The Outcome of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration (LCBDE) for the Choledocholithiasis that ERCP Failed to Remove.
- Author:
Hyun Sub LEE
1
;
Seog Ki MIN
;
Sun Young YI
;
Hyeon Kook LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. leehk@ewha.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE);
Choledocholithiasis;
ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography)
- MeSH:
Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde;
Choledocholithiasis;
Common Bile Duct;
Female;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Length of Stay;
Operative Time;
Postoperative Complications;
Recurrence;
Retrospective Studies
- From:Journal of the Korean Surgical Society
2008;75(3):191-194
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: With the advent of endoscopic technology, ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography)/ES (endoscopic sphincterotomy) has become the main treatment for CBD stones. However, when ERCP fails to remove CBD stones, it remains unclear whether laparoscopic treatment is an alternative or not. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of LCBDE for the management of difficult choledocholithiasis. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 68 LCBDE cases that were performed at the Ewha Womans University School of Medicine, Mokdong Hospital from January, 2000 to March, 2006. Group A was defined that primary LCBDE was performed without ERCP/ES. Group B was defined that secondary LCBDE was performed after ERCP/ES had failed. The operative outcomes and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Primary LCBDE was performed for 33 patients (Group A) and secondary LCBDE after failure of ERCP/ES was performed for 35 patients (Group B). No significant differences in gender, mean age and associated diseases were noted between the two groups. The stone clearance rate was 100% for both groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups for the mean operative time (201.5 min for Group A vs 188.7 min for Group B: P=0.415), the open conversion rate (9.1% vs 0%, respectively: P=0.068), the complication rate (12.1% vs 8.6%, respectively: P=0.630) and the duration of the hospital stay (14.3 days vs 11.9 days, respectively: P=0.169). The recurrence rate along with a mean follow-up of 24 months showed no significant difference between the two groups (12.1% vs 2.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: When ERCP is impossible or stone retrieval is incomplete, LCBDE is an alternative treatment for difficult CBD stones.
