Choledocholithiasis: Treatment Options in a Tertiary Care Setup in Pakistan.

Introduction Among patients with cholelithiasis, choledocholithiasis may also be present in about 18% of cases. They can be treated through various endoscopic, laparoscopic, and open surgical procedures. Objective The objective of this study was to determine the outcome of patients with choledocholithiasis being treated in our setup. Methods This descriptive case series was conducted at Holy Family Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan over two years from January 2015 to December 2016. All patients with choledocholithiasis admitted to Surgical Unit 1 were included in this study. All patients underwent elective endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In patients with successful ERCP, laparoscopic or open cholecystectomy was performed at a later date. In patients in whom ERCP failed, open surgical clearance of the common bile duct (CBD), along with cholecystectomy, was done. Results A total of 200 cases of choledocholithiasis were admitted during the study period. Most of the participants (73%) in this study were female. Liver function tests were found to be deranged in 88 patients (44%) and normal in 112 patients (56%). At presentation, 3.5% (n=7) had concomitant acute biliary pancreatitis and 8% (n=16) had cholangitis. Successful ERCP followed by cholecystectomy was performed in 88.5% of cases. On the other hand, 11.5% (n=23) patients had failed ERCP due to impacted stones. They underwent open surgical procedures, i.e. 43.48% (n=10) had choledochotomies, 47.82% (n=11) had choledochoduodenostomies and 8.69% (n=2) had hepaticojejunostomies. No postoperative mortality was observed. However, anastomotic leaking occurred in 8.69% cases (n=2). Conclusion A two-staged procedure consisting of ERCP, followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy, should be the first line of treatment for common bile duct (CBD) stones. In cases where ERCP fails, open surgical procedures still remain a relevant and a definitive option in resource-constrained setups.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.