Search

Background: This study was designed to investigate whether 3D laparoscopic common bile duct (LCBDE) could improve surgical outcomes in choledocholithiasis patients compared with 2D LCBDE., Method: Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to balance the bias in baseline characteristic between two groups., Results: 213 patients underwent 3D LCBDE and 212 patients receiving 2D LCBDE were enrolled in this study. The operation time and blood loss in 3D group were significantly less than that in 2D group. After propensity score matching, a total of 114 paired cases were selected from the two groups. The operation time and blood loss in 3D group remain significantly lower than in 2D group. In the end, the subgroup analysis based on abdominal adhesion level was performed and it was observed that for patients with adhesion level 1 and level 2, 3D surgery could obviously decrease the operation time and intraoperative blood loss., Conclusions: 3D LCBDE would significantly reduce operation time, blood loss, and conversion rate to laparotomy in choledocholithiasis patients versus 2D LCBDE. For patients with abdominal adhesions level 1 and level 2, 3D LCBDE could provide better surgical outcomes than 2D LCBDE.

Background: A history of abdominal biliary tract surgery has been identified as a relative contraindication for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE), and there are very few reports about laparoscopic procedures in patients with a history of abdominal biliary tract surgery., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes of 227 consecutive patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations at our institution between December 2013 and June 2019. A total of 110 consecutive patients underwent LCBDE, and 117 consecutive patients underwent open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE). Patient demographics and perioperative variables were compared between the two groups., Results: The LCBDE group performed significantly better than the OCBDE group with respect to estimated blood loss [30 (5-700) vs. 50 (10-1800) ml; p = 0.041], remnant common bile duct (CBD) stones (17 vs. 28%; p = 0.050), postoperative hospital stay [7 (3-78) vs. 8.5 (4.5-74) days; p = 0.041], and time to oral intake [2.5 (1-7) vs. 3 (2-24) days; p = 0.015]. There were no significant differences in the operation time [170 (60-480) vs. 180 (41-330) minutes; p = 0.067]. A total of 19 patients (17%) in the LCBDE group were converted to open surgery. According to Clavien's classification of complications, the LCBDE group had significantly fewer postoperative complications than the OCBDE group (40 vs. 57; p = 0.045). There was no mortality in either group. Multiple previous operations (≥ 2 times), a history of open surgery, and previous biliary tract surgery (including bile duct or gallbladder + bile duct other than cholecystectomy alone) were risk factors for postoperative adhesion (p = 0.000, p = 0.000, and p = 0.000, respectively)., Conclusion: LCBDE is ultimately the least invasive, safest, and the most effective treatment option for patients with previous abdominal biliary tract operations and is especially suitable for those with a history of cholecystectomy, few previous operations (< 2 times), or a history of laparoscopic surgery.

Introduction: The best approach for choledocholithiasis remains a matter of debate. Choledocholithiasis is usually treated with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE). Data pertaining to the clinical outcomes of these approaches in the management of patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiasis in China are limited. An analysis of the economic burden associated with these treatments is lacking. The Chinese REgistry Study on the Treatment of Cholecysto-Choledocholithiasis (CREST Choles) was designed to address these issues in a real-world setting., Methods and Analysis: CREST Choles was an ambispective, multicenter, observational, open-cohort study. A total of 2700 patients undergoing one of the three treatments (EST+laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), LCBDE+LC and LTCBDE+LC) during the period from 1 January 2013 to 1 December 2018 at participating centres were enrolled in the study. Patients with gallstones and confirmed common bile duct stones were included. Data pertaining to demographics, disease history, procedural details, imaging features and follow-up were collected. Follow-up was conducted at least 6 months after enrolment in the study and annual follow-up will be conducted until December 2020. The primary outcome is the rate of adverse outcomes within 3 years postoperatively. Economic analysis (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) would be performed to compare expense across treatments., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval was obtained at all participating centres. The registry presented is the first attempt to comprehensively evaluate the cost of treatment for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis in China. Findings are expected to be available in 2020 and will facilitate clinical decision making in such cases., Trial Registration Number: NCT02554097., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely promoted in recent years as a safe and effective treatment for choledocholithiasis. However, there are no standard guidelines for the treatment of patients who have concomitant hepatolithiasis of the left liver and abdominal adhesions. The aim of the current research was to compare the outcomes of open versus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with left hepatectomy (OCBDH vs. LCBDH) in patients with choledocholithiasis concomitant with left-sided hepatolithiasis, and to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic surgery for choledocholithiasis in patients with abdominal adhesions., Methods: Between October 2012 and October 2015, a total of 321 consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis underwent surgical treatment. LCBDE was performed in 107 patients, and open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) was performed in 111 patients. Further, 31 patients and 72 patients underwent LCBDH and OCBDH, respectively. A total of 133 patients who underwent LCBDE or OCBDE had abdominal adhesions, which were classified as mild, moderate, or severe according to an abdominal adhesion scoring system, which was validated in the LCBDE group and OCBDE group. The perioperative results were reviewed and analyzed retrospectively., Results: In the mild adhesion group, blood loss, postoperative recovery in the LCBDE group was lesser than those in the OCBDE group. In the moderate adhesion group, the postoperative recovery was significantly shorter in the LCBDE group than in the OCBDE group. In the severe adhesion group, the operation time and blood loss in the LCBDE group were higher than those in the OCBDE group. The postoperative recovery was significantly better in the LCBDH group than in the OCBDH group., Conclusion: LCBDH can obviously improve recovery and shorten the hospitalization period. Further, LCBDE is safe and feasible for patients of choledocholithiasis with mild and moderate abdominal adhesions.