评价腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术(LCBDE)与内镜逆行胆管造影、括约肌切开取石术(ER CP/EST)联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)治疗胆囊疾病合并胆总管结石的临床效果,探讨胆石症的微创外科治疗策略。【方法】回顾性分析152例胆囊疾病合并胆总管结石病人分别采用LC LCBDE术(68例)、内镜EST联合LC术(84例)治疗的临床资料, 进行胆总管内径、结石大小、手术时间、手术费用、并发症发生率、术后住院日等方面的统计学对比分析。【结果】两种术式的术后住院日差异无显著性(P>0. 05),手术时间、手术费用、并发症发生率等方面比较差异有显著性(P<0. 01 ), 且两者的胆总管内径、结石大小相比较有差别。【结论】胆总管直径小于1. 0cm,尤其胆总管下端结石嵌顿时宜采用内镜、腹腔镜联合手术治疗;胆总管直径大于1. 0cm或多发结石,尤其并存二级支肝管结石者(无胆管狭窄),腹腔镜下一期手术LC LCBDE是治疗胆囊疾病合并胆总管结石的最佳选择。     

LC+LCBDE和ERCP/EST+LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石疗效的Meta分析

目的系统评价腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)联合胆总管探查取石与内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)/内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开取石术(EST)联合LC治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的有效性及安全性。方法在Pub Med、EMbase、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网、万方等数据库中检索2010年1月至2018年12月发表的比较LC+LCBDE和ERCP/EST+LC疗效的临床随机对照试验(RCT),按照纳入排除标准进行文献筛选和质量评估后确定纳入文献,阅读文献全文提取相关研究资料,采用Rev Man5. 3软件进行数据分析。结果最终纳入10篇文献,包括1 502例病例,其中LC+LCBDE组756例,ERCP/EST+LC组746例。Meta分析结果示:LC+LCBDE组和ERCP/EST+LC组总并发症率无统计学差异(P> 0. 05),在并发症类型上,LC+LCBDE组术后胰腺炎、胆管炎、出血发生较多,LC+LCBDE组胆漏发生较多。两种术式在结石清除率、中转开腹率、手术时间、住院时间等方面均无统计学差异(P均> 0. 05)。结论 LC+LCBDE与ERCP/EST+LC两种微创术式具有相似的有效性及安全性,两者有各自发生较多的相关并发症,在手术时间及住院时间上均未呈现明显差异,LC+LCBDE组在住院费用上稍具优越性。以上结论尚需进行更多前瞻性RCT进行验证及更新。     

腹腔镜胆道手术用于胆总管结石治疗的临床研究

目的比较腹腔镜胆囊切除+胆总管切开探查取石术和传统开腹胆囊切除+胆总管切开探查取石术的临床效果。方法 75例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者分两组,腹腔镜组31例行腹腔镜胆囊切除+胆总管切开取石术;44例传统开腹胆囊切除+胆总管切开取石术。统计手术时间,术后胃肠功能恢复时间,术后住院时间及并发症。结果与开腹组比较,腹腔镜组患者住院时间短[(5.3±1.2)d vs.(7.0±2.5)d],术中出血少[(54±16.7)ml vs.(62±12.3)ml],手术时间短[(58±11.3)min vs.(65±9.67)min],通气时间短[(2.3±0.6)d vs.(2.7±0.4)d]。两组并发症和结石清除率无明显差异。结论腹腔镜胆总管切开取石术完全能达到传统开腹胆道切开取石术的效果,并具有创伤小,痛苦少,恢复快的优点。     

腹腔镜手术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床研究

目的 探讨腹腔镜微创手术在治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石疾病中的价值。方法 回顾性分析了1996年1月～2004年9月在该院确诊为胆囊结石胆总管结石的病人采用腹腔镜手术的治疗情况，并对多种治疗的选择方案、结果作了分析比较。结果 68例患者中大多数在腹腔镜下一期作了胆囊切除、胆总管切开胆道镜下取石T管引流，未发现有明显并发症。少数胆总管无扩张的病例由内镜下作EST后联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术二期完成治疗，极少数上述方案治疗失败的患者由开腹完成治疗。腹腔镜手术一期治疗与内镜、腹腔镜联合二期治疗和开腹手术相比较，病人住院时间短，恢复快，并发症少，手术成功率高，具有明显的优点，而手术时间并无延长。结论 腹腔镜下手术一期取除结石是治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的主要、较好的选择方案。     

内镜逆行胰胆管造影术取石失败后即行腹腔镜胆总管探查术的临床观察

目的对于胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石患者,探讨内镜逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP)治疗肝外胆管结石不成功时如何选择治疗方式及时机。方法 12例胆囊结石合并肝外胆管结石拟分期行腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)+ERCP患者,行常规ERCP治疗失败,立即静吸复合全麻下完成LC+胆管探查取石术(LCBDE)。结果12例患者均顺利完成LC+LCBDE,并取净结石。术后3例出现高淀粉血症,全组无胆漏、肠漏、胆管炎、胰腺炎和胆道出血等并发症发生。结论对于ERCP治疗不成功的患者,急诊行LCBDE是安全、可行的补救措施。     

腹腔镜下经胆囊管的胆总管探查取石术治疗肝外胆道结石

目的探讨腹腔镜下经胆囊管的胆总管探查取石术治疗肝外胆道结石的临床应用效果。方法应用该方法治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石26例，总结其临床资料。结果经胆囊管途径取石成功率为24／26，1例因胆囊管变异，1例导丝插入胆总管未成功，中转为胆总管切开术。术中扩张时无胆管撕裂，术后无腹腔出血、胆漏发生，无围手术期死亡。术后住院时间4-8d.结论对于胆囊结石合并继发性肝外胆管结石的病例，在采用腹腔镜下1次手术的方式治疗时，应首先考虑经胆囊管途径，以争取更小创伤以便更快地恢复。     

胆囊并发胆总管结石患者的微创外科治疗研究

目的探究胆囊并发胆总管结石患者的微创外科治疗。方法选取2013年1月-2018年1月该院收治的92例胆囊并发胆总管结石患者为研究对象,采用随机数字表法将患者分为对照组(n=46)和观察组(n=46)。两组患者中存在胰腺炎的患者先行控制腹膜炎,对照组患者行腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)联合胆总管探查取石术(LCBDE),观察组患者行十二指肠乳头括约肌切开取石术(EST),术后3 d行LC治疗。比较两组患者围术期情况、费用情况和并发症情况。结果两组患者均未出现中转开腹手术情况,观察组患者的手术时间、止痛药使用率、住院时间均低于对照组患者,耗材费用和住院总费用多于对照组患者,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05);两组患者的术中出血量、术后排气时间和手术费用比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。观察组患者各项并发症总发生率为6.51%低于对照组患者的19.53%,差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论胆囊并发胆总管结石患者控制腹膜炎后行EST+LC治疗较LC+LCBDE治疗能够缩短手术时间,减轻术后疼痛,降低并发症发生率,缩短住院时间,但所需费用较高。     

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration to treat choledocholithiasis in situs inversus patients: A technical review

Situs inversus (SI) is a rare congenital condition characterized by a mirror-image transposition of the major visceral organs. Since the 1990s, more than one hundred SI patients have been reported to have successfully undergone laparoscopic cholecystectomy. In these cases, the major problem is to overcome is the left-right condition for right-handed surgeons. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), an alternative to treat patients with bile duct stones, has shown equivalent efficacy and is less likely to cause pancreatitis than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Recent updated meta-analyses revealed that a shorter postoperative hospital stay, fewer procedural interventions, cost-effectiveness, a higher stone clearance rate, and fewer perioperative complications are additional advantages of LCBDE. However, the technique is technically demanding, even for skilled laparoscopic surgeons. Conducting LCBDE in patients with difficult situations, such as SI, is more complex than usual. We herein review published SI patients with choledocholithiasis treated by LCBDE, including our own experience, and this paper focuses on the technical aspects.     

腹腔镜同步和内镜-腹腔镜序贯手术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的疗效观察

目的对比分析腹腔镜胆囊切除术联合腹腔镜胆总管探查(LC-LCBDE同步)和内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开取石联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术(EST-LC序贯)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的疗效,旨在为该疾病的临床治疗选择合理的方式。方法回顾性分析采用LC-LCBDE同步治疗及40例采用EST-LC序贯治疗的胆囊结石合并胆总管结石病例资料(共80例)。结果两组均无死亡病例,LC-LCBDE组37例完成手术,3例中转开腹,EST-LC组36例完成序贯治疗手术,4例因内镜下插管失败改行LC-LCBDE。两组手术成功率,手术时间,一次性结石清除率,总并发症相比,差异无统计学意义(P0.05),住院时间和住院费用方面比较,LC-LCBDE组优于EST-LC组,差异有统计学意义[(10.20±1.23)d比(13.50±2.41)d,t=3.006,P=0.004;(1.93±0.21)万元比(2.67±0.34)万元,t=3.132,P=0.003]。结论在胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的微创治疗中,LC-LCBDE同步治疗在住院时间及住院费用方面优于EST-LC序贯治疗,在技术条件允许下应列为首选。在胆总管相对较细(0.8 cm),结石位置较低直径较小,可以选择EST-LC序贯治疗。     

胆道支架和鼻胆管引流在腹腔镜胆总管探查术后一期缝合中的应用

目的 对比胆道支架和鼻胆管引流在腹腔镜胆总管探查术（LCBDE）后一期缝合中的临床疗效。方法 回顾性分析2016年8月－2021年1月在该院行内镜逆行胰胆管造影术（ERCP）取石失败的74例患者的临床资料，分为支架引流组（n = 38）和鼻胆管引流组（n = 36）。支架引流组ERCP取石失败后放置胆道支架引流，鼻胆管引流组ERCP取石失败后放置鼻胆管引流，两组患者均行腹腔镜胆总管切开取石一期缝合术。比较两组患者手术时间、术后住院时间、术后并发症发生率、术后肠道功能恢复时间、术后胆总管结石复发率和住院时间。结果 两组患者胆管缝合方式、手术时间、术中出血量、术后并发症总发生率和住院费用比较，差异均无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。鼻胆管引流组术后胆瘘发生率明显低于支架引流组，住院时间明显短于支架引流组，术后肠道功能恢复时间明显长于支架引流组，术后总补液量多于支架引流组，差异均有统计学意义（P < 0.05）。结论 ERCP取石失败后放置鼻胆管引流，可降低LCBDE术后一期缝合的胆瘘发生率，缩短住院时间，但放置胆道支架引流患者肠道功能恢复更快，补液量更少。因此，在临床操作中，应根据患者具体情况，选择相应的个体化引流方式。     

腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石

目的:探讨腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床疗效.方法:回顾分析2009年1月-2010年12月腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)联合十二指肠镜治疗35例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者的临床资料.所有患者均采取经十二指肠镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP),内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术(EST),取出胆总管结石,放置胆道塑料支架引流(ERBD).ERCP后3d内行LC,术后4d出院.出院后1～2周内再次行十二指肠镜取出胆道支架并行ERCP了解胆管有无残余结石.结果:35例患者均1次取净胆总管结石,1例EST术中出血,34例成功行LC,1例中转开腹行胆囊切除术.术后并发急性胰腺炎2例,所有患者均无胆漏、十二指肠穿孔、黄疸等并发症.结论:腹腔镜联合十二指肠镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石具有疗效确切、创伤小、恢复快等优点.     

Outcomes of laparoscopic bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis with small common bile duct

BACKGROUNDLaparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration (LCBDE) is one of the main treatments for choledocholithiasis with CBD diameter of larger than 10 mm. However, for patients with small CBD (CBD diameter ≤ 8 mm), endoscopic sphincterotomy remains the preferred treatment at present, but it also has some drawbacks associated with a series of complications, such as pancreatitis, hemorrhage, cholangitis, and duodenal perforation. To date, few studies have been reported that support the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.AIMTo investigate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.METHODSA total of 257 patients without acute cholangitis who underwent LC + LCBDE for cholecystolithiasis from January 2013 to December 2018 in one institution were reviewed. The clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed. According to whether the diameter of CBD was larger than 8 mm, 257 patients were divided into large CBD group (n = 146) and small CBD group (n = 111). Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed to adjust for clinical differences. The demographics, intraoperative data, short-term outcomes, and long-term follow-up outcomes for the patients were recorded and compared.RESULTSIn total, 257 patients who underwent successful LC + LCBDE were enrolled in the study, 146 had large CBD and 111 had small CBD. The median follow-up period was 39 (14-86) mo. For small CBD patients, the median CBD diameter was 0.6 cm (0.2-2.0 cm), the mean operating time was 107.2 ± 28.3 min, and the postoperative bile leak rate, rate of residual CBD stones (CBDS), CBDS recurrence rate, and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41% (6/111), 3.60% (4/111), 1.80% (2/111), and 0% (0/111), respectively; the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.4 ± 3.6 d. For large CBD patients, the median common bile duct diameter was 1.0 cm (0.3-3.0 cm), the mean operating time was 115.7 ± 32.0 min, and the postoperative bile leak rate, rate of residual CBDS, CBDS recurrence rate, and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41% (9/146), 1.37% (2/146), 6.85% (10/146), and 0% (0/146), respectively; the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.7 ± 2.7 d. After propensity score matching, 184 patients remained, and all preoperative covariates except diameter of CBD stones were balanced. Postoperative bile leak occurred in 11 patients overall (5.98%), and no difference was found between the small CBD group (4.35%, 4/92) and the large CBD group (7.61%, 7/92). The incidence of CBDS recurrence did not differ significantly between the small CBD group (2.17%, 2/92) and the large CBD group (6.52%, 6/92).CONCLUSIONLC + LCBDE is safe and feasible for choledocholithiasis patients with small CBD and did not increase the postoperative bile leak rate compared with chole-docholithiasis patients with large CBD.     

腹腔镜胆总管探查术后胆管一期缝合的临床应用分析

目的 探讨腹腔镜胆总管切开探查术后胆管一期缝合的可行性、疗效及适应证.方法 回顾2007年1月～2011年3月99例因胆囊胆总管结石病行腹腔镜胆管切开取石治疗的临床资料.结果 一期缝合组39例,T管引流组60例,一期缝合组较T管引流组手术时间及术后住院时间短、住院费用少和恢复正常生活快(P＜0.05).一期缝合组手术并发症1例(2.6％),T管引流组手术并发症2例(3.3％),与放置T管有关.两组随访结果差异无显著性.结论 LCBDE一期缝合具高效、创伤小、术后恢复快、并发症少等优点,是当前微创治疗胆囊胆总管结石病的最合适的选择.     

腹腔镜胆囊切除术联合胆总管探查取石术治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果

目的探讨腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)联合腹腔镜胆总管探查取石术(LCBDE)治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的临床效果。方法选择2017年3月至2020年3月收治的47例胆囊结石合并胆总管结石患者为研究对象,将其随机分为对照组(n=23)和观察组(n=24),对照组予以LC联合内窥镜括约肌切开术(EST)治疗,观察组予以LC联合LCBDE治疗,比较两组的治疗效果。结果观察组的手术时间、恢复排气时间、住院时间短于对照组,术中出血量少于对照组(P<0.05)。术后3 d,观察组的GAS、MTL水平明显高于对照组(P<0.05)。两组的结石清除率无显著差异(P>0.05)。术后3 d,观察组的E、Cor、NE水平均低于对照组(P<0.05)。结论LC联合LCBDE治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的结石清除率高,且对胃肠功能影响小,可减轻机体应激反应,安全性高。     

经内镜逆行胰胆管造影与开腹手术治疗胆总管结石及其合并胆囊良性病变的成本-效果分析

目的比较经内镜逆行胰胆管造影与开腹手术治疗单纯胆总管结石及胆总管结石合并胆囊良性病变的成本-效果。方法对2009年1月-2012年12月596例接受ERCP治疗（ERCP组）及173例接受开腹胆总管切开取石术（手术取石组）的单纯胆总管结石患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,比较两组患者的治愈率、术后并发症发生率、住院时间、术前准备时间及住院总费用。对同一时期29例接受ERCP＋腹腔镜胆囊切除（LC）术治疗（ERCP＋LC组）,38例接受单纯腹腔镜治疗（腹腔镜组）及129例接受开腹胆总管切开取石术＋胆囊切除术（手术取石＋切除组）的胆总管结石合并胆囊良性病变患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析,比较指标同上。结果单纯胆总管结石患者中,ERCP组与手术取石组的治愈率及术后并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;但住院总费用[（1.31±0.63）万元、（2.06±0.75）万元]、住院时间[（8.91±4.95）、（12.14±5.15）d]及术前准备时间[（3.77±3.09）、（5.13±3.99）d]比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。胆总管结石合并胆囊良性病变患者中,3组间治愈率及术后并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。ERCP＋LC组与手术取石＋切除组住院总费用[（1.89±0.46）万元、（2.32±0.89）万元]、住院时间[（9.00±3.74）、（12.47±4.50）d]及术前准备时间[（3.24±1.83）、（5.15±2.98）d]比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。ERCP＋LC组与腹腔镜组比较,住院总费用与住院时间差异均无统计学意义（P〉0.05）;但前者术前准备时间明显短于后者,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论对于单纯胆总管结石的治疗,ERCP具有费用少、住院时间及术前准备时间短且与外科手术等效的优点;对于胆总管结石合并胆囊良性疾病的治疗,ERCP＋LC术相比传统外科开腹手术,也具有同样的优势。     

Preliminary experience using laparoscopic transcystic cholangioscopy for treatment of common bile duct stones.

Laparoscopic transcystic cholangioscopy (LTC) in combination with electrohydraulic lithotripsy may be an alternative treatment to ERCP and sphincterotomy in patients with both gallbladder and common bile duct stones undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Preliminary experience using LTC lithotripsy in 13 cases is reported. In 12 cases the stones were pushed out into the duodenum using the tip of the cholangioscope, in 8 of them stone disintegration via LTC lithotripsy also being required. In the remaining case the cholangioscope could not be inserted into the common bile duct via the cystic duct due to complete cystic duct obstruction. The average hospital stay was 9 days (range 6-16) in patients with LTC/lithotripsy, which did not differ significantly from 8.4 days (range, 4-19) (n = 330) in the group undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone. The patients usually resumed normal activity the day after discharge. LTC lithotripsy has the advantages over endoscopic sphincterotomy of a shorter treatment and preservation of a normal functioning sphincter of Oddi. Further technical improvements, especially the development of a cholangioscope for this purpose, are urgently required.     

Combined endoscopic and laparoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones

In a consecutive series of 228 patients reterred to Kalundborg Sygehus, Surgical Department, for treatment of gall bladder disease, 17 patients had common bile duct (CBD) stones. Nine were found pre-operatively and treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC), papillotomy and stone extraction. In two cases, however, the ERC procedure failed and the patients were treated successfully using laparoscopic therapy. Six CBD stones were found during laparoscopic surgery. Four of these patients were treated with laparoscopic stone extraction. In two patients laparoscopic stone extraction was not possible and they were treated post-operatively with ERC and stone extraction. Two CBD stones were discovered after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. One was treated with ERC and stone extraction, the other with open surgery. By combining endoscopic and laparoscopic procedures, it is possible in most cases to avoid open surgery for the treatment of CBD stones.     

Selective endoscopic cholangiography for the detection of common bile duct stones in patients with cholelithiasis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The detection and management of common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy continues to be controversial. Several diagnostic and therapeutic strategies have been suggested. These include intraoperative cholangiography, selective endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, and endoscopic ultrasonography. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of selective ERCP in detecting CBD stones in patients with cholelithiasis before laparoscopic cholecystectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective study, patients with cholelithiasis who presented during a 6-year period were assessed on a selective basis with ERCP for suspected CBD stones before laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ERCP was carried out if the patient had any of the following criteria: a dilated CBD on ultrasound, gallstone pancreatitis, or abnormal liver function tests. Intraoperative cholangiography was not performed in any of the patients. Long-term follow-up was undertaken. RESULTS: The study included 427 patients. On the basis of selective criteria, ERCP was carried out in 41 patients (9.6 %), with confirmed CBD stones in 22 cases (53.7 %). The most useful predictor of CBD stones on ERCP was the presence of a dilated CBD in association with abnormal liver function tests. In this situation, CBD stones were identified in 14 of 17 cases (82 %). Abnormal liver function tests alone had a sensitivity of 50 % (four of eight). All other parameters used in isolation had a lower detection rate. During a median follow-up period of 6 years (range 1-10 years), six of 386 patients (1.6 %) with initially normal imaging and biochemical tests presented again with retained stones. All were successfully managed by ERCP and sphincterotomy. There were no major complications. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative selective ERCP is effective in detecting clinically significant CBD stones. However, there is a high false-negative rate when a single criterion is used to guide therapy. Multivariate analysis of preoperative parameters for risk stratification, in conjunction with other imaging modalities, may make it possible to minimize unnecessary ERCPs.     

Two-stage treatment with preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) compared with single-stage treatment with intraoperative ERCP for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis with possible choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: An ideal treatment for choledocholithiasis in the laparoscopic era has not been established. The objective of this study was to elucidate whether a treatment strategy of performing intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) during laparascopic cholecystectomy (when choledocholithiasis is confirmed by intraoperative cholangiography) is better for patients with suspected common bile duct stones than the current strategy (preoperative ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective randomized study to evaluate which of these two approaches was most benefit- and cost-effective for patients with intermediate risk of choledocholithiasis. Patients underwent either preoperative ERCP followed by a laparoscopic cholecystectomy a few weeks later (the "preoperative ERCP" group) or intraoperative ERCP (the "intraoperative ERCP" group). Intraoperative ERCP was performed using the rendezvous technique. RESULTS: There were 64 patients in the preoperative ERCP group and 59 patients in the intraoperative ERCP group. The demographic and clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar, except that the bilirubin and gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) levels and the number of patients treated on an inpatient basis were higher in the preoperative ERCP group. Success rates were similar (96.6 % in the preoperative ERCP group vs. 90.2 % in the intraoperative ERCP group in the per-protocol study). Total morbidity, post-ERCP morbidity, and post-ERCP acute pancreatitis rates were higher in the preoperative ERCP group, but there were no differences between the two groups in the frequency of residual common bile duct stones, the conversion rate to open cholecystectomy, or surgical morbidity. The length of hospital stay and costs were lower in the intraoperative ERCP group despite the longer surgical times in this group. Univariate analysis did not find any relationship between morbidity and total bilirubin or GGT. Logistic regression analysis confirmed that morbidity was related only to the treatment group and the time spent in the operating room: the relative risk (RR) was 4.37 for morbidity and 1.015 for the time spent in the operating room); the RR for papillotomy was 5.49. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatment approaches were equally effective but the intraoperative ERCP group had less morbidity, a shorter hospital stay, and reduced costs. The lower morbidity in the intraoperative ERCP group resulted from the lower rate of papillotomy and lower rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis and cholecystitis. Total morbidity was principally related to the type of treatment approach used.