One-step versus two-step procedure for management procedures for management of concurrent gallbladder and common bile duct stones. Outcomes and cost analysis.

BACKGROUND: The management of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis combined is controversial. The more frequent approach is a two-stage procedure, with endoscopic sphincterotomy and stone removal from the bile duct followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This study aims to demonstrate how, on the basis of the personal experience, the Rendez-vous technique, that combines the two techniques in a single-stage operation is better than the sequential treatment. METHODS: Between June 2017 to December 2019, 40 consecutive patients with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis combined were enrolled for the study: 20 were treated with the sequential treatment and 20 with the Rendez-vous method. The preoperative diagnostic work-up was similar in the two group. The endpoints of the study included incidence of endoscopic and surgical complications, rate of hospitalization and cost analysis. RESULTS: The study showed no difference in demographic parameters between the two groups, but the success rate of clearance of CBD was significantly smaller for sequential arm, with the need of additional procedures. We found a statistical reduction of postoperative acute pancreatitis, hospital stay and charges in Rendez-vous group, at the expense of a prolonged total operating time. CONCLUSIONS: The data of the study confirm the superiority of the Rendez-vous technique because it resolves cholelithiasis associated with choledocholithiasis in a single surgical act, with greater acceptance of the patient who avoids a second invasive surgical act, and with a reduction in complications; moreover, it requires shorter hospitalization, resulting in reduced costs. We propose this option in the management of cases where preoperative ERCP-ES has failed. KEY WORDS: Common bile duct stones, Cholecysto-choledocholithiasis, Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic sphincterotomy, Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, Laparo-endoscopic Rendez-vous.

Specialist shortage in developing countries: comprehending delays in care.

We describe a case of a middle-aged woman who presented with progressive jaundice and was suspected to have rebound choledocholithiasis, which was initially managed with balloon extraction through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography at her first presentation. Healthcare in Pakistan, like many other developing countries, is divided into public and private sectors. The public sector is not always completely free of cost. Patients seeking specialised care in the public sector may find lengthy waiting times for an urgent procedure due to a struggling system and a lack of specialists and technical expertise. Families of many patients find themselves facing 'catastrophic healthcare expenditure', an economic global health quandary much ignored.

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration After Failed Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Patients with Concomitant Gall Stones and Common Bile Duct Stones: A Prospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the present study was to compare the outcomes of secondary laparoscopic CBD exploration (LCBDE) following failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and primary laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred eighty-five patients undergoing LCBDE were divided into Group I consisting of patients undergoing a primary LCBDE (n = 102) and Group II consisting of patients undergoing LCBDE after failure of ERCP to clear the CBD stones (n = 83). Primary outcome measure was successful laparoscopic CBD clearance. The secondary outcome measures were degree of difficulty, operative time, complications, hospital stay, and the cost of treatment. RESULTS: Success rate was similar in both groups (85.3% versus 80.7%). Mean operative time, degree of difficulty, hospital stay, and cost of procedure were significantly higher in Group II (P value <.05). CONCLUSION: It may be prudent to consider ERCP failure patients for primary LCBDE than risk the complications of ERCP if they are suitable for primary surgery.

Single-stage management with combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the value of a single stage with combined tri-endoscopic (duodenoscopy, laparoscopy and choledochoscopy) approach for patients with concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. METHODS: Fifty-three patients with combined gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones from February 2014 to April 2015 were randomized assigned to two groups: 29 patients underwent single-stage surgery with combined duodenoscope, laparoscope and choledochoscope (combined tri-endoscopic group), and 29 patients underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy to remove common bile duct stones followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy several days later (control group). The success rate of complete stone removal, procedure-related complication, hospital stay and the cost of hospitalization were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Altogether, 53 patients (29 patients in combined tri-endoscopic group and 24 patients in control group) successfully underwent the surgery and ERCP procedure. Three patients in the control group developed post-ERCP pancreatitis. One case of bile leaking and one case of residual stone were noted in the combined tri-endoscopic group. There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to both complete stone removal [96.6 % (28/29) vs. 100 % (24/24)] and procedure-related complication rate [3.4 % (1/29) vs. 12.5 % (3/24)] (p > 0.05). No open surgery was required in either group. There were significant differences between the two groups with regard to hospital stay (6.72 ± 1.3 days vs. 10.91 ± 1.6 days, p < 0.01) and cost of hospitalization (15,724 ± 1613 CNY vs. 19,829 ± 2433 CNY, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The single-stage combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis was just as safe and successful as the control group. In addition, it resulted in a shorter hospital stay and less cost.

Hepatectomy with primary closure of common bile duct for hepatolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis.

AIM: To evaluate the feasibility of hepatectomy and primary closure of common bile duct for intrahepatic and extrahepatic calculi. METHODS: From January 2008 to May 2013, anatomic hepatectomy followed by biliary tract exploration without biliary drainage (non-drainage group) was performed in 43 patients with intrahepatic and extrahepatic calculi. After hepatectomy, flexible choledochoscopy was used to extract residual stones and observe the intrahepatic bile duct and common bile duct (CBD) for determination of biliary stricture and dilatation. Function of the sphincter of Oddi was determined by manometry of the CBD. Primary closure of the CBD without T-tube drainage or bilioenteric anastomosis was performed when there was no biliary stricture or sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Dexamethasone and anisodamine were intravenously injected 2-3 d after surgery to prevent postoperative retrograde infection due to intraoperative bile duct irrigation, and to maintain relaxation of the sphincter of Oddi, respectively. During the same period, anatomic hepatectomy followed by biliary tract exploration with biliary drainage (drainage group) was performed in 48 patients as the control group. Postoperative complications and hospital stay were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: There was no operative mortality in either group of patients. Compared to intrahepatic and extrabiliary drainage, hepatectomy with primary closure of the CBD (non-drainage) did not increase the incidence of complications, including residual stones, bile leakage, pancreatitis and cholangitis (P > 0.05). Postoperative hospital stay and costs were nevertheless significantly less in the non-drainage group than in the drainage group. The median postoperative hospital stay was shorter in the non-drainage group than in the drainage group (11.2 ± 2.8 d vs 15.4 ± 2.1 d, P = 0.000). The average postoperative cost of treatment was lower in the non-drainage group than in the drainage group (29325.6 ± 5668.2 yuan vs 32933.3 ± 6235.1 yuan, P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Hepatectomy followed by choledochoendoscopic stone extraction without biliary drainage is a safe and effective treatment of hepatolithiasis combined with choledocholithiasis.

Assessment of jaundice in the hospitalized patient.

Jaundice in the hospitalized patient is not an uncommon consultation for the general gastroenterologist. It is essential to explore the underlying cause of jaundice because management is largely aimed at addressing these causes rather than the jaundice itself. Although the diagnostic evaluation for jaundice can be broad, clinical judgment must be used to prioritize between various laboratory tests and imaging studies. Most importantly, clinicians must understand which conditions are emergent and/or require evaluation for liver transplantation. Further studies need to be performed to better understand the outcomes of hospitalized patients who develop jaundice.

[Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic techniques for one-stage treatment of concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis].

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical effects of combined endoscopic-laparoscopic technique for one-stage treatment of cholelithiasis with concomitant choledocholithiasis. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of the clinical data of 30 patients (Group A) with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis receiving one-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with intraoperative encoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) and 32 patients (Group B) receiving LC combined with 1aparoscopic common bile duct exploration. The operative time, blood loss, conversion to open surgery rate, time to postoperative ambulation, calculi residual rate, hospitalization cost and length of hospital stay were analyzed comparatively. RESULTS: There were statistically differences between the two groups in hospitalization cost and length of hospital stay (P<0.05) but not in the other indices (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic techniques can be a safe and feasible option for one-stage treatment of concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis to allow rapid postoperative recovery with a shortened hospital stay.

Multimedia article. Sphincterotome stricturoplasty for long ampullary stenoses and benign biliary strictures (with video).

BACKGROUND: Long ampullary stenoses and fibrotic distal biliary strictures are not infrequently encountered during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Instead of balloon dilation and stenting, we propose that these strictures can be managed with sphincterotome stricturoplasty (SS) during the initial ERCP. OBJECTIVE: To report our clinical experience with SS for benign distal biliary strictures. DESIGN: Review on prospectively collected data. PATIENTS: All (consecutive) patients who underwent ERCP and SS performed by the authors in a 12-month period. Long ampullary stenosis and/or distal biliary stricture is defined as significant narrowing of CBD from the level of duodenal wall into the common bile duct (CBD) after initial sphincterotomy. The upstream CBD is dilated. Despite adequate ES, contrast drainage is poor due to the downstream stricture. SS was performed using the same sphincterotome in slightly bowed position under endoscopic and fluoroscopic guidance. The cutting wire was placed parallel to the superior border within the stricture and incising the stenosis. In cases of relatively long strictures, during initial SS the majority of the cutting wire was inside the biliary opening. This differs from ES, where about one-third to one-half of the length of cutting wire is outside the ampulla. MEASUREMENTS: Clinical data, hospital course, procedure-related complication rates, and outcomes were prospectively collected in a database. RESULTS: During the study period, 308 ERCPs were performed. Benign and short (≤15 mm in length) distal biliary strictures were observed in 25 patients. Mean ± SD stricture length was 7.4 ± 3.0 mm. The presumed etiologies for these strictures were choledocholithiasis (n = 22) and postsphincterotomy stenosis (n = 3). There was no perforation, post-ERCP pancreatitis, postsphincterotomy bleeding, or cholangitis. To date, none of these patients who had SS have needed follow-up ERCP. LIMITATIONS: Single-operator experience, limited follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with balloon stricturoplasty ± biliary stenting, SS is a simple and cost-effective alternative option in managing long ampullary stenosis and/or distal fibrotic biliary stricture during the initial ERCP.

Telerobotic-assisted laparoscopic cholecystectomy: our experience on 29 patients.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The role of computer-assisted surgery (CAS) is still debated and not clearly defined. METHODS: The authors report their initial experience with CAS, comparing 29 patients submitted to cholecystectomy, using a Zeus remote-controlled robot and an Aesop remote voice-activated endoscope robot, with 29 patients submitted to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The surgical field and the arms of the robot were under the direct and real-time control of the surgeon, who stayed at the workstation and maneuvered the Zeus, using joysticks. The workstation was in the same room as the patient. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients underwent telerobotic-assisted cholecystectomy (TLAC); 1 procedure was converted to standard LC and 1 to open cholecystectomy. The conversions were due to choledocholithiasis and cholecystitis. During TLAC, the mean operating time and transition time (from the induction of anesthesia to incision of the skin) were, respectively, 75 min (range, 60-170 min) and 45 min (range, 25-60 min). We did not observe any complications related to TLAC. The limitations of TLAC were the lack of tactile feedback, the increase in surgical time, and the expensive cost of the procedure to reach the same result as that of LC. CONCLUSIONS: After this initial experience, we believe that TLAC could be considered only for training in CAS, but that it is without advantages in terms of its higher cost compared with LC.

MDCT cholangiography with volume rendering for the assessment of patients with biliary obstruction.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the diagnostic utility of MDCT cholangiography with volume rendering in the evaluation of patients with suspected biliary tree obstruction. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: MDCT was performed in 34 patients who were thought to have biliary obstruction. Portal venous phase scanning was initiated 70 sec after the IV infusion of 150 mL of contrast agent, and no cholangiographic contrast agent was administered. Three-dimensional MDCT cholangiographic images were produced using volume rendering. ERCP was performed in 26 patients, and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC) was performed in five patients; 17 patients underwent biopsy or surgery. The findings on MDCT cholangiography were compared with those of ERCP, PTC, biopsy, or surgery. RESULTS: The correct diagnosis was made on MDCT cholangiography for 14 (93%) of the 15 patients with a biliary stone and in 16 (94%) of the 17 patients with malignant biliary obstruction. Microlithiasis in one patient could not be detected on MDCT cholangiography. One patient with polypoid adenocarcinoma and one patient with normal findings were incorrectly diagnosed with a biliary stone on the basis of MDCT cholangiography. In one of the two patients with a benign stricture, the stricture was incorrectly diagnosed as malignant. For the diagnosis of biliary stone, sensitivity and specificity of MDCT cholangiography were 93% and 89%, respectively. For the diagnosis of malignant obstruction, sensitivity and specificity were both 94%. The accuracy of the technique for the diagnosis of the cause of biliary obstruction was 83.3%. CONCLUSION: MDCT cholangiography with volume rendering is a noninvasive and fast imaging technique with high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of the cause of biliary tree obstruction. It is a promising diagnostic tool for the assessment of patients with bile duct obstructions.