Search

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is the criterion standard for treating patients with symptomatic gallstone disease; however, the optimal technique for extracting common bile duct stones remains unclear. Recent studies have noted improved outcomes with single-stage techniques, such as intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (iERCP) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); however only few studies have directly compared those two single-stage techniques., Objectives: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, we retrospectively analyzed the postoperative outcomes of all patients who underwent single-stage LC for choledocholithiasis from 2005 to 2017. Using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, as well as International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes, we stratified patients into two cohorts: those who underwent iERCP and LCBDE. Applying univariate techniques, we evaluated baseline characteristics and postoperative outcomes for both cohorts. Our primary outcomes of interest were 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality; our secondary outcomes included rates of reoperation, readmission, operative time, and hospital length of stay., Results: Of the 1814 single-stage LC patients during our 13-year study period, 1185 (65.3%) underwent LCBDE; 629 (34.6%) underwent iERCP. Our univariate analysis showed that the two cohorts were homogeneous in terms of baseline characteristics, including demographics, preoperative comorbidities, laboratory values, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores. 30-day postoperative morbidity (including infectious and noninfectious complications) and overall mortality between groups were low and comparable. The mean operative time was slightly longer with LCBDE (125.1 ± 62.0 min) than iERCP (113.5 ± 65.2 min; P < 0.001), however the mean hospital length of stay, readmission rate, and reoperation rate were similar., Conclusion: We found that both iERCP and LCBDE resulted in low, comparable rates of morbidity and mortality. Centers with readily available endoscopic expertise might favor iERCP for its ease of access and shorter operative time. However, LCBDE remains an appropriate technique for patients with choledocholithiasis, especially when immediate endoscopic intervention is unavailable.

Background: Recommendations for the duration of antimicrobial therapy in cholangitis after successful endoscopic biliary drainage vary. The aim of this study was to compare the occurrence of local infectious complications in patients with acute cholangitis treated with antibiotics for 3 days or less compared with 4 days or more., Methods: We performed a retrospective multicentre study in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients who received a successful biliary drainage by endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography because of cholangitis due to common bile duct stones between 2012 and 2017 were included. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a local infectious complication within 3 months of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography. Secondary outcomes included Clostridioides difficile infection, total length of hospital stay and all-cause mortality., Results: A total of 426 patients with cholangitis were identified and 296 patients met all inclusion criteria. Therapy duration was ≤3 days in 137 patients (46.3%). During follow-up, 41 patients (13.9%) developed a local infectious complication. Occurrence of infectious complications did not differ between the two groups ( p  = 0.32). No patient developed Clostridioides difficile infection. Median hospital stay was 6 days (interquartile range 4-8 days) in the short antibiotic group compared with 7 days (interquartile range 5-9 days) in the long group ( p  = 0.03). Four (1.4%) patients died during follow-up, all were treated for ≥4 days ( p  = 0.13 )., Conclusions: Antimicrobial therapy of 3 days or less seems to be sufficient after successful biliary drainage in patients with acute cholangitis. Randomized trials should confirm our findings.

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has been becoming more and more popular in patients with symptomatic choledocholithiasis. However, the safety and effectiveness of LCBDE in elderly patients with choledocholithiasis is still uncertain. This meta-analysis is aimed to appraise the safety and feasibility of LCBDE for elderly patients with choledocholithiasis., Materials and Methods: Studies comparing elderly patients and younger patients who underwent LCBDE for common bile duct stone were reviewed and collected from the PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Primary outcomes were stone clearance rate, overall complication rate, and mortality rate. Secondary outcomes were operative time, conversion rate, pulmonary complication, bile leakage, reoperation, residual stone rate, and recurrent stone rate., Results: Nine studies, including two prospective studies and seven retrospective studies, met the inclusion criteria. There were 2004 patients in this meta-analysis, including 693 elderly patients and 1311 younger patients. There was no statistically significant difference between elderly patients and younger patients regarding stone clearance rate (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.42-1.26; p = 0.25), overall complication rate (OR 1.31; 95% CI 0.94-1.82; p = 0.12), and mortality rate (OR 2.80; 95% CI 0.82-9.53; p = 0.10). Similarly, the operative time, conversion rate, bile leakage, reoperation, residual stone rate, and recurrent stone rate showed no significant difference between two groups (p > 0.05). While elderly patients showed high risk for pulmonary complication (OR 4.41; 95% CI 1.78-10.93; p = 0.001) compared with younger patients., Conclusion: Although there is associated with higher pulmonary complication, LCBDE is still considered as a safe and effective treatment for elderly patients with choledocholithiasis.

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is one of the minimally invasive options for choledocholithiasis. Primary closure of the common bile duct (CBD) upon completion of laparoscopic choledochotomy is safe in selected patients. The present study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of primary closure of CBD after LCBDE in patients aged 70 years or older., Methods: A total of 116 patients (51 males and 65 females) who suffered from choledocholithiasis and underwent primary closure of the CBD (without T-tube drainage) after LCBDE from January 2003 to December 2017 were recruited. They were classified into two groups according to age: group A (≥70 years, n = 56), and group B (<70 years, n = 60). The preoperative characteristics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were evaluated., Results: The mean operative time was 172.02 min for group A and 169.92 min for group B (P = 0.853). The mean hospital stay was 7.40 days for group A and 5.38 days for group B (P < 0.001). Bile leakage occurred in two patients in group A and one in group B (3.57% vs 1.67%, P = 0.952). There were no significant differences in the rates of postoperative complications and mortality between the two groups. At median follow-up time of 60 months, stone recurrence was detected in one patient in group A and two in group B (1.79% vs 3.33%, P = 1.000). Stenosis of CBD was not observed in group A and slight stenosis in one patient in group B (0 vs 1.67%, P = 1.000)., Conclusion: Primary closure of the CBD upon completion of laparoscopic choledochotomy is safe and feasible in elderly patients ≥70 years old., (Copyright © 2019 First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine in China. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aim: Although endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) has been widely used to facilitate the removal of difficult common bile duct stones, however, the outcomes have not yet been investigated in terms of the diameter of the balloon used. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between EPLBD using smaller (12-15 mm, S-EPLBD) and larger balloons (> 15 mm, L-EPLBD)., Methods: Six hundred seventy-two patients who underwent EPLBD with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stone removal were enrolled from May 2004 to August 2014 at four tertiary referral centers in Korea. The outcomes, including the initial success rate, the success rate without endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy, the overall success rate, and adverse events between S-EPLBD and L-EPLBD groups, were retrospectively compared., Results: The initial success rate, the success rate without mechanical lithotripsy, the overall success rate, and the overall adverse events were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of severe-to-fatal adverse events was higher in the L-EPBLD group than in the S-EPLBD group (1.6% vs 0.0%, 0.020). One case of severe bleeding and two cases of fatal perforation occurred only in the L-EPLBD group. In the multivariate analysis, the use of a > 15-mm balloon was the only significant risk factor for severe-to-fatal adverse events (>0.005, 23.8 [adjusted odds ratio], 2.6-214.4 [95% confidence interval])., Conclusions: L-EPLBD is significantly related to severe-to-fatal adverse events compared with S-EPLBD for common bile duct stone removal., (© 2019 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: Acute gallstone pancreatitis occurs when a gallstone is impacted at the ampulla of Vater. The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the treatment of small choledocholithiasis in these patients is uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of expectant management with endoscopic sphincterotomy for the treatment of small choledocholithiasis (≤5 mm) in patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis., Patients and Methods: Of the 258 patients admitted for acute gallstone pancreatitis from January 2010 to December 2014, 174 patients with small choledocholithiasis were reviewed retrospectively. Patients with coexisting acute cholangitis and/or pancreatobiliary malignancy were excluded. They were divided into an endoscopic sphincterotomy group (n=64) and an expectant management group (n=110). Severity index and outcomes of pancreatitis, complications, and overall mortality were compared., Results: Age and sex were not significantly different between the two groups. The mean Ranson, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation-II, and bedside index of severity in acute pancreatitis scores were not significantly different between the two groups. The computed tomography severity index score was significantly higher in the expectant management group than in the endoscopic sphincterotomy group (1.6±1.1 vs. 1.0±0.9, P<0.001). Duration of hospitalization, time for normalization of the white blood cell count, and time for oral feeding were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference between two groups in the incidence of development of pseudocyst or walled-off necrosis. In addition, no difference was observed in the rate of recurrence of acute pancreatitis and readmission because of recurrent choledocholithiasis., Conclusion: Expectant management seems to be effective for the treatment of patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis and size of bile duct stones equal to or less than 5 mm.

Background: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) for the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS) is used increasingly widely because it is a minimally invasive procedure. However, some clinical practitioners argued that EST may be complicated by post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) and accompanied by a higher recurrence of CBDS than open choledochotomy (OCT). Whether any differences in outcomes exist between these two approaches for treating CBDS has not been thoroughly elucidated to date., Aim: To compare the outcomes of EST vs OCT for the management of CBDS and to clarify the risk factors associated with stone recurrence., Methods: Patients who underwent EST or OCT for CBDS between January 2010 and December 2012 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Follow-up data were obtained through telephone or by searching the medical records. Statistical analysis was carried out for 302 patients who had a follow-up period of at least 5 years or had a recurrence. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed to adjust for clinical differences. A logistic regression model was used to identify potential risk factors for recurrence, and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was generated for qualifying independent risk factors., Results: In total, 302 patients undergoing successful EST ( n = 168) or OCT ( n = 134) were enrolled in the study and were followed for a median of 6.3 years. After propensity score matching, 176 patients remained, and all covariates were balanced. EST was associated with significantly shorter time to relieving biliary obstruction, anesthetic duration, procedure time, and hospital stay than OCT ( P < 0.001). The number of complete stone clearance sessions increased significantly in the EST group ( P = 0.009). The overall incidence of complications and mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups. Recurrent CBDS occurred in 18.8% (33/176) of the patients overall, but no difference was found between the EST (20.5%, 18/88) and OCT (17.0%, 15/88) groups. Factors associated with CBDS recurrence included common bile duct (CBD) diameter > 15 mm (OR = 2.72; 95%CI: 1.26-5.87; P = 0.011), multiple CBDS (OR = 5.09; 95%CI: 2.58-10.07; P < 0.001), and distal CBD angle ≤ 145° (OR = 2.92; 95%CI: 1.54-5.55; P = 0.001). The prediction model incorporating these factors demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81 (95%CI: 0.76-0.87)., Conclusion: EST is superior to OCT with regard to time to biliary obstruction relief, anesthetic duration, procedure time, and hospital stay and is not associated with an increased recurrence rate or mortality compared with OCT in the management of CBDS., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Background: Choledocholithiasis is one of the main complications of cholelithiasis with a prevalence in the Mexican population of 14%. The management through the guide proposed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) in 2010 can support the surgeon for the timely resolution of the pathology., Objective: To determine that the guide proposed by ASGE for the management of choledocholithiasis in patients with "high risk" reduces the complications of this pathology., Methods: A comparative, retrospective case-control study was conducted from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. We included patients who were stratified at high risk of choledocholithiasis according to the ASGE guidelines. They were divided into 2 groups: the case group (diagnosis by ASGE guidelines) was submitted directly to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), the second group (no ASGE) followed the protocol of performing computed tomography, magnetic cholangioresonance, and finally ERCP., Results: Of 61 patients with choledocholithiasis, the following groups were compared: the appearance of cholangitis, the complications after ERCP, time of ERCP, days of hospital stay and mortality. Obtaining significant difference in: "complications post ERCP" group ASGE 3/35 (9%), group no ASGE 8/26 (30.7%) with OR of 0.2 (0.05 - 0.9 IC 95%) and a p = 0.03; "Cholangitis" group ASGE 2/35 (5.7%), group no ASGE 8/26 (30-7%) with ORP 0.13 (0.03-0.71 IC 95%) and p = 0.009., Conclusion: In our setting, the use of the ASGE guideline reduces the presence of cholangitis and post-ERCP complications., (Copyright: © 2019 Permanyer.)

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) with subsequent cholecystectomy is the standard of care for the management of patients with choledocholithiasis. There is conflicting evidence in terms of mortality reduction, prevention of complications specifically biliary pancreatitis and cholangitis with the use of early cholecystectomy particularly in high-risk surgical and elderly patients., Aims: We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the early cholecystectomy versus wait and watch strategy after ES., Methods: We searched Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane database for randomized controlled trials comparing the 2 strategies in the management of choledocholithiasis after ES. Our primary outcome of interest was difference in mortality. We evaluated several secondary outcomes including difference in development of acute pancreatitis, biliary colic and cholecystitis, cholangitis and recurrent jaundice, nonbiliary adverse events, and length of hospital stay. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for categorical variables and difference in means was calculated for continuous variables. These were pooled using random effects model., Results: Seven studies with 916 patients (455 cholecystectomy group and 461 wait and watch group) were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled RR with 95% confidence interval for mortality was 1.43 (0.93-2.18), I=9%. In the high-risk patient group, pooled RR was 1.39 (0.64-3.03) and in low-risk population pooled RR was 1.53 (0.79-2.96). Pooled RR for acute pancreatitis was 1.64 (0.46-5.81) with no heterogeneity. There was no difference in the rate of acute pancreatitis patients based on high-risk versus low-risk patients. Pooled RR for occurrence of biliary colic and cholecystitis during follow-up was 9.82 (4.27-22.59), I=0%. Pooled RR for cholangitis and recurrent jaundice was 2.16 (1.14-4.07), I=0%. However, there was no difference in the rate of cholangitis between the 2 groups in low-risk patients. Length of stay was shorter in the wait and watch group with a pooled mean difference was -2.70 (-4.71, -0.70) with substantial heterogeneity., Conclusions: Although we found no difference in mortality between the 2 strategies after ES, laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be recommended as it is associated with lower rates of subsequent recurrent cholecystitis, cholangitis, and biliary colic down the road even in high-risk surgical patients.

Background and Aim: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is a standard procedure for the treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) is emerging as an effective method to treat difficult CBDS, providing several advantages over ES without increasing early adverse events (AE). However, the late AE of EPLBD have not yet been well studied. The aim of the present study was to compare late AE after EPLBD versus ES for the treatment of CBDS using a propensity score-based cohort analysis., Methods: Propensity score matching was introduced to reduce the possible bias in baseline characteristics between two treatment groups and formed the matched cohort including 240 patients. Primary endpoint was cumulative as well as estimated 1-year and 3-year late AE rates. Secondary outcome was the incidence of early AE., Results: Cumulative late AE rates were 12.5% and 16.7% in the ELPBD and ES groups (P = 0.936) with a median follow-up period of 915.5 and 1544.5 days, respectively. Estimated 1-year and 3-year late AE rates were 8.4% and 13.1% in the EPLBD group and 5.0% and 15.0% in the ES group, respectively. In multivariate analysis, ≥two procedures were identified as independent risk factors for late AE. Overall early AE rate did not differ between the groups., Conclusion: In the present study, late AE rate after EPLBD showed no significant difference compared with that after ES, which had a relatively long follow-up period. Therefore, EPLBD could be used for the treatment of CBDS, if CBDS are considered difficult to treat. Clinical Trial Registry: UMIN000027798., (© 2018 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.)

Background: Acute cholangitis (AC) requires prompt diagnosis and treatment for optimal management., Aims: To examine whether a putative "weekend effect" impact outcomes of patients hospitalized for AC., Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients admitted with AC between 2009 and 2012. After excluding those not meeting Tokyo consensus criteria for AC, the cohort was categorized into weekend (Saturday-Sunday) and weekday (Monday-Friday) hospital admission and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) groups. Primary outcome was length of stay (LOS); secondary outcomes included ERC performance, organ failure, and mortality. Groups were compared with Chi-square and t tests; predictors of LOS were assessed with linear regression., Results: The cohort consisted of 181 patients (mean age 63.1 years, 62.4 % male). Choledocholithiasis was the most common etiology of AC (29.4 %). Fifty-two patients (28.7 %) were admitted on a weekend and 129 (71.3 %) on a weekday. One hundred forty-one patients (78 %) underwent ERC, of which 120 (85 %) were on a weekday. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, LOS, proportion undergoing ERC, time to ERC, organ failure, or mortality between weekend and weekday admission groups. Similarly, there were no significant differences between weekend and weekday ERC groups. In multivariate analyses, international normalized ratio (p < 0.01) and intensive care unit triage (p < 0.01) were independent predictors of LOS, whereas weekend admission (p = 0.23) and weekend ERC (p = 0.74) were not., Conclusions: Weekend admission and weekend ERC do not negatively impact outcomes of patients hospitalized with acute cholangitis at a tertiary care center. Further studies, particularly in centers with less weekend resources or staffing, are indicated.

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of symptomatic recurrence following initial non-operative management of gallstone disease in the elderly and to test possible predictors., Methods: This is a single institution retrospective chart review of patients 65 years and older with an initial hospital visit (V1) for symptomatic gallstone disease, over a 4-year period. Patients with initial "non-operative" management were defined as those without surgery at V1 and without elective surgery at visit 2 (V2). Baseline characteristics included age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), diagnosis, and interventions (ERCP or cholecystostomy) at V1. Outcomes assessed over 1 year were as follows: recurrence (any ER/admission visit following V1), surgery, complications, and mortality. A survival analysis using a Cox proportional hazards model was performed to assess predictors of recurrence., Results: There were 195 patients initially treated non-operatively at V1. Mean age was 78.3 ± 7.8 years, 45.6% were male, and the mean CCI was 2.1 ± 1.9. At V1, 54.4% had a diagnosis of biliary colic or cholecystitis, while 45.6% had a diagnosis of cholangitis, pancreatitis, or choledocholithiasis. 39.5% underwent ERCP or cholecystostomy. Excluding 10 patients who died at V1, 31.3% of patients had a recurrence over the study period. Among these, 43.5% had emergency surgery, 34.8% had complications, and 4.3% died. Median time to first recurrence was 2 months (range 6 days-4.8 months). Intervention at V1 was associated with a lower probability of recurrence (HR 0.3, CI [0.14-0.65])., Conclusion: One-third of elderly patients will develop a recurrence following non-operative management of symptomatic biliary disease. These recurrences are associated with significant rates of emergency surgery and morbidity. Percutaneous or endoscopic therapies may decrease the risk of recurrence.

Background: Detailed preoperative delineation of biliary tract anatomy plays a pivotal role in guiding surgeons completing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) smoothly. Hereby, we retrospectively investigated the potential impact of preoperative magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) on LC., Patients and Methods: In this study, clinical data of LC patients who received conventional preoperative examinations from January 2008 to December 2010 (Ctrl group, n = 300) versus conventional examinations plus extra preoperative MRCP assessment between January 2011 and December 2013 (MRCP group, n = 300) were randomly retrieved. The ratios of conversion to open cholecystectomy and various postoperative morbidities were respectively analyzed., Results: In total, the incidences of operation conversion, postoperative remnant cystic duct stone, and choledocholithiasis in the MRCP group were 12 (4.0%), 1 (0.3%), and 2 (0.7%), respectively, all evidently lower than those in the Ctrl group: 41 (13.7%), 7 (2.3%), and 9 (3.0%). In addition, the MRCP group also presented with fewer cases of bile duct injury and incidental gallbladder carcinoma compared with the Ctrl group (1 versus 5 and 1 versus 2, respectively), although none of the variances was statistically significant., Conclusions: Our results demonstrated that preoperative MRCP had a robust safeguarding effect on LC and deserves further promotion.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is challenging in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ERCP in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis and accessed the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores and Child-Pugh classifications for prediction of morbidity and mortality.From January 2000 to June 2014, 77 ERCP operations were performed in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. The data on operative complications were analyzed. MELD scores and Child-Pugh classifications were calculated and associated with operative outcomes and survival. Telephone follow-up was performed to determine survival situations.No death, perforation, or hemorrhage caused by gastroesophageal varices occurred as a result of the procedure. The rate of intraoperative hemorrhage was 13.0%, and the rate of postoperative morbidity was 27.3% including hemorrhage (18.2%), post-ERCP pancreatitis (6.1%), aggravated infection of the biliary tract (1.3%), hepatic encephalopathy (1.3%), and respiratory failure (1.3%). Four (5.2%) patients had both intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhage. Receiver operating characteristic analysis identified MELD scores higher than 11.5 as the best cutoff value for predicting complication incidence (95% confidence interval = 0.63-0.87). Twenty-one (44.7%) patients with a MELD score above 11.5 developed a complication, and 3 (10%) patients who had a lower MELD score developed a complication (P = 0.001). Both MELD score and Child-Pugh classification had prognostic value in patients without jaundice, although sex may result in different prognostic values based on the 2 scores. The rate of complications was not significantly different among patients with different Child-Pugh classifications. No significant difference was observed in patients with different MELD scores or Child-Pugh classifications in terms of median survival times.ERCP is an effective and safe procedure in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. MELD scores can predict the risk of operative complications, but Child-Pugh classification system scores do not predict the risk of complications.

Background & Aims: The management of acute biliary diseases often involves endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but it is not clear whether this technique reduces mortality. We investigated whether mortality from acute biliary diseases that require ERCP has been reduced over time and explored factors associated with mortality., Methods: We conducted a cohort study using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (1998-2008). We identified hospitalizations for choledocholithiasis, cholangitis, and acute pancreatitis that involved ERCP. Multivariate analyses were used to determine the effects of time period, patient factors, hospital characteristics, features of the ERCP procedure, and types of cholecystectomies on mortality, length of stay, and costs., Results: From 1998 to 2008 there were 166,438 admissions for acute biliary conditions that met the inclusion criteria, corresponding to more than 800,000 patients nationwide. During this interval, mortality decreased from 1.1% to 0.6% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-0.8), diagnostic ERCPs decreased from 28.8% to 10.0%, hospitals performing fewer than 100 ERCPs per year decreased from 38.4% to 26.9%, open cholecystectomies decreased from 12.4% to 5.8%, and unsuccessful ERCPs decreased from 6.3% to 3.2% (P < .0001 for all trends). Unsuccessful ERCP (aOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.4-2.2), open cholecystectomy (aOR, 3.4; 95% CI 2.7-4.3), cholangitis (aOR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.3), older age, having Medicare health insurance, and comorbidity were associated with increased mortality., Conclusions: In-hospital mortality from acute biliary conditions requiring ERCP in the United States has decreased over time. Reductions in the rate of unsuccessful ERCPs and open cholecystectomies are associated with this trend., (Copyright © 2014 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The paper presents the results of the 1778 performed ERCP on patients with benign bile duct occlusion. Father was given evaluation of the effectiveness of using ksifokam, and usage of preventive and therapeutic stenting of the main pancreatic duct in 31 patients.

Background: Between 10% to 18% of people undergoing cholecystectomy for gallstones have common bile duct stones. Treatment of the bile duct stones can be conducted as open cholecystectomy plus open common bile duct exploration or laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC + LCBDE) versus pre- or post-cholecystectomy endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in two stages, usually combined with either sphincterotomy (commonest) or sphincteroplasty (papillary dilatation) for common bile duct clearance. The benefits and harms of the different approaches are not known., Objectives: We aimed to systematically review the benefits and harms of different approaches to the management of common bile duct stones., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, 2013) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to August 2013)., Selection Criteria: We included all randomised clinical trials which compared the results from open surgery versus endoscopic clearance and laparoscopic surgery versus endoscopic clearance for common bile duct stones., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models meta-analyses, performed with Review Manager 5., Main Results: Sixteen randomised clinical trials with a total of 1758 randomised participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria of this review. Eight trials with 737 participants compared open surgical clearance with ERCP; five trials with 621 participants compared laparoscopic clearance with pre-operative ERCP; and two trials with 166 participants compared laparoscopic clearance with postoperative ERCP. One trial with 234 participants compared LCBDE with intra-operative ERCP. There were no trials of open or LCBDE versus ERCP in people without an intact gallbladder. All trials had a high risk of bias.There was no significant difference in the mortality between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 5/371 (1%) versus 10/358 (3%) OR 0.51;95% CI 0.18 to 1.44). Neither was there a significant difference in the morbidity between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 76/371 (20%) versus 67/358 (19%) OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.62). Participants in the open surgery group had significantly fewer retained stones compared with the ERCP group (seven trials; 609 participants; 20/313 (6%) versus 47/296 (16%) OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.62), P = 0.0002.There was no significant difference in the mortality between LC + LCBDE versus pre-operative ERCP +LC (five trials; 580 participants; 2/285 (0.7%) versus 3/295 (1%) OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.12 to 4.33). Neither was there was a significant difference in the morbidity between the two groups (five trials; 580 participants; 44/285 (15%) versus 37/295 (13%) OR 1.28; 95% CI 0.80 to 2.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the number of participants with retained stones (five trials; 580 participants; 24/285 (8%) versus 31/295 (11%) OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.39).There was only one trial assessing LC + LCBDE versus LC+intra-operative ERCP including 234 participants. There was no reported mortality in either of the groups. There was no significant difference in the morbidity, retained stones, procedure failure rates between the two intervention groups.Two trials assessed LC + LCBDE versus LC+post-operative ERCP. There was no reported mortality in either of the groups. There was no significant difference in the morbidity between laparoscopic surgery and postoperative ERCP groups (two trials; 166 participants; 13/81 (16%) versus 12/85 (14%) OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.72). There was a significant difference in the retained stones between laparoscopic surgery and postoperative ERCP groups (two trials; 166 participants; 7/81 (9%) versus 21/85 (25%) OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.72; P = 0.008.In total, seven trials including 746 participants compared single staged LC + LCBDE versus two-staged pre-operative ERCP + LC or LC + post-operative ERCP. There was no significant difference in the mortality between single and two-stage management (seven trials; 746 participants; 2/366 versus 3/380 OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.12 to 4.33). There was no a significant difference in the morbidity (seven trials; 746 participants; 57/366 (16%) versus 49/380 (13%) OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.89). There were significantly fewer retained stones in the single-stage group (31/366 participants; 8%) compared with the two-stage group (52/380 participants; 14%), but the difference was not statistically significantOR 0.59; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.94).There was no significant difference in the conversion rates of LCBDE to open surgery when compared with pre-operative, intra-operative, and postoperative ERCP groups. Meta-analysis of the outcomes duration of hospital stay, quality of life, and cost of the procedures could not be performed due to lack of data., Authors' Conclusions: Open bile duct surgery seems superior to ERCP in achieving common bile duct stone clearance based on the evidence available from the early endoscopy era. There is no significant difference in the mortality and morbidity between laparoscopic bile duct clearance and the endoscopic options. There is no significant reduction in the number of retained stones and failure rates in the laparoscopy groups compared with the pre-operative and intra-operative ERCP groups. There is no significant difference in the mortality, morbidity, retained stones, and failure rates between the single-stage laparoscopic bile duct clearance and two-stage endoscopic management. More randomised clinical trials without risks of systematic and random errors are necessary to confirm these findings.

Background: Minilaparotomy has been reported to be an alternative minimally invasive option to laparoscopy. However, the quality of available data on the effectiveness of minilaparotomy to treat choledocholithiasis is poor., Materials and Methods: Two hundred and twenty-eight patients with choledocholithiasis underwent surgical exploration of the common bile duct via minilaparotomy from 1995 to 2010. Of these, 193 patients had choledocho/cholecystolithiasis with previous ineffective attempts at endoscopic clearance and 29 patients had choledocho/cholecystolithiasis without previous attempts at endoscopic clearance. Six other patients had recurrent/residual choledocholithiasis despite ineffective attempts at endoscopic clearance. Peri-operative adverse events were analyzed in accordance with the revised Satava classification for intra-operative events while post-operative complications were graded according to the Accordion classification., Results: Conversion was needed in 3.9% of procedures. The mean operative time was 86 min. Post-operative complications occurred in 6.1%, 2.2% of which were major (Accordion grade 4-6). Mortality was 0.9%., Conclusion: Minilaparotomy is an effective minimally invasive approach for the surgical treatment of choledocholithiasis. This approach could be considered as an alternative to the laparoscopic approach for surgical exploration of the common bile duct in patients with choledocholithiasis., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) followed by a laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is generally accepted as the treatment of choice for patients with choledochocystolithiasis who are eligible for surgery. Previous studies have shown that LC after ES is associated with a high conversion rate. The aim of the present study was to assess the complexity of LC after ES compared with standard LC for symptomatic uncomplicated cholecystolithiasis., Methods: The study population consisted of two patient cohorts: patients who had undergone a previous ERCP with ES for choledocholithiasis (PES) and patients with cholecystolithiasis who had no previous intervention prior to LC (NPES)., Results: The PES group consisted of 93 patients and the NPES group consisted of 83 consecutive patients. Patients in the PES group had higher risks for longer [more than 65 min, odds ratio (OR) = 4.21 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.79-9.91)] and more complex [higher than 6 points, on a 0-10 scale, OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.43-6.81)] surgery. The conversion rate in the PES and NPES group (6.5% versus 2.4%, respectively) and the complication rate (12.9% versus 9.6%, respectively) were not significantly different., Discussion: A laparoscopic cholecystectomy after ES is lengthier and more difficult than in uncomplicated cholelithiasis and should therefore be performed by an experienced surgeon., (© 2012 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.)

Introduction: Management of choledocholithiasis and its complications is variable and often requires transfer to a specialty facility. This study links patient-specific characteristics with the outcome measure of complicated choledocholithiasis to identify high-risk patients who may require expedited treatment or transfer to a higher level of care., Materials and Methods: Patients with a discharge diagnosis of choledocholithiasis (CDL) were identified from the 2009 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Patient characteristics were identified associated with the primary outcome measure of complicated choledocholithiasis (cCDL), defined as acute pancreatitis or cholangitis during the admission for CDL. Predictors of mortality were also evaluated. Analysis was performed using complex-sample univariate and adjusted analyses., Results: We identified 123,990 discharges with a diagnosis of CDL. The overall incidence of CDL was 314 per 100,000 NIS discharges. Forty-one percent of CDL discharges were for cCDL (acute pancreatitis 31%, cholangitis 12%). Risk factors for cCDL included age (risk increased 0.8% per year), male gender (odds ratio [OR] 1.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.2), alcohol abuse (OR 1.5, CI 1.3-1.8), diabetes (OR 1.1, CI 1.0-1.2), hypertension (OR 1.1, CI 1.0-1.2), obesity (OR 1.2, CI 1.1-1.3), nonelective admission (OR 2.3, CI 2.0-2.6), and Asian/Pacific Islander race/ethnicity (OR 1.2, CI 1.0-1.5). Patients with cCDL had increased odds of mortality (OR 1.5, CI 1.2-2.0)., Conclusions: Increased age, nonelective admission, and specific comorbid conditions are associated with cCDL, which has increased mortality. These factors can be used to identify patients needing timely access to treatment or transfer to a higher level of care., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare the safety and effectiveness of primary closure with those of T-tube drainage in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for choledocholithiasis., Methods: A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed, EmBase, and Cochrane Library databases. Only randomized controlled trials comparing primary closure with T-tube drainage in LCBDE were considered eligible for this meta-analysis. The analyzed outcome variables included postoperative mortality, overall morbidity, biliary complication rate, biliary leak rate, reoperation, operating time, postoperative hospital stay, time to abdominal drain removal, and retained stone. All calculations and statistical tests were performed using ReviewerManager 5.1.2 software., Results: A total of 295 patients (148 patients with primary closure and 147 patients with T-tube drainage) from three trials were identified and analyzed. No deaths occurred in any of the trials. Primary closure showed significantly better results in terms of morbidity (risk ratio (RR), 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.30 to 0.88), biliary complication without a combination of retained stone (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.97), reoperation (RR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.87), operating time (mean difference (MD), -20.72; 95% CI, -29.59 to -11.85), postoperative hospital stay (MD, -3.24; 95% CI, -3.96 to -2.52), and time to abdominal drainage removal (MD, -0.45; 95% CI, -0.86 to -0.04). Statistically significant differences were not found between the two methods in terms of biliary leak, biliary complication, and retained stones., Conclusion: The current meta-analysis indicates that primary closure of the common bile duct is safer and more effective than T-tube drainage for LCBDE. Therefore, we do not recommend routine performance of T-tube drainage in LCBDE.

Aim: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones., Methods: Four databases, including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Science Citation Index up to September 2011, were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were extracted from the studies by two independent reviewers. The primary outcomes were stone clearance from the common bile duct, postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were conversion to other procedures, number of procedures per patient, length of hospital stay, total operative time, hospitalization charges, patient acceptance and quality of life scores., Results: Seven eligible RCTs [five trials (n = 621) comparing preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); two trials (n = 166) comparing postoperative ERCP/EST + LC with LC + LCBDE], composed of 787 patients in total, were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis detected no statistically significant difference between the two groups in stone clearance from the common bile duct [risk ratios (RR) = -0.10, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.24 to 0.04, P = 0.17], postoperative morbidity (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.10, P = 0.16), mortality (RR = 2.19, 95% CI: 0.33 to 14.67, P = 0.42), conversion to other procedures (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.54 to 2.70, P = 0.39), length of hospital stay (MD = 0.99, 95% CI: -1.59 to 3.57, P = 0.45), total operative time (MD = 12.14, 95% CI: -1.83 to 26.10, P = 0.09). Two-stage (LC + ERCP/EST) management clearly required more procedures per patient than single-stage (LC + LCBDE) management., Conclusion: Single-stage management is equivalent to two-stage management but requires fewer procedures. However, patient's condition, operator's expertise and local resources should be taken into account in making treatment decisions.

Background: The major issue with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) is whether its diagnostic accuracy for common bile duct (CBD) stones matches that of other diagnostic procedures, and thus, whether it will become a routine diagnostic procedure. The current study aimed to address the main determinants of CBD stone diagnosis in IOC among an Iranian population., Methods: In a retrospective review database-based study conducted in Taleghani Hospital in Tehran between 2006 and 2008, baseline data and perioperative information of 2060 patients (male to female ratio 542:1518, mean age 53.7 years) who were candidates for cholecystectomy and underwent concomitant IOC for confirming CBD stones were reviewed. The predictive power of this procedure for diagnosis of abnormal biliary ducts with the focus on biliary stones was determined., Results: Overall mortality and morbidity following cholecystectomy in the study population were 0.6% and 2.6%, respectively. Both early mortality and morbidity due to cholecystectomy were higher in male than female. The prevalence of CBD stones in IOC was 3.4% (5.2% in male and 2.8% in female, P=0.008). Among those without gallstones, 8.7% had CBD stones and only 3.1% had concomitant gallstones and CBD stones. The main predictors of stone appearance as an abnormal feature of IOC during cholecystectomy were: advanced age (OR=1.022, P=0.001), male gender (OR=1.498, P=0.050), history of abdominal surgery (OR=1.543, P=0.040) and preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (OR=5.400, P<0.001)., Conclusions: IOC is a safe and accurate method for the assessment of bile duct anatomy and stones. Therefore, the routine use of IOC within cholecystectomy seems reasonable and is recommended.

Background: Ampullary restenosis is a late complication of biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy. Long-term data are limited regarding both the rate of restenosis and complications resulting from repeat therapy., Aims: To determine the incidence of post sphincterotomy restenosis and the effectiveness of endoscopic therapy in the management of this entity., Methods: A retrospective review of medical charts and the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) database to identify patients with ERCP and biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy during the period 1998-2002 at the University of Iowa Hospitals was conducted. All subjects were contacted by phone and asked about the recurrence of their pancreatobiliary symptoms after the first ERCP and whether they sought any medical treatment for these symptoms. The primary outcome was restenosis of the sphincterotomy site and the secondary outcome was complications of endoscopic treatment of sphincterotomy restenosis., Results: A total of 202 patients underwent ERCP and biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy on an intact major papilla. Of these, n = 80 patients (54.7 +/- 19 years of age, 76% female) consented and enrolled in the study. Among these, n = 13 (16%) developed ampullary restenosis in 1-62 (median 16) months after the index ERCP. These 13 patients underwent a total of 24 ERCPs (range 1-4 for each patient) for repeat biliary sphincterotomy and biliary stenting, if needed. Repeat biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy was successful in 12/13 (92%) patients. Complications of repeat biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy were seen in three patients: mild pancreatitis (n = 1), severe bleeding (n = 1), and severe duodenal perforation (n = 1)., Conclusions: Long-term restenosis is an important sequella of biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy. Repeat biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy is an effective treatment modality, but complications are not negligible.

Background: Endoscopic biliary stenting with a plastic stent is often performed to prevent impaction of common bile duct (CBD) stones. The therapeutic effect of a plastic stent placement in terms of reduction in stone size and number has not been established., Objective: The aim of this study was to study the effect of biliary stenting as therapy for CBD stones., Design: Retrospective study., Setting: Municipal hospital outpatients., Interventions: Patients with large (> or = 20 mm) and/or multiple (> or = 3) stones had placement of a 7F double-pigtail plastic stent without stone extraction at the initial ERCP. Approximately 2 months later, stone removal was attempted. The number and size of CBD stones before and after stent placement, stone clearance, complications, and 180-day mortality were evaluated., Results: Forty patients were studied. Stent placement averaged 65 days (range, 50-82 days). The median number (interquartile range) of stones per patient fell after stent placement (4.0 [3.0] before vs. 2.0 [1.0] after; P < .0001). Characteristically, larger stones became smaller and small stones disappeared (ie, the median stone index decreased from 4.6 [3.0] to 2.0 [1.5]; P < .0001). Stone clearance at the second ERCP was achieved in 37 out of 40 patients (93%). Complications included cholangitis (13%) and pancreatitis (5%) after the second ERCP. No 180-day mortality occurred., Limitations: A retrospective, single-center study., Conclusions: Stent placement for 2 months was associated with large and/or multiple CBD stones becoming smaller and/or disappearing without any complications. Stenting followed by a wait period may assist in difficult CBD stone removal., (Copyright 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The management of symptomatic or incidentally discovered common bile duct (CBD) stones is still controversial. Of patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis, 5-15% will also harbor CBD stones, and those with symptoms suggestive of choledocholithiasis will have an even higher incidence. Options for treatment include preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy (ERCP/ES) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiogram (LC/IOC), followed by either laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) or placement of a common bile duct double-lumen catheter with postoperative management. The purpose of this analysis was to determine the optimal management of such patients., Methods: A decision analysis was performed to analyze the management of patients with suspected common bile duct stones. The basic choice was between preoperative ERCP/ES followed by LC, LC/IOC followed by LCBDE, or common duct double-lumen catheter (Fitzgibbons tube) placement with either expectant management or postoperative ERCP/ES. Data on morbidity and mortality was obtained from the literature. Sensitivity analysis was done varying the incidence of positive CBD stones on IOC with associated morbidity and mortality., Results: One-stage management of symptomatic CBD stones with LC/LCBDE is associated with less morbidity and mortality (7% and 0.19%) than two-stage management utilizing preoperative ERCP/ES (13.5% and 0.5%). Sensitivity analysis shows that there is an increase in morbidity and mortality for LC/LCBDE as the incidence of positive IOC increases but are still less than two-stage management even with a 100% positive IOC (9.4%, 0.5%). If a double-lumen catheter is to be used for positive IOC, the morbidity would be higher than two-stage management only if the positive IOC incidence is more than 65% but still with no mortality., Conclusion: LCBDE has lower morbidity and mortality rates compared to preoperative ERCP/ES in the management of patients with suspected CBD stones even if the chance of CBD stones reaches 100%. Using a common duct double-lumen catheter may be considered if LCBDE is not feasible and the chance of CBD stone is less than 65%.

Background: Cholecystectomy is not required in up to 64% of patients who adopt a wait-and-see policy after endoscopic clearance of common bile duct stones. Although reports of retrospective cohort series have shown a higher mortality among patients who defer cholecystectomy, it is not known if this is due to the patients' premorbid health status or due to the deferral of cholecystectomy. Randomised clinical trials of prophylactic cholecystectomy versus wait-and-see have not had sufficient power to demonstrate differences in survival., Objectives: To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of cholecystectomy deferral (wait-and-see) versus elective (prophylactic) cholecystectomy in patients who have had an endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy., Search Strategy: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1966 to 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 2007), and Science Citation Index Expanded without language restrictions until April 2007., Selection Criteria: Randomised clinical trials comparing patients whose gallbladder was left in-situ after endoscopic sphincterotomy (wait-and-see group) versus patients who had cholecystectomy with either endoscopic sphincterotomy or common bile duct exploration (prophylactic cholecystectomy group), irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status., Data Collection and Analysis: We assessed the impact of a wait-and-see policy on mortality. Secondary outcomes assessed were the incidence of biliary pain, cholangitis, pancreatitis, need for cholangiography, need for cholecystectomy, and the rate of difficult cholecystectomy. We pooled data using relative risk with fixed-effect and random-effects models., Main Results: We included 5 randomised trials with 662 participants out of 93 publications identified through the literature searches. The number of deaths was 47 in the wait-and-see group (334 patients) compared to 26 in the prophylactic cholecystectomy group (328 patients) for a 78% increased risk of mortality (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.75, P = 0.010). The survival benefit of prophylactic cholecystectomy was independent of trial design, inclusion of high risk patients or inclusion of any one of the five trials. Patients in the wait-and-see group had higher rates of recurrent biliary pain (RR 14.56, 95% CI 4.95 to 42.78, P < 00001), jaundice or cholangitis (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.09 to 5.87, P = 0.03), and of repeat ERCP or other forms of cholangiography (RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.32, P = 0.005). Cholecystectomy was eventually performed in 35% (115 patients) of the wait-and-see group., Authors' Conclusions: Prophylactic cholecystectomy should be offered to patients whose gallbladders remain in-situ after endoscopic sphincterotomy and common bile duct clearance.

Background: No unanimous consensus has been reached as to the need for routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) for choledocholithiasis in very elderly patients, who are considered as high-risk subjects for surgery., Methods: From 1991 through 1997, 170 patients were referred to undergo preoperative ES and routine LC for common bile duct (CBD) stones. The results for 27 patients (age 80 years or older) were compared with those achieved for younger patients. Successively, in a retrospective case-control study, the results for the selected patients were compared with those for 27 very elderly patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but did not receive LC. The mean follow-up period was 126 months., Results: Octogenarians showed longer surgery time (79 vs 51 min) and postoperative hospital stay (2.8 vs 1.2 days), as well as more early low-grade complications (15% vs 3%), whereas there were no differences in conversion rate or serious complications. Recurrent symptoms or complications developed in 48% of octogenarians not undergoing routine LC, and 30% finally needed surgery. One patient in the control group died after emergency cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. The results of surgery were significantly poorer for the control group., Conclusions: Although a "wait-and-see" policy allowed two-thirds of LCs to be avoided in octogenarians, biliary-related events developed for every second patient, often requiring delayed surgery, with poorer results. Sequential treatment (ES followed by elective LC) is a safe procedure for octogenarians, and should be considered as a standard, definitive treatment for cholecystocholedocholithiasis even after the age of 80 years.