Search

Objective Discuss the clinical experience of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and primary suture in operation for choledocholithiasis. Methods From August 2010 to December 2012， 53 patients with choledocholithiasis were treated with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and primary suture laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and primary suture，not T tube drainage in Dept.of General Surgery First，Wenjiang branch courts of Sichuan provincial people's hospital. Their clinical data were selected and retrospectively analyzed. Results 53 cases have successfully operated （100%）， the operated time was 100-180 minutes， and the postoperative hospitalization time was 6-12 days. 4 cases occured bile leakage （7.5%）， but they were cured through abdominal cavity drainage. All the patients were follow-up visited in 2-14 months. There was nobile leakage， bile duct stenosis， bile duct bleeding or residual calculi. Conclusion Under the strict conditions for mastering operative indications， laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and primary suture is a safe， effective， more minimally invasive， faster recovery treatment for choled ocholithiasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: 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 86min. 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 &y& Elsevier]

Background: This study aimed to describe the authors' early experience with robot-assisted common bile duct exploration (CBDE) for choledocholithiasis refractory to endoscopic therapy and to compare the outcomes with those of equivalent patients undergoing an open technique. Methods: At our institution, 55 CBDEs were performed between 2005 and 2010. All 19 robot-assisted cases were unselected elective referrals for stone disease. Of 36 open procedures, emergency cases and exploration not for stone disease were excluded, leaving 18 cases for analysis. Cases were analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis. A P value of 0.05 denoted statistical significance. Results: The patients did not differ in terms of demography, comorbidity, or presenting symptoms. The reasons for endoscopic failure in both groups were similar. The mean operating time was longer for robot-assisted surgery (220 ± 41.26 min) than for open surgery (169 ± 65.81 min) ( P = 0.01), but the median hospital stay was shorter (4 vs 11 days; P = 0.02). Four conversions to open surgery (21 %) were performed due to severe adhesions. The two groups did not differ statistically in terms of T-tube usage (74 vs 61 %; P = 0.414). One death occurred in the robotic group and two in the open cohort. Postoperative complications occurred in seven robotic and ten open cases ( P = 0.402). They were mainly respiratory complications in the robot-assisted group, whereas they were cardiac and wound-related complications in the open group. Two of the converted cases had complications similar to those of the open group. Postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for retained stones was performed in one open case and three robotic cases. Conclusion: Robot-assisted CBDE offers some benefit when ERCP fails. Ideal case selection may enhance success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Purpose: Our aim was to compare outcomes of children undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC+CBDE) to those undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with adjunctive endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (LC+ERCP). Methods: We performed a two-center retrospective chart review of all children (<18 years) undergoing LC+CBDE or LC+ERCP between January 2000 and July 2011. Wilcoxon test was performed on continuous variables and logistic regression modeling on categorical data. A P value < 0.05 was considered significant. Outcomes with a P value < 0.2 were selected for multivariable analysis. Results: Forty-two patients were identified. Twenty-four (57%) underwent LC+ERCP, and eighteen (43%) underwent LC+CBDE. Demographic and clinical factors were well matched between groups. Total operative time was similar between groups (157 min vs. 152 min, P = .26). LC+CBDE patients had zero major complications and five minor complications (retained stone: 3, pancreatitis: 1, late recurrence: 1). LC+ERCP patients experienced two major complications (duodenal perforation: 1, bleeding requiring transfusion: 1), and four minor complications (pancreatitis: 2, retained stone: 2, P = .57). Median length of stay was significantly longer (15.7 days vs. 6.6 days, P = .02), and median hospital cost was significantly higher ($18,132 vs. $12,735, P < .01) in the LC+ERCP group. Multivariable analysis revealed that cost was significantly lower in patients undergoing LC+CBDE (P = .05, OR= 0.71; 95% CI: 0.51–0.97). Conclusion: LC+CBDE at the time of cholecystectomy is associated with decreased length of stay, decreased cost, and has similar or improved morbidity compared to LC+ERCP. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Introduction: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is an effective, single-stage treatment for choledocholithiasis. However, LCBDE requires specific cognitive and technical skills, is infrequently performed by residents, and currently lacks suitable training and assessment modalities outside of the operating room. To address this gap in training, a simulator model for transcystic and transcholedochal LCBDE was developed and evaluated. Methods: A procedure algorithm incorporating essential cognitive and technical steps of LCBDE was developed, along with a physical model to allow performance of a simulated procedure. Modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) rating scales were developed to assess performance on the model. Construct validity was assessed by comparing the performance of novices (residents and surgeons without LCBDE experience) versus experienced subjects (surgeons with previous LCBDE experience). Concurrent validity was assessed by comparing scores from the LCBDE scales to those from the standard OSATS scale. Internal consistency and interrater reliability were assessed by comparing performance scores assigned by three independent raters. Results: Sixteen novices and five experienced subjects performed simulated procedures, with novices scoring lower than experienced subjects on both transcystic (20 ± 3 vs. 33 ± 2 [possible score range, 0-45], p < 0.001) and transcholedochal (25 ± 8 vs. 42 ± 3 [possible score range, 0-53], p < 0.001) rating scales. Scores on the rating scales correlated significantly with scores from the standard OSATS scale. Internal consistency and interrater reliability of the LCBDE rating scales were favorable. Conclusions: The LCBDE simulator is a low-cost yet realistic physical model that allows performance and evaluation of technical skills required for LCBDE. The LCBDE rating scales show evidence of construct validity, concurrent validity, internal consistency, and interrater reliability. Use of the LCBDE model and associated rating scales allows procedure-specific feedback for trainees and could be used to improve current training. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOES) was compared to LC with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) to define the best single-session minimally invasive treatment for cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Methods: Between June 2009 and December 2010, patients with gallstones and common bile duct (CBD) stones diagnosed by preoperative ultrasonography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography were randomized to LC-LCBDE or LC-IOES. The primary end point was complete clearance of CBD of stones. The secondary end points were operation time, conversion rate, length of hospital stay, complications and mortality. Results: Two hundred and twenty-six patients were eligible. They were randomized to LC-LCBDE (n = 115) and LC-IOES (n = 111). There was no statistically significant difference in the success rate of CBD clearance between the two interventions (92% for LC-LCBDE vs. 97.2% for LC-IOES with a p value >0.05). There were no differences between the two groups in terms of surgical time and postoperative length of stay. Pancreatitis and bleeding sphincterotomy were significantly more prevalent in the LC-IOES group, while bile leakage and retained CBD stones were significantly more prevalent in the LC-LCBDE group. Conclusion: Both LC-IOES and LC-LCBDE were shown to be safe, effective, minimally invasive treatments for cholecystocholedocholithiasis, but the former option may be preferred when facilities and experience in endoscopic therapy exist. Copyright © 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the benefits and harms of primary closure versus T-tube drainage after common bile duct (CBD) exploration for choledocholithiasis. Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was done to identify randomized controlled trials assessing the benefits and harms of primary closure versus T-tube drainage after CBD exploration from Jan. 1990 to Apr. 2010. A meta-analysis was set up to distinguish overall difference between the primary closure and the T-tube drainage group. Results: There were statistically significant differences between groups: biliary complications (odds ratio (OR) 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.42 (0.19-0.92); P = 0.03), main complications (OR 95% CI, 0.46 (0.23-0.90); P = 0.02), operating time (weighted mean difference (WMD) 95% CI, −19.53 (−29.35 to −9.71); P < 0.0001), and hospital stay (WMD 95% CI, −4.16 (−7.07 to −1.24); P = 0.005) except peri-operative mortality (OR 95% CI, 0.83 (0.11-6.37); P = 0.86), residual stones (OR 95% CI, 0.70 (0.22-2.25); P = 0.55), and abdominal collections (OR 95% CI, 1.93 (0.34-10.76); P = 0.46). And the result of wound infection (OR 95% CI, 0.38 (0.14-1.02); P = 0.05) tended to favor the primary closure group. Conclusion: The primary closure might be as effective as T-tube drainage after choledochotomy in the prevention of the development of post-operative complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The evolution of surgical technology has impacted on surgical practice. We determined trends in surgical caseload for common benign biliary and uppergastrointestinal conditions in Australia over the last 15 years. Methods: Using the Medicare Australia web site, the use of Medicare item numbers specific to gall stone, bariatric and anti-reflux procedures were determined nationally and for each Australian state for each year from 1994 to 2007. Rates of operative cholangiography, laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy conversion and bile duct exploration were calculated. Per capita use of bariatric procedures was also determined. Anti-reflux surgery was analysed as total and specific subgroups of anti-reflux procedures. Results: The use of intra-operative cholangiography has increased over time, and the conversion to open cholecystectomy and application of common bile duct exploration both decreased. A rapid increase in restrictive bariatric procedures has occurred, and this has been followed by a similar increase in revision bariatric surgery and lap band adjustments. The application of anti-reflux surgery has also increased significantly with the repair of large hiatus hernia accounting for most of the increase over the last five years, whereas revision anti-reflux surgery remains uncommon. Conclusions: These data demonstrate significant increases in the application of some laparoscopic surgical techniques, particularly for morbid obesity. Future health-care planning will need to consider the impact of these changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Despite advancements in gallbladder surgery with the introduction of endoscopic and laparoscopic techniques, many surgeons, especially in the developing world, still perform open cholecystectomy with common bile duct (CBD) exploration for choledocholithiasis. The purpose of the study is to report the outcomes of a case series of open CBD exploration without the use of T-tubes. Materials and methods: A retrospective chart review of all consecutive open CBD exploration done by the first author over a period of 23 years was conducted. Demographic data, preoperative investigations, the surgical techniques and perioperative outcomes were recorded. Results: Of 690 open cholecystectomies performed during the study period, 108 had common bile duct exploration. In 94 cases this was done via a supraduodenal choledochotomy, in 10 cases via a transduodenal sphincteroplasty and in 4 cases via the cystic duct. In 90 cases, a simple choledochotomy and primary closure was done while in 4 cases choledocho-duodenostomy was required. Eighty-seven percent of surgeries were done on elective basis and 13% on an emergency basis and no T-tubes were used in any patients. The mean hospital length of stay was 3.2 days and the perioperative morbidity was negligible. Conclusions: In a limited resource setting, there is still a role for open CBD exploration and primary closure without the necessity of T-tubes and stents as evidenced by a good perioperative patient outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Traditionally, the common bile duct (CBD) is closed with T-tube drainage after choledochotomy and removal of CBD stones. However, the insertion of a T-tube is not without complication.Aim Of Work: This randomized study was designed to compare the use of T-tube and primary closure of choledochotomy after laparoscopic choledochotomy to determine whether primary closure can be as safe as closure with T-tube drainage.Methods: Between February 2006 and June 2009, 122 consecutive patients with proven choledocholithiasis had laparoscopic choledochotomy. They were randomized into two equal groups: T-tube (n = 61) and primary closure (n = 61). Demographic data, intraoperative findings, postoperative complications, and postoperative stay were recorded.Results: There was no mortality in both groups. There were no differences in the demographic characteristics or clinical presentations between the two groups. Compared with the T-tube group, the operative time and postoperative stay were significantly shorter and the incidences of overall postoperative complications and biliary complications were statistically and significantly lower in the primary closure group.Conclusion: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with primary closure without external drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy is feasible, safe, and cost-effective. After verification of ductal clearance, the CBD could be closed primarily without T-tube insertion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 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 was used in 11 cases, and a standard choledocoscope was used in two cases due to lack of availability of the Ambu aScope 2. 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. 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 is safe and feasible in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. It confers significant financial benefits and offers an economical alternative to expensive reusable endoscopes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Several techniques of laparoscopic bile duct exploration and intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) have been developed to treat patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones in one session and avoid the complications of ES. With all these options available, very few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been undertaken. This review analyzes those studies. Methods We searched PubMed. Four RCTs and a Cochran Database Systematic Review were found. Results Two RCTs compared preoperative ES and laparoscopic CBD exploration (E) for known CBD stones. Laparoscopic CBDE had shorter length of hospitalization. Two RCTs compared immediate and delayed treatment and found that length of stay was less with laparoscopic CBDE, but clearance rates and morbidity/mortality were similar. Conclusions Studies suggest that CBD stones discovered at the time of cholecystectomy are best treated during the same operation. The transcystic approach is safest if applicable. Individual surgeons must be aware of their own capabilities and those of the available endoscopists and perform the safest technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOEST) was compared with laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LCBDE) for cholecystocholedocholithiasis in an attempt tried to find the best mini-invasive treatment for the cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis.Methods: For this study, 234 patients with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis diagnosed by preoperative B-ultrasonography and intraoperative cholangiogram were divided at random into an LC-LCBDE group (141 cases) and an LC-IOEST group (93 cases). The surgical times, surgical success rates, number of stone extractions, postoperative complications, retained common bile duct stones, postoperative lengths of stay, and hospital charges were compared prospectively.Results: There were no differences between the two groups in terms of surgical time, surgical success rate, number of stone extractions, postoperative complications, retained common bile duct stones, postoperative length of stay, and hospital charge.Conclusion: Both LC-IOEST and LC-LCBDE were shown to be safe, effective, minimally invasive treatments for cholecystocholedocholithiasis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is a cost-effective, efficient, and minimally invasive method of treating choledocholithiasis. We reviewed the long-term results and efficacy of LCBDE for the common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: Medical charts were reviewed for all patients undergoing LCBDE at St. Vincent Hospital over 11 years (1990–2001). Demographic data, clinical features, laboratory data, radiologic and operative findings, and postoperative follow-up evaluation were analyzed. Results: A total of 346 LCBDE were performed during the study period. The mean operative time was 127 ± 3 min, and the length of hospital stay averaged 2.8 ± 0.1 days. In 8 patients (2.3%), LCBDE was converted to an open procedure. Complications were noted in 33 patients (9.5%), including patients (2.7%) with retained stones. No postoperative mortalities were recorded. No long-term strictures or biliary complications were noted over a mean follow-up period of 43 months (follow-up data available for 96%). Conclusion: A policy of routine cholangiography and LCBDE for CBD stones was effective in clearing the bile duct and avoiding further hepatobiliary instrumentation. The findings show that LCBDE can be performed successfully with low morbidity and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (CBDE) has traditionally been accompanied by T-tube drainage. However, other methods of choledochotomy closures have been reported. This study compared three laparoscopic methods of choledochotomy closure in a prospective, randomized fashion to determine which method should be the preferred technique.Methods: In this porcine model, 24 animals initially underwent laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) clipping to simulate an obstruction. Two days later, the animals underwent laparoscopic clip removal and simulated CBDE through a 1.5-cm choledochotomy. The animals were then randomized to one of three groups: primary choledochotomy closure (group I), antegrade CBD stenting with primary closure (group II), or T-tube placement (group III). To assess for CBD stenoses and leaks, the animals were killed 2 months postoperatively, at which time a cholangiogram was performed and the bile duct harvested. The ratio of proximal CBD to choledochotomy site was assessed radiographically and histologically.Results: The operative time was significantly longer in group III (200 +/- 13 min, p < 0.05) than in group I (141 +/- 17 min) and group II (154 +/- 16 min). The ratio of the proximal CBD diameter to the choledochotomy site diameter by cholangiogram was 2.1:1.0 in group I, to 1.2:1.0 in group II, and 1.1:1.0 in group III (p < 0.01). The ratio of the proximal CBD intraluminal area to the choledochotomy site intraluminal area was 2.1:1.0 in group I compared to 1.1:1.0 in groups II and III (p < 0.01). None of the animals developed jaundice or sepsis.Conclusion: Significant stenoses were present at the choledochotomy site in the primary closure group, and T-tube placement resulted in prolonged operative times. We conclude that laparoscopic antegrade CBD stenting with primary closure of the choledochotomy site is the preferred technique after choledochotomy in an animal model. Further assessment in a clinical trial is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration is a well-established treatment option in dedicated centers. However, few data are available on the results in elderly patients.Methods: The outcome after laparoscopic CBD exploration in elderly patients (age <70 years) was compared with that in a concurrent control group of younger patients (age, <70 years).Results: There were 77 elderly patients in group A and 207 younger patients in group B. American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) III and IV patients and prior abdominal operations were more frequent in group A (p <0.001). Two patients from each group underwent conversion to open surgery. There was no significant difference frequency of use between the transcystic and choledochotomy approaches, although the latter tended to be more frequent in the group A because of larger stones, (group A 53.4%; group B, 37.6%). Minor and major morbidity (group A, 12%; group B, 13.6%), rate of recurrent stones (group A, 1.3%; group B, 1.9%), and mortality (group A, 1.3%; group B, 0%) were not significantly different between the two groups. The single death in group A involved a patient with acute toxic cholangitis who underwent emergency surgery after multiple failed attempts at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography/endoscopic sphincterotomy performed elsewhere. No CBD stenosis was observed at follow-up assessment.Conclusions: Elective laparoscopic CBD exploration is safe and effective. It may become the standard of care in both elderly and younger patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, laparoscoscopic common bile duct exploration has become the procedure of choice in the management of choledocholithiasis in several laparoscopic centers. The increasing interest for this laparoscopic approach is due to the development of instrumentation and technique, allowing the procedure to be performed safely, and it is also the result of the revised role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, which has been questioned because of its cost, risk of complications and effectiveness. Many surgeons, however, are still not familiar with this technique. In this article we discuss the technique and results of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Both the laparoscopic transcystic approach and choledochotomy are discussed, together with the results given in the literature. When one considers the costs, morbidity, mortality and the time required before the patient can return to work, it would appear that laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration is more favorable than open surgery or laparoscopic cholecystectomy with preoperative or postoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy. However, the technique requires advanced laparoscopic skills, including suturing, knot tying, the use of a choledochoscope, guidewire, dilators and balloon stone extractor. Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration appears to be the most cost-effective method to treat common bile duct stones, it should be emphasized that this procedure is very challenging, and it should be performed by well-trained laparoscopic surgeons with experience in biliary surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We develop a computer-based training system to simulate laparoscopic procedures in virtual environments for medical training. The major hardware components of our system include a computer monitor to display visual interactions between 3D virtual models of organs and instruments together with a pair of force feedback devices interfaced with laparoscopic instruments to simulate haptic interactions. We simulate a surgical procedure that involves inserting a catheter into the cystic duct using a pair of laparoscopic forceps. This procedure is performed during laparoscopic cholecystectomy to search for gallstones in the common bile duct. Using the proposed system, the user can be trained to grasp and insert a flexible and freely moving catheter into the deformable cystic duct in virtual environments. The associated deformations are displayed on the computer screen and the reaction forces are fed back to the user through the force feedback devices. A hybrid modeling approach was developed to simulate the real-time visual and haptic interactions that take place between the forceps and the catheter, as well as the duct; and between the catheter and the duct [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: There are a variety of approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).Methods: Decision modeling was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four strategies for managing CBD stones around the time of LC: (a) routine preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (preoperative ERCP), (b) LC with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC), followed by laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCDE), (c) LC with IOC, followed by ERCP (postoperative ERCP), and (d) expectant management (LC without any tests for CBD stones). Local hospital data were used to estimate costs. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in terms of the cost per case of residual CBD stones prevented (in excess of the cost of LC alone). Diagnostic test characteristics, procedure success rates, and adverse event probabilities were derived from a systematic review of the literature. Sensitivity analysis was used to explore the effect of uncertainty on the results of the model.Results: LC alone was the least costly strategy, but it was also the least effective. Of the more aggressive strategies, LCDE and preoperative ERCP were associated with marginal costs of $5993.60 and $299,259.35, respectively, per case of residual CBD stones prevented. Postoperative ERCP was more costly and less effective than LCDE, but it had a lower cost-effectiveness ratio than preoperative ERCP when the prevalence of CBD stones was <80%.Conclusions: Compared to other common approaches, laparoscopic CBD exploration is a cost-effective method of managing CBD stones in patients who undergo LC. If expertise in LCDE is unavailable, selective postoperative ERCP is preferred over routine preoperative ERCP, unless the probability of CBD stones is very high (>80%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]