Search

Background: When compared to open surgery, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is known to cause less discomfort and a faster recovery. This study examines the effect of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) strategy on LCBDE outcomes., Methods: In March 2021 to May 2024, 400 patients with LCBDE participated in randomized research. The six patient groups were: Multimodal Pain Management (n = 50), Standard Pain Management (n = 50), ERAS (n = 50), Preoperative Assessment (n = 100), Standard Preoperative Assessment (n = 100), and Standard Care (n = 50). The patient's satisfaction, long-term recovery, pain, anxiety, and complication rates were among the outcomes that were measured., Results: After the intervention, the mean anxiety level of the ERAS group was significantly lower (P < 0.05), and their rates of complications were also decreased. Reduced postoperative pain scores, which were 5 on day 1 and decreased to 3 by day 3, were the consequence of the multimodal pain management strategy inside ERAS. A 90% satisfaction rating and an average recovery period of five days were reported by the ERAS group. Long-term results in ERAS showed that the average time to return to work was only 25 days, and there was a decreased incidence of chronic pain., Conclusion: The ERAS protocol enhances the short- and long-term course of recovery for patients with LCBDE, leading to increased satisfaction and better clinical outcomes. These results suggest that the ERAS method should be used as the gold standard for postoperative care for patients with LCBDE., Competing Interests: Declarations Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Consent to participate Consent to participate was taken from all the patients involved in this study. Medical ethics with ethics approval It’s a randomized study conducted and approved by the ethics committee of Anqing First People’s Hospital of Anhui Medical University, China (AOYY–YXLL–KJXM–21)., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Advancements in laparoscopic techniques led to the adoption of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) as an alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for management of choledocholithiasis (CD). The goal of this study was to describe the initial experience at a safety net hospital with acute care surgeons performing LCBDE for suspected CD. We hypothesized LCBDE would reduce length of stay and hospital costs compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and ERCP performed in the same hospital admission., Methods: This was a retrospective case-control study from 2019 to 2023 comparing LCBDE to LC/ERCP among patients diagnosed with CD. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables and Chi-square tests for categorical variables. Data reported as median [interquartile range] or research subjects with condition (percentage)., Results: A total of 110 LCBDE were performed, while 121 subjects underwent LC and ERCP. Patients in the LCBDE group were more likely to be female with a total of 87 female subjects (77.6%) compared to 76 male subjects (62.8%) (95% CI 1.14-3.74). Initial WBC was lower in the LCBDE group at 8.4 [6.9-11.8] compared to the LC/ERCP group at 10.9 [7.9-13.5] (p = 0.0013). Remaining demographics and lab values were similar between the two groups. Patients who underwent LCBDE had a significantly shorter length of stay at 2 days [1-3] compared to those in the LC/ERCP group at 4 days [3-6] (p < 0.001). Hospital charges for the LCBDE group were $46,685 [$38,687-$56,703] compared to $60,537 [$47,527-$71,739] for the LC/ERCP group (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: LCBDE is associated with significantly lower hospital costs and shorter length of stay with similar post-operative complication and 30-day readmission rates. Our results show that LCBDE is safe and should be considered as a first-line approach in the management of CD., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) utility in management of choledocholithiasis may decrease length of stay and patient cost, but postoperative management remains widely debated. We examined periprocedural LFTs for patients undergoing LCBDE and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) speculating for trend existence after successful LCBDE. We hypothesized that postoperative LCBDE LFTs would not downtrend even after successful ductal clearance. We identified 99 patients under 18 who underwent ERCP or LCBDE with at least one pre- and post-procedural LFT. Periprocedural LFTs between groups were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. The 22 ERCP patients demonstrated a significant downtrend across Tbili ( P < .001), AST ( P = .001), ALT ( P = .002), and ALP ( P < .001). The 27 LCBDE patients demonstrated a significant downtrend in Tbili ( P = .002) only, while AST ( P > .05), ALT ( P > .05), and ALP ( P > .05) were nonsignificant. Lack of consistent downtrend in the LCBDE group raises doubt regarding the utility of postoperative LFTs for post-procedural management., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Backgrounds: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been shown to be effective in managing choledocholithiasis whilst avoiding ERCP-related complications. However, patient and technical factors effects outcome. This study aimed to explore the matters effecting the failure of LCBDE., Methods: All patients who underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) between 2007 and 2021 were identified using a prospective database. Data were collected for patients who underwent LCBDE including demographics, pre-operative investigations, intra-operative findings, technique of bile duct clearance and clearance rates, and post-operative outcomes. Predictors of failed LCBDE were identified., Results: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed in 3648 patients. Of these, 374 underwent LCBDE for suspected choledocholithiasis. Choledochoscopy was most frequently used (58.8%) with a success rate of 84.1%. Small cystic duct diameter (4.7 vs. 3.4 mm, P = 0.002), stone size >6 mm (P = 0.02), stone: cystic duct ratio >1 (P = 0.04), and >3 stones was associated with failed LCBDE by univariate analysis. Small cystic duct diameter (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.26-0.77, P = 0.004) and stone size >6 mm (OR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.06-0.92), P = 0.04) correlated with failure by multivariate analysis. Failed LCBDE was associated with increased length of stay (6.6 days vs. 3.1 days, P = 0.001), however the rate of serious complications or mortality was unaffected., Conclusion: LCBDE is safe and effective in managing choledocholithiasis. Factors such as cystic duct diameter, size and number of CBD stones, and stone: cystic duct ratio are associated with increased likelihood of inadequate clearance. The presence of these factors can help clinicians in decision making during LCBDE to improve chance of success., (© 2023 The Authors. ANZ Journal of Surgery published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.)

Background: Treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS) includes laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with either laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or perioperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The main objective of this study was to identify predictive factors for the failure of upfront and exclusive surgical treatment by LCBDE., Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective study on patients with CBDS and operated for LC between 2007 and 2019. The use of intra- or postoperative endoscopy for CBD clearance within 6 months after surgery was considered as failure of LCBDE. Predictors for the failure of LCBDE were investigated and outcomes were compared., Results: Among 222 operated patients, LCBDE was successfully performed in 173 patients (78%) and 49 (22%) required ERCP with sphincterotomy (intraoperative (n=29) or postoperative (n=20)). Independent risk factors for surgical failure were male sex (OR: 2.525 (1.111-5.738); p=0.027), anesthesia induction time ≥ 4 p.m. (OR: 4.858 (1.731-13.631); p=0.003), pediculitis (OR: 4.147 (1.177-14.606); p=0.027), and thin CDB < 4mm (OR: 11.951 (3.562-40.097), p< 0.0001). Age, ASA score, cystic anatomy, presence of cholecystitis, and the surgeon's experience were not identified as predictors for surgical failure. A general anesthesia number >1 (6% vs. 33%; p < 0.0001), length of initial stay (6 [1-42] vs. 8 [2-27], p=0.012), total length of hospitalization (6 [1-45] vs. 9 [2-27]; p=0.010), and the rate of emergency readmissions (3.5% vs. 12.2%; p=0.027) were significantly higher in the LCBDE failure group., Conclusions: Upfront LCBDE for CBDS was associated with improved outcomes compared to intra-/postoperative ERCP recourse. Male sex, pediculitis, thin CBD, and surgery later than 4 p.m were associated with LCBDE failure and the need for endoscopic treatment., Registration Number and Agency: The present retrospective study was approved by our local ethics committee and was declared on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04467710)., (© 2023. The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract.)

Background: For patients with choledocholithiasis, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is preferred over open surgery. Whether primary closure of the common bile duct (CBD) should be performed upon completion of choledochotomy remains unclear, and the corresponding indications for primary closure of the common bile duct have yet to be fully identified. This study was performed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of primary closure of CBD among elderly patients (≥ 70 years) after LCBDE., Methods: Patients with choledocholithiasis who had undergone LCBDE with primary closure of the CBD between July 2014 and December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Included patients were assigned into two groups (Group A: ≥70 years and Group B: <70 years) according to age. Group A was compared with Group B in terms of preoperative characteristics, intraoperative results and postoperative outcomes., Results: The mean operative time for Group A was 176.59 min (± 68.950), while the mean operative time for Group B was 167.64 min (± 69.635) (P = 0.324). The mean hospital stay after surgery for Group A was 8.43 days (± 4.440), while that for Group B was 8.30 days (± 5.203) (P = 0.849). Three patients in Group A experienced bile leakage, while bile leakage occurred in 10 patients in Group B (3.8% vs. 4.5%, P = 0.781). Group A was not significantly different from Group B in terms of postoperative complications and 30-day mortality except pneumonia (P = 0.016), acute cardiovascular event (P = 0.005) and ICU observation (P = 0.037). After a median follow-up time of 60 months, 2 patients in Group A and 2 patients in Group B experienced stone recurrence (2.5% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.612). One patient in Group A experienced stenosis of the CBD, while stenosis of the CBD occurred in 5 patients in Group B (1.3% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.937)., Conclusions: Primary closure of CBD upon completion of LCBDE could be safely performed among patients ≥ 70 years., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is considered a safe and effective method for the removal of bile duct stones, selecting primary duct closure (PDC) or T-tube drainage (TTD) following choledochotomy remains controversial. This study aims to explore the clinical effects of PDC and TTD after LCBDE., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 348 patients with choledocholithiasis treated with LCBDE from January 2016 to October 2020. All patients were divided into PDC (225 cases) and TTD (123 cases) groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. We compared operative parameters and outcomes., Results: After matching (n = 116/group), no significant difference was observed between the two groups (P > 0.05) regarding intra-abdominal infection, incision infection, bile leakage, and retained stones. In terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative exhaust time, postoperative antibiotic use time, and postoperative abdominal drainage time, PDC group was obviously superior to TTD group (P < 0.05)., Conclusion: Primary closure following LCBDE is considered a safe and effective alternative to T-tube drainage., (Copyright © 2023 Asian Surgical Association and Taiwan Robotic Surgery Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

There are still many physicians who are reluctant to use primary biliary suture in Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for fear of more complications. We compare and analyze the clinical effectiveness of bile duct primary suture with three laparoscopic ports and indwelling T-tube drainage (with four laparoscopic ports) in patients with choledocholithiasis after LCBDE. Clinical data of 135 patients with common bile duct (CBD) stone were compared, including general conditions, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, hospitalization costs, postoperative follow-up and other indicators. Forty-eight patients underwent primary suture of bile duct (group A) and 87 were treated with external T-tube drainage (group B). There were no significant differences between the two groups neither relating to the age, gender, BMI, diameter of CBD, number of stones, preoperative bilirubin value, number of previous surgeries in preoperative, nor the operation time, residual stones, the number of cases converted from laparoscopic conversion to laparotomy. The postoperative complications like fever, bleeding, incision infection, bile duct stricture has no differences between two group. The incidence of bile leakage (p = 0.008) and postoperative electrolyte disturbance (p = 0.001) were slightly lower in group A. There were fewer postoperative complications in group A vs group B (p = 0.04). Patients in group A experienced shorter postoperative hospital stay (p < 0.001), earlier postoperative extubation (p < 0.001), lower total hospitalization costs (p = 0.03), and earlier postoperative recovery (p = 0.000). Primary suture of CBD is a safe and effective method for some patients after LCBDE., (© 2023. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).)

Single-stage management of choledocholithiasis with concomitant gallstones consists of performing either laparoscopic bile duct exploration (LBDE) or intra-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography at the same time as laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Transductal LBDE is associated with significantly higher post-operative morbidity, longer operative times and longer hospital stay when compared to transcystic LBDE. The aim of this study was to report the transcystic exploration rate and post-operative outcomes from LBDE before and after implementation of the LATEST (Leveraging Access to Technology and Enhanced Surgical Technique) principles., Methods: A retrospective review of 481 consecutive patients between February 1998 and July 2021 was performed. Patients were assigned into two groups determined by whether they were operated before or after the implementation of LATEST. Data collected included pre-operative demographic information, medical co-morbidity, pre-operative investigations, and intra-operative findings (including transcystic exploration rate, negative choledochoscopy rate, use of holmium laser lithotripsy and operative time). Outcomes of this study were the transcystic exploration rate, stone clearance rate, conversion to open surgery, post-operative morbidity and mortality, and length of post-operative hospital stay., Results: The pre-LATEST group contained 237 patients and the LATEST group comprised of 244 patients. Ultra-thin choledochoscopes and holmium laser lithotripsy were used more frequently in the LATEST group (41.4% and 18.4%, respectively). Enhanced surgical techniques (correction of the cystic duct-CBD junction and the trans-infundibular approach) were also performed more frequently in the LATEST group. More patients in the LATEST group received transcystic LBDE (86.1% vs 11.0%, p < 0.0001). The LATEST group had significantly higher stone clearance rates (98.8% vs 93.7%, p = 0.0034), reduced post-operative morbidity and shorter post-operative hospital stay (4 days vs 1 day, p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: LATEST describes four key factors that can be used when performing LBDE. The adoption of LATEST in LBDE is associated with an increased stone clearance, a higher transcystic exploration rate and reduced post-operative morbidity., (© 2022. Crown.)

Background: Recent trials and metanalysis have demonstrated the favorable results of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the LC + LCBDE learning curve including transcystic and transductal approaches and its effect on the outcomes., Methods: We identified all unselected patients who underwent LC + LCBDE by a single surgeon between May 2017 and July 2021. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative data were analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis to evaluate the learning curve., Results: A total of 110 patients were included. Total postoperative complications rate was 12.7%, including bile leakage in six (5.5%) patients. Mean length of hospital stay was 2.7 (1-14) days. No patient had conversion to open surgery. The CUSUM graph divided the learning curve into three distinct phases: (1) Learning (1-38), (2) Competence (39-61) and (3) Proficiency (62-110). There was a significant increase in the transcystic approach rate with each phase (44.7% vs 73.9% vs 98%; P < .001). A significant decrease in the operative time (150.9 vs 117.6 vs 99.9 min; P < .001) and complication rate (21.1% vs 21.7% vs 2%; P = .01) were observed across the three phases., Conclusion: Our data suggest that the learning curve for complete competence in LC + LCBDE is approximately 60 cases, provided that proper training is available. The initial learning phase can be carried out safely and efficiently with acceptable results., (© 2022 Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery.)

Purpose: The Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) and the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI®) are both widely used methods for reporting postoperative complications. Several studies have compared the CCI® with the CDC in evaluating postoperative complications of major abdominal surgery. However, there are no published reports comparing both indexes in single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with cholecystectomy (LCBDE) for the treatment of common bile duct stones. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of the CCI® and the CDC in evaluating the complications of LCBDE., Methods: In total, 249 patients were included. Spearman's rank test was used to calculate the correlation coefficient between CCI® and CDC with length of postoperative stay (LOS), reoperation, readmission, and mortality rates. Student t-test and Fisher's exact test were used to study, if higher ASA, age, larger surgical time, history of previous abdominal surgery, preoperative ERCP, and intraoperative cholangitis finding were associated with higher CDC grade or higher CCI® score., Results: Mean CCI® was 5.17 ± 12.8. CCI® ranges overlap among three CDC grades: II (20.90-36.20), IIIa (26.20-34.60), and IIIb (33.70-52.10). Age > 60 years, ASA ≥ III, and intraoperative cholangitis finding were associated with higher CCI® (p = 0.010, p = 0.044, and p = 0.031) but not with CDC ≥ IIIa (p = 0.158, p = 0.209, and p = 0.062). In patients with complications, LOS presented a significantly higher correlation with CCI® than with CDC (p = 0.044)., Conclusion: In LCBDE, the CCI® assesses better the magnitude of postoperative complications in patients older than 60 years, with a high ASA as well as in those who present intraoperative cholangitis. In addition, the CCI® correlates better with LOS in patients with complications., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: There are two minimally invasive ways of treating cholecystolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis, but there remains some controversy regarding which technique is better, since they both have advantages and disadvantages. The one-step method involves laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, and primary close (LC + LCBDE + PC), while the two-step procedure consists of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic sphincterotomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP + EST + LC)., Objective: This multicenter retrospective study aimed to analyze and compare the effects of the two techniques., Methods: The data of patients who underwent either one-step LCBDE + LC + PC or two-step ERCP + EST + LC treatment for gallstones in the gallbladder and bile duct at the Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital, Shanghai Tongren Hospital, and Taizhou Fourth People's Hospital between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2019 were collected, and the preoperative indicators of the two groups were compared., Results: The surgical success rate of the one-step laparoscopic group was 96.23% (664/690), the transit abdominal opening rate was 2.03% (14/690), and there were 21 cases of postoperative bile leakage. The success rate of the two-step endolaparoscopic surgery was 78.95% (225/285), the transit opening rate was 2.46% (7/285), and there were 43 postoperative cases of pancreatitis and five of cholangitis. Postoperative cholangitis, pancreatitis, postoperative stone recurrence, postoperative hospitalization, and treatment costs were significantly lower (P< 0.05) in the one-step laparoscopic group than in the two-step endolaparoscopic group. However, the amount of intraoperative bleeding, the postoperative extraction time of the abdominal drainage tube, and the incidence of bile leakage were higher (P< 0.05) in the one-step laparoscopic group than in the two-step endolaparoscopic group., Conclusion: The two methods of treating choledocholithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis that were analyzed in this study were safe and effective, and each method had its own advantages.

Purpose of Review: Examine recent advances in the treatment of patients with complex gallstone disease., Recent Findings: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been shown to be an effective and safe treatment for choledocholithiasis, resulting in decreased hospital length of stay and costs when compared with ERCP plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Novel simulator-based curricula have recently been developed to address the educational gap that has resulted in an underutilization of LCBDE. Patients with cholecystitis who are too ill to safely undergo LC have traditionally been treated with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided gallbladder drainage is a novel definitive treatment for such patients and has been shown to result in decreased complications and hospital readmissions compared to PC. The management of symptomatic gallstone disease during pregnancy has evolved over the last several decades. While it is now well established that laparoscopic procedures under general anesthesia are safe throughout a pregnancy, recent studies have suggested that laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the third trimester specifically may result in higher rates of preterm labor when compared with non-operative management. Finally, indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence cholangiography is a novel imaging modality that has been used during laparoscopic cholecystectomy and may offer better visualization of biliary anatomy during dissection when compared with traditional intraoperative cholangiography. A number of recent technological, procedural, educational, and research innovations have enhanced and expanded treatment options for patients with complex gallstone disease., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been demonstrated to be safe and effective for patients with acute cholangitis caused by common bile duct stones (CBDSs). The outcomes after LCBDE with primary closure in patients with CBDS-related acute cholangitis are unknown. The present study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LCBDE with primary closure for the management of acute cholangitis caused by CBDSs., Methods: Between June 2015 and June 2020, 368 consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis combined with cholecystolithiasis, who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) + LCBDE in our department, were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 193 patients with CBDS-related acute cholangitis underwent LC + LCBDE with primary closure of the CBD (PC group) and 62 patients underwent LC + LCBDE followed by T-tube placement (T-tube group). A total of 113 patients who did not have cholangitis were excluded. The clinical data were compared and analyzed., Results: There was no mortality in either group. No significant differences were noted in morbidity, bile leakage rate, retained CBD stones, or readmission rate within 30 days between the two groups. Compared with the T-tube group, the PC group avoided T-tube-related complications and had a shorter operative time (121.12 min vs. 143.37 min) and length of postoperative hospital stay (6.59 days vs. 8.81 days). Moreover, the hospital expenses in the PC group were significantly lower than those in the T-tube group ($4844.47 vs. $5717.22). No biliary stricture occurred during a median follow-up of 18 months in any patient. No significant difference between the two groups was observed in the rate of stone recurrence., Conclusions: LCBDE with primary closure is a safe and effective treatment for cholangitis caused by CBDSs. LCBDE with primary closure is not inferior to T-tube drainage for the management of CBDS-related acute cholangitis in suitable patients., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: The safety and feasibility of primary closure after laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) have been confirmed in elective settings. However, the suitability of primary closure after LCBDE in the treatment of patients with non-severe acute cholangitis in emergency settings remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to explore the safety and feasibility of LCBDE with primary closure in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis., Methods: Consecutive patients with choledocholithiasis combined with gallbladder stones treated by LCBDE with primary closure at our institution from January 2015 to April 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. These patients were divided into two groups: emergency group (patients with non-severe acute cholangitis) and elective group (patients without acute cholangitis). The demographic and perioperative data of the two groups were compared., Results: One hundred twenty-two patients received LCBDE combined with primary closure during this period, including 70 in the emergency group and 52 in the elective group. Baseline characteristics were balanced in both groups, except for higher levels of white blood cells (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), total bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and albumin in the emergency group. No postoperative mortality occurred in either group. Compared to the elective group, the emergency group had a longer operation time (P = 0.011), and more estimated blood loss (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of conversion (2.9% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.507), use of baskets (84.2% vs. 78.8%, P = 0.481), use of electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) (2.9% vs. 1.9%, P = 1.000), or postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.214). The incidence of postoperative complications was comparable between the two groups. During the follow-up period, none of the patients experienced biliary stricture, and 1 case of stone recurrence occurred in the elective group., Conclusions: LCBDE with primary closure for choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe acute cholangitis has the equivalent efficacy and morbidity to elective surgery. Primary closure after LCBDE is a safe and feasible option for choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe acute cholangitis., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Although the feasibility of T-tube drainage after emergency laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been reported, the safety and effectiveness of primary closure (PC) after LCBDE in patients with non-severe acute cholangitis (AC) remain uncertain. This study aimed to investigate the safety and feasibility of PC after LCBDE in patients with non-severe AC. Consecutive choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe AC who were treated with a laparoscopic approach at our institution between January 2014 and March 2021 were enrolled. These patients were divided into two groups (PC group and T-tube group) based on the way of closure of the common bile duct. The baseline characteristics and perioperative data between the two groups were compared. A total of 230 patients who underwent LCBDE met the inclusion criteria, and there were 94 patients in the PC group and 126 patients in the T-tube group. Baseline data were balanced between the two groups, except that there was less acute cholecystitis in the PC group than in the T-tube group (P = 0.027). Compared to the T-tube group, the PC group had a shorter operation time (P < 0.001), less estimated blood loss (P < 0.001), less use of electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) (P = 0.001), shorter time of drainage removal (P < 0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.001) and residual stones (P = 0.029). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion (4.3 vs. 4.4%, P = 1.000), intraoperative transfusion (0.0 vs. 0.7%, P = 1.000), use of basket (71.2 vs. 69.9%, P = 0.816), postoperative bleeding (1.1 vs. 0.7%, P = 1.000), biliary leakage (4.3 vs. 3.7%, P = 1.000), incision infection (1.1 vs. 2.2%, P = 0.649), pneumonia (2.1 vs. 1.4%, P = 1.000), or cholangitis (1.1 vs. 2.9%, P = 0.651). No postoperative mortality occurred in either group. During the follow-up period, no biliary stricture occurred in the two groups, and two patients in the T-tube group were found to have stone recurrence. PC after LCBDE in choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe AC shows superior clinical outcomes to T-tube drainage in terms of the operation time, estimated blood loss, time of drainage removal, postoperative hospital stay, and residual stones. PC is a safe and feasible treatment for choledocholithiasis patients with non-severe AC after LCBDE., (© 2021. Italian Society of Surgery (SIC).)

Objective: To compare the safety and feasibility of T-tube drainage and primary suture after laparoscopy combined with choledochoscopy in the treatment of secondary choledocholithiasis. Methods: The clinical data of patients who underwent laparoscopic choledochoscopy combined with choledochoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for secondary choledocholithiasis from June 2015 to June 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the different treatment method of common bile duct (CBD) incision, the patients were divided into a T-tube drainage group and a primary suture group. The preoperative clinical characteristics, results of preoperative liver function tests (LFTs), LFTs on the first day after the operation and the fourth day after the operation, operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative complications, and times of postoperative hospital stay were compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference in preoperative clinical data, preoperative LFTs, and postoperative complications between the two groups ( P  > .05). However, primary suture demonstrated significant advantages ( P  < .05) in terms of the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and other related factors. Bilirubin levels on the first day after the operation and the fourth day after the operation between the two groups suggested that T-tube drainage reduces bilirubin in the short term, but that long-term bilirubin draining is similar between the two strategies. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that choledochal diameter less than 8 mm was an independent risk factor for bile leakage. Conclusions: Laparoscopy combined with intraoperative choledochoscopic CBD exploration is superior to T-tube drainage in terms of the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay. The ability of reducing bilirubin by traditional T-tube drainage is indeed better than that of primary suture in the early stage after operation, but there is no difference in long-term outcome between the two groups. Choledochal diameter ≤8 mm was an independent risk factor for bile leakage. To summarize, LCBDEs primary suture for secondary choledocholithiasis is safe and feasible.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of continuous suture and interrupted suture in Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration (LCBDE) for choledocholithiasis. Materials and Methods: The data of 125 patients with choledocholithiasis treated with LCBDE in our department from January 2017 to January 2019 were retrospectively collected and divided into two subgroups: the continuous suture group ( n  = 56) and the interrupted suture group ( n  = 69). The operation duration, time to suture, intraoperative blood loss, extubation time, hospital stay, total hospitalization expenses, preoperative and postoperative diameters of the common bile duct (CBD), and the occurrence rate of postoperative complications were all compared between the two groups. Results: The operative duration, time to suture, and intraoperative blood loss in the continuous suture group were less compared with those in the interrupted suture group ( P  < .05). There was no statistical significance between the 2 groups considering extubation time, hospital stay, total hospitalization expenses, and the occurrence rate of postoperative complications ( P  > .05). The postoperative CBD diameters in both groups were significantly larger than the preoperative CBD diameters ( P  < .05). Conclusions: The continuous suture technique shortened the operative duration, time to suture, and reduced intraoperative blood loss. It proves to be an effective and safe method in patients diagnosed with CBD stones.

Purpose: Overlapping surgery or double-booking is a vital yet disputed issue in healthcare field. However, safety of the overlapping surgery during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes and safety of overlapping surgery during laparoscopic cholecystectomy and LCBDE for gallbladder and common bile duct stones (CBDS)., Material and Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed 2736 laparoscopic cholecystectomy and LCBDE surgeries during 2013-2020. One thousand, two hundred eighty patients underwent LCBDE through cystic duct, including 867 receiving overlapping procedures, while 1456 underwent LCBDE through laparoscopic choledochotomy (LC), including 981 who underwent overlapping procedures. Data regarding patient sex, age, body mass index, the American Society of Anesthesiology grade, comorbidities, preoperative liver function test, previous upper abdominal surgery, presence of acute cholecystitis, cholangitis, pancreatitis, or jaundice, common bile duct (CBD) or CBDS diameter, CBDS number, LCBDE operation time, procedure duration, length of stay, stone clearance, CBD closure methods, conversion to open surgery, and complications were collected., Results: Differences in demographics and clinical variables between both groups were not significant, and the unadjusted outcomes were comparable, except for the total procedure duration (transcystic: p  < .001; LC: p  < .001). After adjusting for demographics and clinical variables, overlapping surgery showed an extended total surgical procedure duration (transcystic: standardized coefficient = 0.084, p  = .004; LC: standardized coefficient = 0.072, p  = .015). Other effects of overlapping surgery were also comparable., Conclusions: Overlapping surgery in laparoscopic cholecystectomy and LCBDE was safe at our institution. However, the association of patient outcomes with overlapping laparoscopic cholecystectomy and LCBDE should be further investigated.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS : Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is considered a safe and effective method for the removal of bile duct stones. However, the choice of primary duct closure (PDC) or T-tube drainage (TTD) technique after LCBDE is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of PDC and TTD after LCBDE. METHODS : Studies published before May 1, 2021 in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to screen out randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies to compare PDC with TTD. Meta-analyses of fixed effect and random effect models were performed using RevMan 5.3. RESULTS : A total of 1865 patients were enrolled in six RCTs and ten cohort studies. Regarding RCTs, the PDC group was significantly better than the TTD group in terms of operation time, total postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, and hospitalization expenses (all P <0.05). Based on cohort studies of the subgroup, the PDC group had shorter operation time, shorter postoperative hospital stay, less intraoperative blood loss, and limited total postoperative complications. Statistically, there were no significant differences in bile leakage, retained stones, stone recurrence, bile duct stricture, postoperative pancreatitis, other complications, or postoperative exhaust time between the TTD and PDC groups. CONCLUSIONS : Based on the available evidence, compared with TTD, PDC is safe and effective, and can be used as the first choice after transductal LCBDE in patients with choledocholithiasis.

Background: Common bile duct (CBD) stones are reported in ~ 15% of patients who undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. Prior to lithotripsy techniques, transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) was limited to smaller CBD stones. The addition of lithotripsy to LCBDE increases cost, operative time and staffing requirements. Predicting which patients might require lithotripsy would be useful in operative planning. The primary aim was to investigate clinical variables for predicting lithotripsy assistance during transcystic bile duct exploration by laparoendoscopy (PRE-LABEL). Secondary aims were to develop and validate a predictive scoring tool., Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of consecutive patients who underwent transcystic LCBDE at a single centre in the UK was performed to investigate clinical variables for PRE-LABEL and develop a scoring tool (ABCdE score: age, bilirubin, CBD diameter, ERCP). Binary logistic regression was used to investigate which independent variables (predictors) were associated with lithotripsy assistance during transcystic LCBDE. The ABCdE score was applied to both UK and Spain patient cohorts to determine its sensitivity, specificity and accuracy., Results: From 8 pre-operative clinical variables analysed, age ≤ 40 years, bilirubin > two-times upper limit of normal, CBD diameter ≥ 10 mm and ERCP failure of stone extraction were independent predictors of requiring lithotripsy during transcystic LCBDE and formed the ABCdE score. The hazard ratios were 2.87, 3.79, 2.78 and 10.06, respectively. An ABCdE score ≥ 2 resulted in 71% sensitivity, 81% specificity and 79% accuracy in predicting lithotripsy during LCBDE (UK cohort). Validation using a contemporary cohort from Spain yielded similar sensitivity, specificity and accuracy., Conclusions: This study represents the only study to date reporting independent predictors of requiring lithotripsy assistance during transcystic LCBDE. ABCdE score ≥ 2 can highlight patients that may require lithotripsy in order to avoid failure of transcystic LCBDE and therefore avoid choledochotomy or post-operative ERCP., (© 2020. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The transcystic approach to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration has gained popularity for the single-stage management of choledocholithiasis with concomitant gallstones. Our team previously described the use of a porcine aorta segment to simulate the common bile duct during laparoscopic skill training., Methods: With the advent of the transcystic approach as a contender for the first-line technique of accessing the common bile duct, we present an evolution of the laparoscopic training model using a Porcine Aorta-Renal Artery (PARA) specimen to simulate the structural integrity, dimensions and spatial distribution of both the human cystic and common bile ducts., Results: This training model allows the use of a choledochoscope for transcystic exploration of the biliary tree. It combines fidelity and reproducibility required for a simulated training model to offer experience in laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration. Validation of the model was demonstrated by 21 surgeons who completed a questionnaire after performing the simulated procedure. In all sections assessing reliability, face validity and content validity of the model, mean rating scores were between 4 and 5 out of five (good or excellent)., Conclusions: We present the evolution of an established training model for laparoscopic common bile duct exploration which focusses the attention on the transcystic approach to the common bile duct and the use of lithotripsy techniques. The need for such a model reflects the shift in the current practice of the laparoendoscopic management of choledocholithiasis with concomitant gallstones from transductal to transcystic approach.

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is increasingly being used to treat choledocholithiasis. However, few studies have examined the treatment of recurrent common bile duct stones (CBDS) in patients with a history of prior biliary surgery. The current research aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open common bile duct exploration in patients with a history of prior biliary surgery., Methods: Between March 2010 and August 2019, 162 patients with recurrent CBDS after prior biliary surgery who underwent surgical management in our institution were enrolled in this study. The demographic, intraoperative and postoperative data were retrospectively analysed., Results: Among these 162 patients, 72 underwent laparoscopic approach (LCBDE group), and 90 underwent open surgery (open common bile duct exploration group). The LCBDE group was associated with significantly lower overall complication rate, incision infection rate and blood loss compared to open common bile duct exploration group (all P < 0.05). Moreover, the laparoscopic approach significantly reduced the length of postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05). However, the operative time, stone clearance rate, and stone recurrence rate were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). The conversion rate of the laparoscopic approach was 6.9%., Conclusions: LCBDE is superior to open procedure in terms of blood loss, hospital stay, overall complication and incision infection in patients with a history of prior biliary surgery, and it should be considered as a safe and effective treatment if it is performed by an experienced surgeon., (© 2020 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.)

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.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been recently introduced for management of CBD stone in patients with previous biliary surgery history. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of primary closure in patients with previous biliary surgery history compared to T-tube drainage. Eighty patients with previous biliary surgery history including laparoscopic cholecystectomy, open cholecystectomy, or open common bile duct exploration were enrolled in the retrospective study. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the methods of choledochotomy closure. Group A: patients with primary closure after LCBDE (n = 51); group B: patients with T-tube drainage after LCBDE (n = 29). Group A exhibited a shorter postoperative hospital stay and lower hospitalization expenses compared to group B. There was no significant difference in conversion rate to open surgery, operating time, intraoperative blood loss, bile leakage rate, overall complication rate, and stone recurrence rate between the 2 groups. Biliary stricture was not observed in the 2 groups during the follow-up period. Primary closure following LCBDE is safe and effective for the management of CBD stones in patients with previous biliary surgery history.

Background: Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is considered the best treatment and has the advantages of being minimally invasive for common bile duct (CBD) stones, the choice of T-tube drainage (TTD) or primary duct closure (PDC) after LCBDE is still controversial. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare the superiority of PDC versus TTD after LCBDE for choledocholithiasis., Methods: All potential studies which compare the surgical effects between PDC with TTD were electronically searched for in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library databases up to November 2019. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software., Results: In total, six randomized controlled trials with 604 patients (307 in the PDC group and 297 in the TTD group) were included in the current meta-analysis. As compared with the TTD group, the pooled data showed that PDC group had shorter operating time (WMD = -24.30; 95% CI = -27.02 to -21.59; p < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%; p < 0.88), less medical expenditure (WMD = -2255.73; 95% CI = -3330.59 to -1180.86; p < 0.0001; I 2 = 96%; p < 0.00001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (OR = -2.88; 95% CI = -3.22 to -2.54; p < 0.00001; I 2 = 60%; p < 0.03), and lower postoperative complications (OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.78; p = 0.77; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups concerning bile leakage (OR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36 to 1.53; p = 0.42; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.90) and retained stones (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.36 to 2.52; p < 0.93; I 2 = 0%; p < 0.66)., Conclusions: LCBDE with PDC should be performed as a priority alternative compared with TTD for choledocholithiasis.

Background: Acute cholangitis (AC) is an acute inflammation of the biliary tract caused by bacterial infection, which occurs due to biliary obstruction primarily because of bile duct stones. We aimed to study the effect of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in the treatment of complicated AC for elderly patients., Method: Elderly patients with complicated AC admitted to our hospital from August 2014 to August 2018 were considered. According to the patients' general conditions and the American Society of Anesthesiologists' (ASA) grade, 98 patients were divided into three groups: ASA grade II, 38 patients; ASA grade III, 33 patients; and ASA grade IV, 27 patients; all patients underwent emergency laparoscopic common bile duct exploration within 8 h of admission. The perioperative data of these patients were analyzed., Results: There were no significant differences between the three groups in preoperative laboratory test results, except for albumin levels. Conversely, when compared in every group, there were some significant differences in changes between pre- and postoperative laboratory test results, except for albumin levels. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of perioperative data (operation time, blood loss, peritoneal drainage time, postoperative time to flatus, and postoperative hospital stay). Although four patients had postoperative complications, there were no significant differences in the rate of complications between the groups., Conclusion: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration is a safe, effective, and feasible method for treating complicated AC in elderly patients. It should be actively used in clinical work to rapidly relieve biliary obstruction.

Objective: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been demonstrated safety and effective for patients with gallbladder stones and extrahepatic bile duct stones, however few studies reported its suitability for the treatment of elderly patients. Thus, our study aims to investigate the safety and feasibility of primary closure after LCBDE in the treatment of elderly patients., Methods: 408 out of 499 patients with Gallbladder stones complicated with choledocholithiasis who were undergone LCBDE and primary closure were divided into two groups: Group A (<65 years old, n = 249) and Group B (≥65 years old, n = 159) and the related clinical data were compared and analyzed by statistical method., Results: Pre-operative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of elderly patients was significantly higher than the younger patients (P < 0.05). In both groups, the positive rate of Choledocholithiasis and bile sludge at exploration, number of stones in CBD, utilization rate of Electro-hydraulic lithotripsy, estimated blood loss, successful duct clearance, the rate of postoperative bile leakage, postoperative bile duct stricture, reoperation, stone recurrence, and other postoperative complications showed no significant difference (p > 0.05). There were also no statistical differences between both groups in time to removal of drainage, postoperative hospital stay, readmission within 30 days and mortality (p > 0.05)., Conclusions: It is safe and feasible to treat the elderly patients with common bile duct stones under the premise of strict surgical indications, skilled laparoscopic procedures and accurate endoscopic suture techniques., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Taiwan LLC.)

Background: The optimal methods for patients with difficult biliary stones remain under debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of frequency-doubled double-pulse neodymium YAG (FREDDY) laser lithotripsy for removing difficult biliary stones during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE)., Methods: Between March 2013 and January 2015, 42 consecutive patients with difficult biliary stones who underwent LCBDE with FREDDY laser lithotripsy were included in this study. The clinical data of all patients were retrospectively collected and analysed., Results: Bile ducts were completely cleared in all patients. The complications related to laser lithotripsy were not noted. A total of 38 patients (90.5%) underwent primary closure of common bile duct, and T-tube drainage was applied to four patients (9.5%). No bile duct injury, bleeding and perforation were observed. There were no post-operative surgery-related deaths. Bile leakage occurred in four patients (9.5%) with primary closure procedure, and all of them were managed successfully with conservative therapy. The median follow-up period was 42.8 months, with no evidence of bile duct stricture and stone recurrence in all patients., Conclusions: The LCBDE combined with FREDDY laser lithotripsy appear to be effective and safe for the treatment of difficult biliary stones., (© 2019 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.)

Background: The aim of this study is to report our experience with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and validate the experts' opinion about anatomical predictors of failed transcystic LCBDE (TLCBDE) approach., Methods: Patients undergoing LCBDE at Kaiser Permanente Southern California hospitals (2005-2015) were included. Predictors of failed TLCBDE were identified using bivariate analysis., Results: Of 115 LCBDE, 89.6% were TLCBDE and 10.4% through choledochotomy. Success rate, morbidity, and length of hospital stay were 83.5%, 6.1%, and 3.8 days respectively. Only stone size:cystic duct ratio >1 (35% versus 63%, P = .044) was associated with failure of TLCBDE. In accordance with experts' opinion, there was a suggestive association of stone size ≥6 mm, cystic duct ≤4 mm, multiple stones, and proximal stone location with failure; however, these did not reach statistical significance., Conclusion: LCBDE is an effective and safe mean of clearing common bile duct stones at community hospitals of an integrated health system. Previously cited contraindications for TLCBDE are not absolute, but rather predictors of failure.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stone extraction is a common and preferred choice for gallstone disease. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) are being increasingly used for managing choledocholithiasis and cholecystolithiasis. We report a case of a Hem-o-lok clip that was dropped into the common bile duct (CBD) after LC and surgical common bile duct exploration (CBDE). An 84-year-old man presented with right upper quadrant pain and jaundice for 2 months, and chills and hyperpyrexia for 1 day. The patient had received ERCP and surgical CBDE at a local hospital 3 years previously. The patient first received ERCP and endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD). When laboratory tests were normal, the patient then received LCBDE. During exploration, stones and a Hem-o-lok clip in the CBD were removed. The patient made good progress after LCBDE + T-tube placement and was discharged from hospital. The findings from this case suggest the following: 1) an appropriate therapy method should be considered for certain gallstone diseases, especially for choledocholithiasis and cholecystolithiasis; and 2) a Hem-o-lok clip should be carefully used during laparoscopic or robot-assisted surgery and the Hem-o-lok clip should not be in close proximity to the incision on the CBD.

Background and Objectives: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been verified to be an effective technique in treating choledocholithiasis, and T-tube insertion has been widely performed after LCBDE. With growing doubts regarding the effectiveness and safety of T-tube drainage (TTD), it has been suggested to replace such with primary duct closure (PDC). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term effectiveness and safety of PDC compared with TTD after LCBDE., Methods: The PubMed, Science Citation Index, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were used to accomplish a systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials and pro-/retrospective cohort studies that compared PDC alone or PDC combined with biliary drainage stenting (PDC+BD) with TTD after LCBDE. A subgroup analysis was established to compare PDC+BD with TTD. RevMan 5.3 was used for the statistical analysis., Results: A total of 2552 patients from 26 studies were included. The pooled odds ratio supported PDC, which yielded lower postoperative overall morbidity and incidence of bile leak and bile peritonitis and shorter surgical time and postoperative hospital stay when compared with TTD. In the subgroup analysis, PDC+BD showed significantly better results in terms of postoperative overall morbidity, incidence of bile leak and bile peritonitis, surgical time, and postoperative hospital stay than did TTD. PDC and PDC+BD showed no difference in the incidence of recurrent stones and biliary stricture during the long-term follow-up period compared with TTD., Conclusion: PDC alone or PDC+BD is superior to TTD as a duct-closure method after LCBDE., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors declare no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.

Background: Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has shown many obvious advantages compared with open surgery in the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones, it remains unclear regarding risk factors of conversion from LCBDE to open surgery and whether conversion will counteract the advantages of LCBDE. The purpose of this study was to explore risk factors and consequences of conversion from LCBDE to open surgery., Methods: A retrospective study was conducted, using a database of 644 patients with LCBDE between 2011 and 2017. Risk factors for conversion to open surgery were determined based on univariable and multivariable analysis. The consequences of conversion to open surgery in LCBDE were analyzed., Results: Conversion was required in 27 (4.2%) of 644 patients undergoing LCBDE. Independent risk factors for conversion were as follows: the max diameter of stones in CBD (odds ratio (OR) 2.234, 95%CI 1.031-4.842; p = 0.042), edema of CBD (OR 12.530, 95%CI 4.633-33.887; p < 0.001), and multiple stones in CBD (OR 3.438, 95%CI: 1.133-10.428; p = 0.029). These risk factors and their combined were good predictors for conversion in LCBDE. More blood loss, longer operative time, longer postoperative hospital stay, and higher incision infection were identified in patients with conversion than those without conversion. However, no significant differences were observed regarding mortality, readmission within 30 days, reoperation, bile leakage, and intra-abdominal fluid collection., Conclusion: Conversion to open surgery in LCBDE was associated with acute edematous CBD with large and multiple stones. Conversion can offset the advantages of LCBDE.

Purpose: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely used to remove common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, surgery is not considered as the first treatment choice for elderly patients with CBD stones because of the potential risk of postoperative complications. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficiency of LCBDE for elderly patients., Methods: From April 2011 to October 2016, 265 consecutive patients underwent LCBDE. We performed a retrospective study and divided these patients into 2 groups. The younger group was younger than 70 years old (n = 179), and the elderly group was 70 years old or older (n = 86). We compared patient demographics, clinical characteristics, intraoperative parameters, postoperative complications, and incidence of recurrent stone between the 2 groups., Results: The elderly patients had higher preoperative morbidity of chronic diseases, such as pulmonary diseases, heart diseases, arterial hypertension, and abdominal operation history ( P < .05). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate to open surgery, total cost, overall complications, and incidence of recurrent stone ( P > .05)., Conclusion: LCBDE can also be carried out as a safe and effective approach to remove CBD stones in elderly patients, although they have higher risk of chronic diseases.

Background: There are three choledochotomy closure methods available following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: T-tube insertion, antegrade stenting, and primary choledochorrhaphy. We reviewed the experience of 12 years at our center searching for the optimal closure technique., Methods: We analyzed retrospectively 146 patients that underwent one of the three closure methods from February 2004 to March 2016. Hospital stay, need for readmission, incidence of early and long-term complications, and biliary leakage development and their clinical impact were determined for each technique., Results: Hospital stay was more prolonged, and need for readmission was higher in the T-tube group. Nine patients of the T-tube group (17.3%), 5 patients (8.6%) of the antegrade stenting group, and 1 patient of the primary suture group (2.8%) developed Dindo-Clavien ≥3 complications (P = .076). The incidence of biliary leakage was 3.8%, 8.6%, and 16.7% for the T-tube group, antegrade stenting group, and primary suture group, respectively. There was no grade C biliary fistula in the primary suture group, and all grade B leaks in these patients were only due to prolonged duration. The T-tube removal caused adverse events in 21.1% of the patients, and complications directly related with stents occurred in 9.6%., Conclusion: Antegrade stents or T-tube insertion do not provide any added value for choledochotomy closure but are charged with specific morbidity. On the contrary, despite biliary leaks being more frequent after primary suture, they are of little clinical consequence and may be managed on an outpatient basis.

Background: Primary closure following laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been widely adopted because of the efficacy and safety in treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, the risk factors for bile leakage, the most common complication after primary closure, has not been clarified yet., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LCBDE with primary closure after choledochotomy between Feb. 2012 and Jun. 2016 was performed. Risk factors for bile leakage were identified by logistic regression inculding demographic factors, preoperative condition and surgical details., Results: Between Feb. 2012 and Jun. 2016, a total of 265 LCBDE procedures were applied in our hospital and 141 patients with primary closure were included in this study. Bile leakage occurred in 11.3% (16/141) of these patients, and happened more frequently in patients with slender CBD (<1 vs ≥1 cm, 31.6% vs 7.0%, p = 0.04) and those managed by inexperienced surgeons (initial 70 cases vs later cases, 17.1% vs 5.6%, p = 0.04). After multivariable regression, the diameter of CBD [OR 95% CI, 3.799 (1.081-13.349), p = 0.04] and experience of surgeons [OR 95% CI, 4.228 (1.330-13.438), p = 0.03] were significantly related to bile leakage., Conclusion: Slender CBD and inexperienced surgeons were the high risk factors for bile leakage after primary closure following LCBDE.

Background: We have recently begun to use a sterile disposable endoscope to perform laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. We evaluated our practice in a large district general hospital and reported the early feasibility of this equipment in performing bile duct exploration., Methods: We began to use the Ambu ® aScope 2 TM from June 2015 in our institution. Any case eligible for a laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was included. Our study period is from June 2015 to November 2015. Data were collected and analysed retrospectively., Results: Thirteen patients were included. Nine were female and five were male. The mean age was 59 years old (range 28 to 82 years). Seven were performed as an emergency and six were performed for elective cases. All patients had common bile duct stones with no history of previous cholecystectomy. The Ambu ® aScope 2 TM was used in 11 cases, and a standard choledocoscope was used in two cases due to lack of availability of the Ambu ® aScope 2 TM . There was one conversion due to an impacted bile duct stone and technical difficulty intra-operatively. Five cases were performed as a transcystic exploration with 1 case being converted to a choledocotomy due to inability to pass the cystic duct using the Ambu ® aScope 2 TM . The mean operating time was 158 min (range 85-255 min). The mean operative time using the reusable endoscope was 130 min. The mean postoperative stay was 3 days (range 0-8 days)., Conclusions: The use of the Ambu ® aScope 2 TM is safe and feasible in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. It confers significant financial benefits and offers an economical alternative to expensive reusable endoscopes.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS), or laparoendoscopic single-site surgery, has been employed in various fields to minimize traumatic effects over the last two decades. Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) has been the most frequently studied SILS to date. Hundreds of studies on SILC have failed to present conclusive results. Most randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been small in scale and have been conducted under ideal operative conditions. The role of SILC in complicated scenarios remains uncertain. As common bile duct exploration (CBDE) methods have been used for more than one hundred years, laparoscopic CBDE (LCBDE) has emerged as an effective, demanding, and infrequent technique employed during the laparoscopic era. Likewise, laparoscopic biliary-enteric anastomosis is difficult to carry out, with only a few studies have been published on the approach. The application of SILS to CBDE and biliary-enteric anastomosis is extremely rare, and such innovative procedures are only carried out by a number of specialized groups across the globe. Herein we present a thorough and detailed analysis of SILC in terms of operative techniques, training and learning curves, safety and efficacy levels, recovery trends, and costs by reviewing RCTs conducted over the past three years and two recently updated meta-analyses. All existing literature on single-incision LCBDE and single-incision laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy has been reviewed to describe these two demanding techniques.

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has already been established for the treatment of patients with common bile duct stones (CBDS) in elective situations. However, the effect of emergent LCBDE on those patients with nonsevere acute cholangitis has not been assessed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of emergent LCBDE on patients with nonsevere acute cholangitis complicated with CBDS., Methods: Seventy-two patients with CBDS admitted from January 2009 to December 2012 were included for this retrospective study. LCBDE of transductal approach for CBDS was performed to all patients. Thirty-seven patients underwent emergent LCBDE for nonsevere acute cholangitis and 35 patients underwent elective LCBDE. Duration of the procedure, complications, retained stone of bile duct, hospital stay, and total charges were compared between the two groups. In addition, the characteristics of patients underwent emergent LCBDE were also compared before and after surgery., Results: There was no significant difference with regard to the diameter of common bile duct and number of CBDS from imaging and/or operative findings between the two groups. There was no conversion to open common bile duct exploration, no major bile duct injuries, and no mortality in both the group of patients. There was no significant difference in patients with or without acute or chronic cholecystitis, duration of surgery, overall hospital stay (16.41 ± 1.03 versus 14.54 ± 0.94, P > 0.05), and total charges (18,603 ± 1774.64 versus 14,951 ± 1257.09 Yuan in renminbi, P > 0.05) between the two groups. Four cases with retained stones were found in patients with emergent LCBDE and two in elective LCBDE patients. There were four cases of biliary leak in patients with emergent LCBDE and three cases in elective LCBDE group, respectively. However, there was no statistical difference between the two groups. The biliary leak was cured postoperatively after drainage. Control of septic symptoms was achieved in all patients after emergent LCBDE., Conclusions: Our data indicated that emergent LCBDE is as safe and effective as elective LCBDE for the treatment of patients with nonsevere acute cholangitis complicated with CBDS., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The immunologic benefits of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for choledocholithiasis are poorly understood. The aim of the present study was to investigate immunologic changes during LCBDE using primary suture or T-tube drainage., Methods: Patients with choledocholithiasis undergoing laparoscopic primary suture of the common bile duct after LCBDE (primary suture group) or laparoscopic LCBDE with choledochotomy plus T-tube drainage (T-tube group) at a single center between June 2008 and June 2011 were included in the present study. Blood samples were collected 24 h preoperatively, and 24 and 72 h postoperatively to assess interleukin 6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) as inflammation markers. Immunosuppression was evaluated using C-reactive protein and leukocyte subpopulations., Results: Patients were 60 ± 17 y old in the primary suture group (56 men and 76 women) and 54 ± 20 y old in the T-tube group (50 men and 58 women). In the primary suture group, three patients (2.3%) required open surgery and six (4.5%) developed postoperative bile leakage. In the T-tube group, two patients (1.9%) required open surgery and four (3.7%) had bile leakage. Operation time and hospital stay were shorter in the primary suture group (P < 0.05). Postoperative TNF-α and lymphocyte counts were lower, and C-reactive protein and IL-6 levels were higher in the T-tube group compared with the primary suture group (P < 0.05). No recurrences or bile duct strictures were noted during follow-up (median of 12 mo)., Conclusions: Laparoscopic primary suture techniques appear to reduce immunologic suppression by minimizing surgical trauma in patients with choledocholithiasis., (Crown Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives. Up to 20% of patients with biliary lithiasis have bile duct stones, which are asymptomatic in 50% of cases. The aim of the study was to evaluate the role of choledoscopy in extracting stones from the main bile ducts. Materials and Methods. This is a retrospective study (January 2014 - December 2024) on 2309 patients who underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic choledoscopy was performed in 32 cases. Of the 32 patients with complete clearance, none had residual common bile duct stones (CBDS) at 1 year postoperatively. Results. The ideal approach in our study was the transcystic approach, with the shortest hospital stays (mean 3 days) transcholedochal approach; it was only feasible in 7 patients. All patients had transcystic drainage that was removed after 10 days (mean operative time 105 min). The transcholedochal approach was demanding from a technical point of view. Primary ductal closure was performed in 5 patients. Ductal closure with transcystic drain was in 9 patients. A total of 14 patients had a T-tube and a longer operative time (on average 170 min). Conversion to open surgery was performed in 4 cases, due to difficult dissection at the level of the hepatic porta. Conclusions. LCBDE for previously documented or discovered CBDS during LC is a safe and feasible procedure. The technique is technically demanding, and requires advanced laparoscopic skills. Patient selection is very important, but the transcystic approach for LCBDE when possible is optimal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study investigated the clinical application of the indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence navigation technique in bile duct identification during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for complex hepatolithiasis. Methods: Eighty patients with complex hepatolithiasis were admitted to our department between January 2022 and June 2023 and randomly divided into control and observation groups. The control group underwent conventional LCBDE, while the observation group underwent LCBDE guided by ICG fluorescence. Results: Intraoperatively, the observation group had shorter operation and search times for the common bile duct (CBD), as well as reduced intraoperative blood loss and fewer complications, such as conversion to laparotomy and various injuries (gastroduodenal, colon, pancreatic, and vascular) than the control group, with statistical significance (P < 0.05). Postoperatively, the observation group had lower rates of postoperative bile leakage, abdominal infection, postoperative hemorrhage, and residual stone than the control group. Additionally, the observation group demonstrated significantly shorter times for resuming flatus, removal of the abdominal drainage tube, and hospitalization than the control group, with statistical significance (P < 0.05). Conclusion: ICG fluorescence navigation technology effectively visualizes the bile duct, improves its identification rate, shortens the operation time, prevents biliary tract injury, and reduces the occurrence of complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the treatment of choice for patients with coexisting gallbladder and bile duct stones. Failure of this usually indicates laparoscopic choledocotomy, after which most patients are managed with primary duct closure and less frequently with T-tube placement or bilioenteric anastomosis. The objective of this paper is to describe the indications and complications of T-tube placement after laparoscopic choledocotomy in a consecutive series of single-stage management of 554 patients. Case series analysis of a prospectively collected historical database of all patients treated with T-tube drainage at Cosme Argerich Hospital from July 2008 and December 2020. Surgical indications and postoperative management will be discussed. Five hundred fifty-four patients underwent simultaneous scheduled laparoscopic cholecystectomy and common bile duct exploration during the analyzed period. One hundred thirteen (20.39%) required laparoscopic choledochotomy, after which 54 (48%) were treated with T-tube drainage, 23 for suspicion of incomplete bile duct clearance, 16 for impaired papillary drainage, 13 for inappropriate bile duct wall conditions, and 2 for lateral bile duct injuries. No significant morbidity was related to T-tube drainage. In our setting, and following a strict protocol, T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy is a valid alternative to primary duct closure in selected patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ultrasound-guided laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is the surgical management of choledocholithiasis. The procedure presents significant benefits to patients but still fails to be generalised because of the complex set of skills it requires. A simulator for ultrasound-guided LCBDE would allow trainee surgeons as well as experienced surgeons who perform this surgery seldomly to practice and gain confidence. Methods: This article presents the development and validation of an easily reproducible hybrid simulator for ultrasound-guided LCBDE which integrates real and virtual components of the task. We first developed a physical model made of silicone. The fabrication technique is replicable and allows quick and easy production of multiple models. We then applied virtual components onto the model to create training for laparoscopic ultrasound examination. Combined with a commercially available lap-trainer and surgical equipment, the model can be used for training the fundamental steps of the surgery through the trans-cystic or trans-choledochal approaches. The simulator was evaluated through face, content, and construct validation. Results: Two novices, eight middle grades, and three experts were recruited to test the simulator. The results of the face validation showed that the surgeons found the model realistic visually and felt realistic when performing the different steps of the surgery. The content validation indicated the usefulness of having a training system to practice the choledochotomy, the choledochoscopy and stone retrieval, and the suturing. The construct validation highlighted the ability of the simulator to differentiate between surgeons with various levels of expertise. Conclusions: The hybrid simulator presented is a low-cost yet realistic model which allows the surgeons to practice the technical skills required for trans-cystic and trans-choledochal ultrasound-guided LCBDE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The optimal treatment options for gallstones together with common bile duct stones (CBDS) remain controversial. The aim of this study was to further compare the recurrence rate of stones after synchronous laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (SLCL) and synchronous laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (SLCE) and to determine which option is more effective in reducing the rate of repeated recurrence of CBDS and the incidence rate of hepatolithiasis. Methods: We retrospectively investigated the clinical data of patients who underwent SLCL or SLCE at our hepatobiliary center between August 2012 and August 2020. The primary and secondary endpoints of this study were the recurrence of CBDS and the occurrence of hepatolithiasis, respectively. Results: In total, 1005 patients were enrolled in this study, including 431 patients in the SLCL group and 574 patients in the SLCE group. SLCL was associated with a significantly decreased rate of CBDS recurrence (4.18% vs. 7.84%, P = 0.018), repeated CBDS recurrence (0.70% vs. 3.00%, P = 0.010), and incidence of hepatolithiasis (0.00% vs. 1.05%, P = 0.040). Compared with SLCE, SLCL was an independent protective predictor of the recurrence of CBDS (relative risk, 0.505; 95% confidence interval, 0.286–0.891; P = 0.018) and repeated recurrence of CBDS (relative risk, 0.226; 95% confidence interval, 0.066–0.777; P = 0.018). Conclusions: SLCL is an optimal treatment option to SLCE for patients with gallstones combined with CBDS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objective: Choledocholithiasis is a frequent pathology, unfortunately when its endoscopic management fails, there is no consensus of how it should be addressed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) using electrosurgery (coagulation) for choledochotomy followed by primary closure after endoscopic treatment failure. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LCBDE from 2013 to 2018 was conducted in Bogotá, Colombia. Clinical demographics, operative outcomes, recurrence rate of common bile duct stones, and long-term bile duct complications were analyzed. A descriptive analysis was performed. Results: A total of 168 patients were analyzed. Most of the patients were males (53.37%) with a median age of 73 years with no comorbidities (65%). Stone clearance was successful in 167 patients (99.4%). Nonlethal complications were noted in 3 patients during the surgery or in the immediate postoperative (1.79%) and managed with T-tube or endoscopically. No cases of mortality surgery related were observed. There were no signs of any type of biliary injury or stricture observed in any of the patients during the 24-month follow-up period. Conclusions: LCBDE with diathermy and primary closure is a safe and effective treatment option for choledocholithiasis for failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in terms of long-term outcome as well as short-term outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Common bile duct (CBD) stones associated with cholecystitis can be treated by single-stage CBD exploration at the time of cholecystectomy or a two-stage approach with endoscopic stone extraction before or after cholecystectomy. The ideal management remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study is to analyze our outcomes with transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Material and Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent transcystic LCBDE between 2015 and 2019 was performed. Results: A total of 106 patients underwent transcystic LCBDE over 5 years. We performed 1192 laparoscopic cholecystectomies with cholangiograms from March 2015 to December 2019. Fifteen patients had a preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for CBD stones seen on magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography that during laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC), there were stones and/or sludge found in the CBD, which required clearance through a transcystic approach. Of the 91 patients who did not have a preoperative ERCP, clearance of the CBD was successful through a transcystic approach in 78 patients (86%). In the 13 patients that intraoperative clearance was not achieved (n = 13, 14%), a postoperative ERCP was performed. A total of 28 patients underwent either pre- or postoperative ERCP (n = 28, 26%). Choledochotomy was not performed in any of the patients. The mean operative time was 127 minutes (127 ± 48). The mean hospital length of stay (LOS) was 4 days (3.9 ± 2.8) with a median LOS of 3 days. Complications observed include wound infection (n = 2, 2%), pancreatitis after ERCP (n = 1, 1%), pneumonia (n = 1, 1%), and right hepatic duct injury (n = 1, 1%). Conclusion: Transcystic LCBDE is an effective and safe option for treatment of CBD stones. While a transcystic approach does not guarantee clearance of the CBD, it avoids the morbidity associated with a choledochotomy and can often prevent patients from having to undergo an additional procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are several methods used to extract common bile duct (CBD) stones encountered during cholecystectomy. Intraoperative cholangiotomy, cholangioscopy, and laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) are techniques that allow removal of stones from the CBD during the index procedure. However, bile leakage following CBD exploration is a common problem. The aim of this study was to assess whether fibrin sealant applied to the duct incision is safe. Methods: Patients planned for laparoscopic gallstone surgery at the Department of Surgery, Enköping Hospital, were included in the study. In cases where perioperative cholangiography showed CBD stones, LCBDE was performed through a longitudinal incision in the CBD. Randomization between closure of the incision with polyglactin sutures or with fibrin sealant was performed. After all the stones had been removed and the incision closed according to the allocation, an abdominal drain was placed close to the incision. A T tube was placed in the CBD or a straight tube into cystic duct for eventual postoperative cholangiogram. The patient and the surgeon assessing the postoperative course were blinded to the randomized allocation. Results: Altogether 51 patients were included from December 2012 to July 2016. Mean operative time was 188 minutes in the fibrin sealant group and 214 minutes in the suture group (P = .159). There was no significant difference between groups in bile flow in the abdominal drainage tube or in the CBD drain during the three first postoperative days. The time to removal of the abdominal drain did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusion: Although the present study lacks the statistical power to prove a benefit from fibrin sealant, it indicates that closure of the incision may be an option to reduce the risk for leakage. Further studies are required to confirm this. The study was retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov September 5, 2015 (NCT02545153). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The management of choledocholithiasis evolves with diagnostic imaging and therapeutic technology, facilitating a laparoscopic approach. We review our first 200 cases of laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct, highlighting challenges and lessons learnt.Methods: We retrospectively studied the first 200 cases of laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration between 2006 and 2019. The database contains demographics, clinicopathological characteristics, diagnostic modalities, operative techniques, duration and outcomes.Results: We compared two approaches: transcystic vs. transcholedochal in our 200 cases. Choledocholithiasis was suspected preoperatively in 163 patients. 21 cases found no stones. Of the remainder, 111/179 cases were completed via the transcystic route and the remaining were completed transcholedochally (68/179); 25% of the transcholedochal cases were converted from a transcystic approach. CBD diameter for transcystic route was 8.2 vs. 11.0 mm for transcholedochal. Total clearance rate was 84%. Retained or recurrent stones were noted in 7 patients. Length of stay was 5.8 days, 3.5 days in the transcystic route vs. 9.4 days after transcholedochal clearance. Eight patients required re-operation for bleeding or bile leak. No mortalities were recorded in this cohort, but 2 cases (1%) developed a subsequent CBD stricture.Conclusion: Concomitant laparoscopic common bile duct clearance with cholecystectomy is feasible, safe and effective in a district general hospital, despite constraints of time and resources. The transcystic route has a lower complication rate and shorter hospital stay, and hence our preference of this route for all cases. Advancements in stone management technology will allow wider adoption of this technique, benefitting more patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]