» Articles » PMID: 38803867

Clinical Application of ERCP Concurrent Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy in the Treatment of Cholecystolithiasis Complicated with Extrahepatic Bile Duct Stones

Overview
Journal Heliyon
Specialty Social Sciences
Date 2024 May 28
PMID 38803867
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and lithotomy (LCBDE) in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis combined with bile duct stones.

Methods: From September 2018 to January 2022, 195 patients with cholecystolithiasis complicated with extrahepatic bile duct stones from Department of Department of General Surgery, Shanghai Jiading Central Hospital met the inclusion criteria, including 60 cases in the LC group and 86 cases in the LCBDE group. The general condition, operation success rate, complications and residual stone rate of the two groups were retrospectively analyzed.

Results: In the simultaneous operation group, 58 patients successfully performed ERCP, and the indwelling rate of the abdominal drainage tube (41.7 % vs. 95.3 %) was significantly better than that in the LCBDE group. There was no significant difference in the conversion rate to open surgery, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss between the two groups. In the simultaneous surgery group, 4 patients (6.7 %) developed pancreatitis after ERCP, which was cured by conservative treatment. The pain score at 6 h after operation was significantly lower than that in the LCBDE group (3.9 ± 1.6 vs 6.5 ± 2.4). There were no significant differences in biliary leakage (1.7 % vs. 4.7 %), postoperative cholangitis (5.0 % vs. 5.8 %), incision infection (3.3 % vs. 3.5 %), and bile duct stone residue rate (5.0 % vs 3.5 %) between the two groups. There was no severe pancreatitis, second operation or death. The duration of hospital stay was shortened in the concurrent operation group (5.1 ± 2.3d vs 7.9 ± 3.7d), and the operation cost was significantly higher than that in the LCBDE group (48839.9 ± 8549.5 vs 34635.9 ± 5893.7 yuan).

Conclusion: ERCP combined with LC and LCBDE are both safe and effective methods for the treatment of cholecystolithiasis combined with extrahepatic bile duct stones. The simultaneous operation group has certain advantages in patient comfort and rapid rehabilitation, which can be popularized in qualified units.

Citing Articles

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation, and laparoscopic hepatectomy for intra- and extrahepatic bile duct stones.

Chen Z, Fu H World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025; 17(1):100544.

PMID: 39872759 PMC: 11757201. DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i1.100544.

References
1.
Zhu J, Li G, Du P, Zhou X, Xiao W, Li Y . Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with gallbladder and common bile duct stones: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2020; 35(3):997-1005. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-020-08052-y. View

2.
Cahyadi O, Tehami N, de-Madaria E, Siau K . Post-ERCP Pancreatitis: Prevention, Diagnosis and Management. Medicina (Kaunas). 2022; 58(9). PMC: 9502657. DOI: 10.3390/medicina58091261. View

3.
Haider A, Siddiqa A, Ali N, Mehershahi S . Biliary Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction. Case Rep Gastroenterol. 2021; 15(1):443-449. PMC: 8138212. DOI: 10.1159/000514542. View

4.
Wang Y, Huang Y, Shi C, Wang L, Liu S, Zhang J . Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration via choledochotomy with primary closure for the management of acute cholangitis caused by common bile duct stones. Surg Endosc. 2021; 36(7):4869-4877. PMC: 9160116. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08838-8. View

5.
Lyu Y, Cheng Y, Li T, Cheng B, Jin X . Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus cholecystectomy versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2018; 33(10):3275-3286. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-06613-w. View