Search

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become an essential tool to investigate patients with the postcholecystectomy syndrome. A normal cholangiogram usually rules out the presence of biliary tract disease, and further investigations are directed towards other organ systems. We present a case in which a normal ERCP caused a significant delay in reassessing the biliary tree in a patient who eventually presented with choledocholithiasis. A repeat ERCP should be considered in patients with persistent biliary tract pain, even if the initial ERCP shows no abnormality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The current management of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi consists of endoscopic stone extraction (ESE) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Following the advent of techniques of laparoscopic ductal stone clearance, an alternative single-stage laparoscopic treatment was introduced for these patients. The European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (E.A. E.S.) set up a ductal stone trial to compare the relative efficacy and outcome of these two management options.Methods: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial compared two management options. Group A (n = 150) received preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) with ESE followed by LC during the same hospital admission, and group B (n = 150) received single-stage laparoscopic management.Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in the clinical demographic details and the pretreatment biochemical findings. In group A, 14 of 150 patients received single-stage treatment; in group B, 17 of 150 were managed by the two-stage approach (protocol violation = 31/300, 10%). In group A patients managed in accordance with randomization, ERC was successful in 129/136 (95%) and preoperative ESE succeeded in 82/98 (84%) with ductal calculi detected by the ERC. Two patients had malignancies and one refused surgery. Thus, 133 patients underwent surgery. Of this group, 116 had LC only and 17 had LC and attempted laparoscopic duct exploration. There were eight conversions to open surgery (6%), 17 complications for both stages (12.8%), and two postoperative deaths (1.5%). In group B patients managed in accordance with randomization, intraoperative cholangiography was successful in 132/133 (99%). Twenty-one (16%) had normal findings, ductal calculi were found in 109, and other pathology was noted in two (periampullary cancer, severe pancreatitis). These two patients and one other (who had gross adhesion in the triangle of Calot) were converted at the start of the procedure. Transcystic ductal stone clearance was successful in 45 of 56 patients (80%), and laparoscopic direct common duct (CBD) exploration was successful in 47 of 55 patients (85%). This group includes 53 patients who underwent primary direct exploration and two failed attempts at transcystic extraction. The conversion rate was 13%. Postoperative complications were encountered in 21 patients (15.8%), and one patient died of a major myocardial infarction (0. 75%). The one postoperative death and the 10/11 biliary complications occurred in the laparoscopic supraduodenal CBD exploration subgroup. The conversion rate was higher in group B (17 vs eight; p = 0.08). Laparotomy in the postoperative period was required in three patients in group A and four patients in group B. The group B patients were in hospital for 3 days less than patients who had two-stage management (median, 6.0, IQR = 4.25-12 vs median, 9.0, IQR = 5.5-14; p < 0.05).Conclusions: The results demonstrate equivalent success rates and patient morbidity for the two management options but a significantly shorter hospital stay with the single-stage laparoscopic treatment. The findings indicate that in fit patients (ASA I and II), single-stage laparoscopic treatment is the better option, and preoperative ESE should be confined to poor-risk patients-i.e., those with cholangitis or severe pancreatitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic ultrasound is an alternative to operative cholangiogram for evaluation of the common bile duct (CBD) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It is a safe, fast, and reliable method for detecting choledocholithiasis.Methods: We prospectively evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of laparoscopic ultrasound (LUS) and digital fluorocholangiogram (DFCG) in a three-phase study of 360 consecutive patients.Results: In phase I, 140 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy had LUS performed first, followed by DFCG. Thirteen patients had CBD calculi identified on LUS. Four patients with confirmed (two cases) or presumed (two cases) CBD calculi on DFCG were not identified on LUS. Thus, the specificity of LUS was 100%, whereas the sensitivity was 76.5%. DFCG had four false positives, for a sensitivity of 100% with a specificity of 96.7%. LUS was performed, on average, in 6.6 min, whereas DFCG required 10.9 min to perform. In phase II, the infusion of saline through a cystic duct catheter was performed in instances where the distal CBD could not be well seen. This maneuver distended the intrapancreatic portion of the CBD, allowing better visualization. Nine stones were identified on LUS in 78 patients, increasing the sensitivity to 100%. One false positive DCFG was encountered, resulting in a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 98.6%. In phase III, we performed routine LUS and used DFCG only in select cases. The sensitivity and specificity for LUS were 95.7% and 100%, respectively, whereas DFCG had a sensitivity of 95.2% and a specificity of 100%. One patient in phase III has returned 11 months post-op with a CBD stone. This was initially missed on LUS, DFCG, and postoperative ERCP. The sensitivity and specificity in all 360 patients were 90% and 100% for LUS and 98.1% and 98.1% for DFCG, respectively. A total of five CBD stones were missed by LUS, four early in the study (phase I). One missed on LUS in phase III was also missed by DFCG and ERCP.Conclusions: LUS is a reliable alternative to DFCG during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). With experience, it is as sensitive as DFCG and more specific. It is more rapidly performed than cholangiography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The current management of patients with ductal calculi and gallstone disease consists of endoscopic stone extraction (ESE) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The advent of techniques of laparoscopic ductal stone clearance has introduced an alternative single stage laparoscopic treatment for these patients. The EAES ductal stone trial was set up to compare the relative efficacy and outcome of these two management options. Methods: The study consists of a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial comparing two management options of patients undergoing LC and suspected of harbouring common duct stones. Patients registered into the trial are randomized to one of two arms: (i) Group A-preoperative ERC with ESE followed by LC during the same hospital admission. (ii) Group B-single stage laparoscopic management consisting of LC and laparoscopic stone extraction either by the trans-cystic duct route or by direct supraduodenal common duct exploration. Results: This preliminary analysis was carried out on 207 randomized patients with comparisons being made on the intention to treat principle. The two groups (A = 106, B = 101) were comparable with respect to clinical features. ASA grade, serum biochemistry and ultrasound findings. Conclusions: These preliminary findings indicate equivalent success rates and patient morbidity between the two management options but a shorter hospital stay (cost benefit) with the single stage laparoscopic treatment. Trans-cystic duct extraction is a more benign procedure than laparoscopic supraduodenal CBD exploration and is accompanied by a significantly shorter hospital stay. The higher incidence of conversion in the single stage laparoscopic group compared to the two-stage arm is due to the preference for open common duct exploration when the laparoscopic attempt failed by the majority of participating surgeons. The results to-date suggest that in fit patients, single stage laparoscopic treatment is the better option and the role of ESE should change to selective use in those patients in whom laparoscopic ductal stone extraction has failed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An audit of routine intraoperative cholangiography in a consecutive series of 496 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been performed. Cannulation of the cystic duct was possible in 483 patients (97%). The use of portable, digitized C-arm fluorocholangiography was vastly superior to the employment of a mobile x-ray machine and static films in terms of reduced time to carry out the procedure and total abolition of unsatisfactory radiological exposure of the biliary tract. Repeat of the procedure was necessary in 22% of cases when the mobile x-ray equipment was used. Aside from the detection of unsuspected stones in 18 patients (3.9%), routine intra-operative cholangiography identified four patients (0.8%) whose management would undoubtedly have been disadvantaged if intraoperative cholangiography had not been performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]