Laparoscopic choledochotomy for bile duct stones

In the era of laparoscopic surgery, treatment strategies for common bile duct stones remain controversial. Laparoscopic choledochotomy is usually indicated only when transcystic duct exploration is not feasible. However, laparoscopic choledochotomy provides complete access to the ductal system and has a higher clearance rate than the transcystic approach. In addition, primary closure of the choledochotomy with a running suture and absorbable clips facilitates the procedure. Therefore, to avoid postoperative biliary stenosis, all patients with bile duct stones can be indicated for choledochotomy, except for those with nondilated common bile duct. Placement of a C-tube also provides access for the clearance of possible retained stones by endoscopic sphincterotomy as a backup procedure. C-tube placement, in contrast to T-tube insertion, is advantageous in terms of a relatively short hospital stay. In conclusion, laparoscopic choledochotomy with C-tube drainage is recommended as the treatment of choice for patients with common bile duct stones. Received: February 27, 2001 / Accepted: March 19, 2001     

A stratified intraoperative surgical strategy is mandatory during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for common bile duct stones

Background: Open exploration and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) remain the preferred treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS). The recent spread of laparoscopy has worsened the dilemna of choosing between surgical and endoscopic treatment of CBDS. The aim of this study was to critically evaluate the results of our preliminary experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (CBDE) for CBDS. Methods: Ninety-two consecutive patients were prospectively submitted to laparoscopic CBDE. Surgical strategy included an initial transcystic approach or laparoscopic choledochotomy. Failure of stone clearance was managed by conversion to open CBDE or by postoperative ES. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy and papillary balloon dilatation were selectively used. Stone clearance was assessed by choledochoscopy and control cholangiography. Results: The overall laparoscopic stone clearance in this series was 84% (transcystic route 63% and choledochotomy 93%). Conversion to laparotomy was mandatory in 12% of the patients because of incomplete stone clearance and in 5% because of intraoperative complications. Postoperative ES was required in 4% of the patients, giving an overall surgical success rate of 96%. When indicated (small and limited number of stones located below the cysticocholedochal junction, with a dilated and patent cystic duct) the transcystic route had the lower success rate, the higher complication rate, and the shorter operative time and postoperative hospital stay. When indicated (accessible and dilated common bile duct over 7 mm), laparoscopic choledochotomy had the higher success rate, the lower complication rate, the longer operative time, and the longer postoperative hospital stay, which is related to associated external biliary drainage. The hospital mortality included two high-risk patients (2%) and the complications rate was 15%. Conclusions: Laparoscopic CBDE is safe in selected patients. A stratified intraoperative surgical strategy is mandatory in deciding between a transcystic route and choledochotomy with specific indications for each approach. When feasible, laparoscopic choledochotomy is more efficient and safe than the transcystic route, but it is associated with a longer postoperative hospital stay, which is due to external biliary drainage. Received: 7 May 1996/Accepted: 19 November 1996     

Follow-up of 161 unselected consecutive patients treated laparoscopically for common bile duct stones

Background: Aim was to study the incidence of recurrent ductal stones and of biliary strictures at follow-up after laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and common bile duct stones and to update the short-term results. Methods: Ductal stones were proven in 161 patients of 1,975 (8.1%) undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration was the method of choice. If this was unsuccessful, laparoscopic choledochotomy was performed. After treatment, all patients were enrolled in a continued, ongoing follow-up study. Results: Laparoscopic CBD exploration was completed in 157 cases (transcystic 107, choledochotomy 50). Retained stones occurred in eight patients (5%) and major complications (cystic duct leakage, hemoperitoneum) in six (3.8%); mortality occurred in one high-risk patient (0.6%). Follow-up available in 154 patients (two unrelated deaths) for a period of up to 62 months showed the occurrence of recurrent ductal stones in five cases (3.2%) and no signs of bile stasis, suggestive of ductal stricture, on the basis of clinical and laboratory findings. Conclusions: This prospective, ongoing follow-up study demonstrates that laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and common bile duct stones in unselected patients is feasible and safe. Received: 21 May 1996/Accepted: 10 March 1997     

Laparoscopic surgery and the common bile duct

Many biliary tract surgeons have now reached a level of sophistication with laparoscopic cholecystectomy that they are now able to deal with the common bile duct at the same time. Preoperative endoscopic cholangiography can be reserved for cases where choledocholithiasis has a high degree of probability. This has served to decrease the number of negative studies. The surgeon has five choices regarding stones confirmed by operative cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: (1) do nothing, hoping the stones will pass spontaneously or that a postoperative sphincterotomy with stone extraction will be successful; (2) perform a transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (best for stones less than 1 cm and distal to the cystic duct); (3) perform a laparoscopic common bile duct exploration by choledochotomy (best for large stones in patients with common bile ducts greater than 1 cm. It is also the preferred approach with stones proximal to the insertion of the cystic duct.); (4) perform an intraoperative sphincterotomy with stone extraction, either retrograde or antegrade (this approach has some proponents but has not gained popularity among the majority of surgeons); and (5) place a double lumen catheter through the cystic duct with a proximal lumen in the common bile duct and the distal lumen in the duodenum. This can be used for serial postoperative cholangiography to confirm spontaneous stone passage or falsely positive operative cholangiograms. It is useful in situations when laparoscopic common bile duct exploration equipment or surgeon expertise is not available. If stones persist, a guidewire can be introduced through the distal lumen of the catheter for a guidewire-assisted sphincterotomy. Other CBD interventions that have been reported include laparoscopic biliary bypass and resection of choledochal cysts. Malignant lesions should not be approached by a laparoscopic method except in unusual circumstances.     

Common bile duct stones: management strategies in the laparoscopic era

We reviewed our experience with the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones in 70 patients by sequential endoscopic-laparoscopic management and single-stage laparoscopic treatment during the past 7 years. The advantages, disadvantages, and feasibility of the two procedures are discussed to elucidate therapeutic strategies for patients harboring gallbladder stones and associated choledocholithiasis. In 44 patients, sequential endoscopic-laparoscopic management was indicatedd, and was successful in 37 of them but, in seven patients endoscopic stone extraction could not be accomplished. Single-stage laparoscopic treatment was attempted in 26 patients. In practice, laparoscopic transcystic common duct exploration or choledochotomy may not always be feasible if the cystic duct or CBD are not dilated; there is a high risk of intraoperative CBD injury in such circumstances. Laparoscopic management was considered to be especially useful for the treatment of numerous, large or difficult stones, because stone removal could be succesfully performed without any injury to the papilla of Vater. This last issue is of particular importance in patients with dilated CBD, because insufficient opening of the ampulla of Vater made by endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) may lead to stasis and reflux-related complications such as cholangitis and recurrent stones. We conclude that the most rational management of CBD stones should be decided according to the size of the CBD, which depends on the size, number, and location of stones. Patients with dilated CBD are indicated to under-go laparoscopic single-stage treatment and combined endoscopic-laparoscopic treatment may be best for patients with non-dilated CBD. (Received Oct. 15, 1997; accepted Oct. 21, 1997)     

Laparoscopic transcystic duct common bile duct exploration

The modern era of common bile duct (CBD) surgery started with Mirizzi, who introduced intraoperative cholangiography in 1932. Intraoperative choledoscopy had been developed as an adjunctive to intraoperative cholangiography, which helped to detect CBD stones in an additional 10% to 15% of instances that otherwise would have been missed. Findings have shown choledochoscopy to be an important technique for efficient and effective management of CBD stones. Efforts to treat patients with common duct stones in one session and to avoid the potential complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy resulted in several laparoscopic transcystic CBD (LTCBDE) techniques. The techniques of transcystic stone extraction include lavage, trolling with wire baskets or biliary balloon catheters, cystic duct dilation, biliary endoscopy, and stone retrieval with wire baskets under direct vision and antegrade sphincterotomy, lithotripsy, and catheter techniques. The indications for LTCBDE are filling or equivocal defects at cholangiography, stones smaller than 10 mm, fewer than 9 stones, and possible tumor. The contraindications are stones larger than 1 cm, stones proximal to the cystic duct entrance into the CBD, small friable cystic duct, and 10 or more stones. Experience with LTCBDE shows that the approach is applicable in more than 85% of cases, with a success rate of 85% to 95%. It also is shown to be more cost effective than postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Recent developments in LTCBDE have focused mainly on implementation of robotically assisted surgery and new imaging methods such as magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography with three-dimensional virtual cholangioscopy and three-dimensional ultrasound. Further technological advances will facilitate the application of laparoscopic approaches to the common duct, which should become the primary strategy for the great majority of patients.     

Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones

We reviewed our experience with the management of common bile duct (CBD) stones in 100 consecutive patients treated laparoscopicaly during the past 9 years (1990–1998) and evaluated the advantages, disadvantages, and feasibility of the treatment, to elucidate reasonable therapeutic strategies for patients harboring CBD stones. We conclude that the most rational management of CBD stones is that which is decided according to the size of the CBD, which, in turn, depends on the size, number, and location of stones. The cystic duct in patients with a non-dilated CBD is narrow, because the size of the CBD depends on the size and number of stones that have migrated through the narrow cystic duct, and the stones in the non-dilated CBD are therefore usually small in size and number. Patients with a dilated CBD, however, are good candidates to undergo single-stage laparoscopic treatment. In our Department, therefore, even if complete removal of stones has failed in patients with non-dilated CBD, further choledochotomy is not carried out, and a C-tube is placed through the cystic duct for a subsequent postoperative transduodenal approach, because laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration and choledochotomy may not be always feasible in those patients with non-dilated CBD, and spontaneous migration of small stones into the duodenum is frequently noted. In fact, some stones demonstrated on intraoperative cholangiograms were not revealed by postoperative cholangiography. In contrast, retained stones detected postoperatively were successfully removed by postoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), the endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation technique (EPBDT), or postoperative cholangioscopy (POCS) without any injury to the sphinter of Oddi. With this approach, we believe that the causes of stone recurrence can be avoided in the majority of cases. Received for publication on Aug. 21, 1999; accepted on Sept. 2, 1999     

Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones: transcystic approach and choledochotomy

The purpose of this study was to review our experience with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration by the transcystic approach and choledochotomy. We selected the transcystic approach for patients whose CBD stones were less than five in number and smaller than 9 mm in diameter, and whose CBD was less than 15 mm in diameter on cholangiograms. Among 217 patients with CBD stones treated laparoscopically, the transcystic approach was performed successfully in 91 of 104 patients in whom it was attempted (87.5%). The other 126 patients underwent laparoscopic choledochotomy, followed by ductal closure with transcystic drainage in 59, T-tube drainage in 46, primary ductal closure in 19, and choledochoduodenostomy in 1. Choledochotomy was converted to open surgery in only 1 patient. The transcystic approach was associated with shorter hospital stay and less morbidity than choledochotomy. However, choledochotomy also had an acceptably low rate of complications. Bile leaks occurred more frequently in those with primary ductal closure than in those with transcystic drainage or T-tube drainage. Residual stones were found in 2 patients with the transcystic approach and in 10 with choledochotomy. The residual stones were removed through the T-tube tract by choledochoscopy in 7 of these 10 patients. From these results we conclude that laparoscopic management of CBD stones is feasible for almost all patients with CBD stones. It is considered to be safe and effective and has the advantage of being a single-stage procedure. Received: July 7, 2000 / Accepted: October 26, 2000     

Technical considerations and laparoscopic bile duct exploration: transcystic and choledochotomy

Single-stage laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones is now challenging the traditional two-stage endo/laparoscopic approach. Many surgeons are reluctant to adopt this procedure because they believe this operation to be difficult and time-consuming. The aim of this report is to describe the technical details of the procedure and to demonstrate its effectiveness in a large series of unselected, consecutive patients. CBD stones were demonstrated in 301 unselected patients out of 2,894 undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (10.4%) and were treated laparoscopically in 297 (98.6%), by the transcystic route in 185 patients (62.2%) and after choledochotomy in 112 patients (37.8%). Mean operative time was 119.2 minutes. Major complications were bile leakage (5 patients) and hemoperitoneum (4 patients) (3%). Retained CBD stones were observed in 14 patients (4.7%) and mortality in 1 high-risk patient (0.3%). Recurrent ductal stones occurred in 5 cases (1.6%) with dilated bile ducts, all after laparoscopic choledochotomy. Single-stage laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and CBD stones treats 2 problems during the same operation, avoids the additive complications of a second procedure (endoscopic sphincterotomy), and reduces hospital stay and costs. Laparoscopic management of ductal stones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the new "gold standard" for the treatment of gallstones and CBD stones.     

Results of the routine use of a modified endoprosthesis to drain the common bile duct after laparoscopic choledochotomy

Background: One hundred eighty-one patients were submitted to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Methods: A transcystic approach was used in 147 patients, choledochotomy in 14, and both in 20. The indications to perform a choledochotomy included stones larger than 20 mm, stones proximal to the cystic duct entrance, and cases in which the transcystic duct approach proved impossible or unsuccessful. Results: The common bile duct was drained by a T-tube in four patients, by laparoscopic sphincterotomy in one, by laparoscopic choledochoduodenostomy in one, and by a 10 Fr endoprosthesis in 28. The stent placement was technically feasible in all patients but one. The biliary drainage was adequate. Mean hospital stay was 2.1 days. Complication was limited to one umbilical infection and one self-limited biliary leak. Conclusions: The procedure proved to be technically simple, safe, and efficient, and resulted in a low morbidity rate and short hospital stay. Received: 29 March 1996/Accepted: 12 June 1996     

腹腔镜下经胆囊管取石及胆囊管内置管(C管)在胆道外科中的应用

目的:对比研究腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石术与腹腔镜下经胆囊管取石术,胆囊管置管(C管)在胆道外科中的应用。方法:回顾调查1995年10月至2004年12月术前经影像学证实为胆总管结石的89例患者。结果:腹腔镜下胆总管切开取石T管引流35例,术后残留结石2例,胆漏4例,放置T管(24±5.6)d。经胆囊管取石C管引流39例,术后残留结石2例,无胆漏,C管放置(8±4.5)d,与T管引流组差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。结论:腹腔镜下经胆囊管取石是值得推荐的方法。经胆囊管路径,不仅可用胆总管取石后的引流,且可在胆道外科诸方面发挥作用。     

腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管钬激光碎石术治疗胆总管结石

目的探讨腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管钬激光碎石术治疗胆总管下段嵌顿结石的价值及安全性。方法选取温州医科大学附属第二医院2014年7月1日至2016年6月30日收治的25例胆囊结石合并胆总管下段嵌顿结石的患者,施行经胆囊管钬激光碎石术治疗。钬激光输出功率1.0~2.0 J,脉冲频率5~10 Hz,在直视下接触结石,将结石击碎后通过取石网篮套取出结石。结果 25例行经胆囊管钬激光碎石术治疗后胆总管下段嵌顿结石均能取石成功,结石1次取净,圈套器结扎胆囊管根部,未行T管引流。手术时间(139.30±30.10)min;术中出血量(83.60±40.10)mL,术后住院时间(4.20±0.65)d。随访6~24个月,无胆道狭窄,无胆漏等发生,结石复发率4%(1/25)。结论对于胆囊管4 mm、继发性胆总管结石患者来说,腹腔镜联合胆道镜经胆囊管钬激光碎石术是一种有效、安全的治疗方法。     

Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones: Study of 13 cases

In recent years, laparoscopic surgery for common bile duct (CBD) stones has been gaining wider acceptance. We report our experience with the laparoscopic management of CBD stones in 16 patients (9 males and 7 females; mean age, 62 years; range, 27–81 years). We considered two options for the laparoscopic procedures: (1) transcystic CBD exploration for those patients with fewer than 3 CBD stones, 5 mm or less in diameter, in whom the diameter of the cystic duct exceeded that of the CBD stones and (2) choledochotomy with T-tube drainage for other patients, unless a preoperative percutaneous transhepatic cholangio-drainage (PTCD) tube had been inserted. We successfully removed CBD stones by laparoscopic management in 13 of the 16 patients. The procedures employed were laparoscopic choledocholithotomy in 10 patients and laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration and stone extraction in 3 patients. We converted to open choledochotomy in 3 patients, because of severe inflammation and dense adhesions due to acute cholecystitis in 2 patients and because of wide adhesions due to previous surgery in 1. We conclude that laparoscopic procedure is a safe and effective method for the removal of CBD stones.     

Current management of common bile duct stones in northern Italy

In order to obtain a complete picture of the current management of cholecystocholedocal lithiasis in northern Italy we've conducted the present survey. In the years 1992–1993, among 7,861 cholecystectomies, 665 patients with gallbladder and common bile duct stones were treated in 49 surgical departments. Some 271 (43%) were treated by traditional methods: open surgery or endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparotomic cholecystectomy; 313 patients (49%) were treated by endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy and only 38 (6%) were treated by one-stage laparoscopy, either by a transcystic approach (27) or by laparoscopic choledochotomy (11). Morbidity and mortality were not significantly different in the different groups. We conclude that open surgery and sequential minimal invasive treatment are the standard approaches to cholecystocholedochal lithiasis in this first stage of the laparoscopic era. The laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones is at present confined to surgical departments specially devoted to laparoscopic surgery.     

Transcystic biliary decompression after direct laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct

Background: A purpose-designed transcystic common bile duct (CBD) decompression cannula is described for use as an alternative to T-tube insertion following laparoscopic direct CBD exploration. This permits safe primary closure of the choledochotomy. Methods: Following direct supraduodenal laparoscopic clearance of large common bile duct stones, the biliary decompression cannula is inserted percutaneously inside its peel-away sheet over a guide-wire into the CBD via the cystic duct. When in place, the cannula is secured to the cystic duct by two catgut extracorporeal Roeder knots and the choledochotomy is then closed. The terminal multiperforated S-shaped segment of the Cuschieri biliary decompression cannula prevents postoperative dislodgement. Results: Transcystic decompression of the extrahepatic biliary tract using the Cuschieri cannula has been used in 12 patients who underwent laparoscopic supraduodenal CBD exploration for large or occluding stones. There was no instance of postoperative dislodgement of the cannula and all patients had effective drainage of the common bile duct (average 300 ml bile per 24 h). The procedure was uncomplicated in all but one patient who developed self-limiting leakage from the CBD suture line in the early postoperative period. The median hospital stay after surgery was 4 days, with a range of 3 to 10 days. The cystic duct decompression cannula was capped and sealed under an occlusive dressing at the time of discharge. Removal of the cannula was carried out without any complications as a day case 11–16 days after surgery. Conclusions: Transcystic biliary decompression is safe and effective. The experience with is use indicates that compared to T-tube drainage, transcystic decompression may accelerate recovery and reduce the hospital stay in patients following laparoscopic direct exploration of the CBD. Its insertion is less technically demanding than placing a T-tube through the choledochotomy. Transcystic decompression with complete primary closure of the CBD realizes the full benefits of the single-stage management of common bile duct calculi and permits confirmation of complete stone clearance after surgery.     

Single-stage laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and common bile duct stones in 120 unselected,consecutive patients

Feasibility, success rate, safety, and shortterm results of single-stage, laparoscopic, transcystic—whenever possible—or choledochotomic treatment of gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones were evaluated in 120 unselected patients.Of 1095 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 120 had ductal stones; among those patients, stones were suspected or proven in 72, 27 of whom were referred after failed endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) performed elsewhere; unsuspected CBD stones were discovered in 48.The procedure was successful in 116 patients. Four patients required conversion to open surgery. The transcystic access was feasible in 77 patients; a choledochotomy was required in 39. Incidence of retained CBD stones was 4.3%. Minor complications, major complications, and mortality were observed in 6.8%, 1.7%, and 0.8% of patients, respectively.Single-stage laparoscopic treatment of gallstones and CBD stones in unselected patients is safe and feasible in the majority of cases, with success rates and short-term results that are not inferior to reported results of ERCP/ES and cholecystectomy.Presented at the annual meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), Orlando, FL, USA, 11–14 March 1995     

Laparoendoscopic approach to treatment of common bile duct stones

Whereas laparoscopic cholecystectomy represents the gold standard treatment for gallstones, there is no universal consensus on the optimal treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones. The options available are various: preoperative or postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and sphincterotomy, laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration, laparoscopic choledochotomy, and traditional open choledochotomy. A few reports describe intraoperative endoscopic clearance of the CBD. The choice of one of these methods depends on the timing of the detection of CBD stones with regard to the cholecystectomy, the expertise of the surgeon, the technology available, and the wishes of the patient. In the surgical department of the "Ospedale Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza," a large referral medical center in Italy, we perform an intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy in the presence of findings suspicious for CBD stones in the course of a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The procedure is readily available thanks to the nearby presence of a skilled endoscopist and is greatly aided by the insertion of a transcystic guidewire, which makes the papilla easily identifiable by the endoscope for the spincterotomy. We have used the technique successfully in 43 of 45 patients over a 7-year period in an overall caseload of 1775 laparoscopic cholecystectomies, with no complications, minimal added operative time, and no added postoperative hospital stay. The technique allows us to completely and definitively manage CBD stones detected intraoperatively at the time of the performance of the laparoscopic cholecystectomy with no added discomfort to the patient.     

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration is gaining favor in the treatment of patients with gallstones and CBD stones. Our aim is to report our results with this procedure, focusing on the technical aspects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients with proven CBD stones undergo laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration, preferably, or a choledochotomy if the former is not feasible. According to CBD stone load and diameter, a biliary drainage tube is positioned for postoperative biliary decompression. RESULTS: Among 284 patients who underwent laparoscopic CBD exploration, 4 (1.4%) were converted to open surgery. Transcystic CBD exploration was feasible in 163 cases (58.2%), but a choledochotomy was required in 117 (41.8%). Biliary drains were positioned in 204 patients (72.8%). Minor complications included hyperamylasemia (11; 3.9%) and minor subhepatic bile collection (7; 2.5%). Major complications were bile leakage (5; 1.8%), hemoperitoneum from cystic artery bleeding (2; 0.7%), subhepatic abscess (2; 0.7%), acute pancreatitis (1; 0.3%), and jejunal perforation (1; 0.3%). Retained CBD stones in 15 patients (5.3%) were removed through the biliary drainage sinus tract (8) or after endoscopy and sphincterotomy (6). In one patient, a small stone passed spontaneously (overall success rate 94.6%). Death from a cardiovascular complication was observed in one elderly high-risk patient (0.3%). Recurrent ductal stones in 5 patients (1.8%) were treated with ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy. One patient with re-recurrent ductal stones underwent hepaticojejunostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic CBD exploration during LC in unselected patients solves two problems during the same anesthesia with high success rates (94.6%), low minor (6.4%) and major (3.8%) morbidity rates, and a low mortality rate (0.3%). Standardization of the technique is mandatory to achieve high success rates.     

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration

OBJECTIVE: To describe the technique of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with high clearance rates, low morbidity, and mortality rates. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: LCBDE is well accepted by patients because treatment is obtained during the same anesthesia. If one stage therapy for gallstones and common bile duct stones provides success rates equivalent to those of the sequential approach, with lower costs, this should be considered the standard of care. METHODS: From September 1991 to March 2007, 5201 laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed at S?o José Avaí Hospital. LCBDE was carried out in 481 patients (9.25%). RESULTS: Of 481 LCBDE, 225 (46.78%) were managed using a transcystic approach and 183 (38.05%) with choledochotomy (114 with transcystic choledochotomy and 69 with longitudinal opening of the common bile duct). Successful laparoscopic stone clearance was achieved in 468 (97.3%). An elective postsurgical endoscopic sphincterotomy were done on the 13 (2.70%) patients not cleared laparoscopically. Seven patients had unexpected retained stones. CONCLUSIONS: LCBDE during laparoscopic cholecystectomy solves 2 problems during the same anesthesia with high success rates and may be employed successfully.     

Laparoscopic choledochoscopy with a small-caliber endoscope

Incidental choledocholithiasis has been reported in 4–5% of cases during routine cholangiography. Many surgeons have resisted laparoscopic common bile duct exploration as a time-consuming and technically frustrating procedure, preferring to send the patient for postoperative ERCP. The purpose of this study was to objectively assess the safety, efficacy, and facility of transcystic duct choledochoscopy using a small-caliber choledochoscope with facilitated insertion technique.Twenty-five consecutive patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) were studied prospectively. Choledochoscopy was carried out with a simplified introducer system using a 6.9-French choledochoscope. An arbitrary limit of 10 min was established for gaining access to the common bile duct (CBD). Incidental CBD stones were found in two of the 25 procedures (8%) and were cleared laparoscopically. The CBD was successfully entered in 21 of 25 attempts (84%). The average time for the entire procedure was 8.7 min. There were no procedure-related complications.Clinical application of this procedure was reviewed in a personal series of 742 LCs. Transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCDE) was successful in clearing stones from the CBD 75% of the time and the addition of laparoscopic choledochotomy brought the success of LCDE to 81%. Excluding patients where transcystic LCDE was not attempted, the overall success rate was 91%.Presented at the annual meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), Nashville, TN 18–19 April 1994