Back to Search Start Over

What is the better surgical treatment option for recurrent common bile duct stones?

Authors :
Tae Hoon Lee
Sung Hoon Choi
Chang-Il Kwon
Jae Hee Cho
Joung-Ho Han
Sung Ill Jang
Chi Young Park
Kwang Hyun Ko
Seok Jeong
Source :
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
Publication Year :
2020
Publisher :
The Korean Surgical Society, 2020.

Abstract

Purpose Repeating endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with recurrent common bile duct (CBD) stones is problematic in many ways. Choledochoduodenostomy (CDS) and choledochojejunostomy (CJS) are 2 surgical treatment options for recurrent CBD stones, and each has different advantages and disadvantages. The aim of this study was to compare the 2 surgical options in terms of the recurrence rate of CBD stones after surgical treatment. Methods This retrospective multicenter study included all patients who underwent surgical treatment due to recurrent CBD stones that were not effectively controlled by medical treatment and repeated ERCP between January 2006 and March 2015. We collected data from chart reviews and medical records. A recurrent CBD stone was defined as a stone found 6 months after the complete removal of a CBD stone by ERCP. Patients who underwent surgery for other reasons were excluded. Results A total of 27 patients were enrolled in this study. Six patients underwent CDS, and 21 patients underwent CJS for the rescue treatment of recurrent CBD stones. The median follow-up duration was 290 (180-1,975) days in the CDS group and 1,474 (180-6,560) days in the CJS group (P = 0.065). The postoperative complications were similar and tolerable in both groups (intestinal obstruction; 2 of 27, 7.4%; 1 in each group). CBD stones recurred in 4 patients after CDS (4 of 6, 66.7%), and 3 patients after CJS (3 of 21, 14.3%) (P = 0.010). Conclusion CJS may be a better surgical option than CDS for preventing further stone recurrence in patients with recurrent CBD stones.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
22886796 and 22886575
Volume :
99
Issue :
6
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....7e5d9fb6592a5045867fe0bcb92bc726