52
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    4
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Early or Delayed Intervention for Bile Duct Injuries following Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy? A Dilemma Looking for an Answer

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background. To evaluate the effect of timing of management and intervention on outcomes of bile duct injury. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively analyzed 92 patients between 1991 and 2011. Data concerned patient's demographic characteristics, type of injury (according to Strasberg classification), time to referral, diagnostic procedures, timing of surgical management, and final outcome. The endpoint was the comparison of postoperative morbidity (stricture, recurrent cholangitis, required interventions/dilations, and redo reconstruction) and mortality between early (less than 2 weeks) and late (over 12 weeks) surgical reconstruction. Results. Three patients were treated conservatively, two patients were treated with percutaneous drainage, and 13 patients underwent PTC or ERCP. In total 74 patients were operated on in our unit. 58 of them underwent surgical reconstruction by end-to-side Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy, 11 underwent primary bile duct repair, and the remaining 5 underwent more complex procedures. Of the 56 patients, 34 patients were submitted to early reconstruction, while 22 patients were submitted to late reconstruction. After a median follow-up of 93 months, there were two deaths associated with BDI after LC. Outcomes after early repairs were equal to outcomes after late repairs when performed by specialists. Conclusions. Early repair after BDI results in equal outcomes compared with late repair. BDI patients should be referred to centers of expertise and experience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          An analysis of the problem of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Intraoperative cholangiography and risk of common bile duct injury during cholecystectomy.

            Intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) may decrease the risk of common bile duct (CBD) injury during cholecystectomy by helping to avoid misidentification of the CBD. To characterize the relationship of IOC use and CBD injury while controlling for patient and surgeon characteristics. Retrospective nationwide cohort analysis of Medicare patients undergoing cholecystectomy from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 1999. Patients were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes from the Medicare Part B depository. Common bile duct injury was defined by a second surgical procedure to repair the CBD injury within 1 year of cholecystectomy. Surgeon demographic features were obtained from matching the Medicare Part B data to the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile database. Frequency of CBD injury in patients who did and did not have IOC performed during cholecystectomy, controlling for patient-level (age, sex, race, and case complexity) and surgeon-level (surgeon's age, sex, race, year of surgical procedure, case order, percentage of IOC use in prior surgical procedures, years in medical practice, board certification, and specialization) factors. The database search identified 1 570 361 cholecystectomies and 7911 CBD injuries (0.5%). Common bile duct injury was found in 2380 (0.39%) of 613 706 patients undergoing cholecystectomy with IOC and in 5531 (0.58%) of 956 655 patients undergoing cholecystectomy without IOC (unadjusted relative risk, 1.49; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-1.57). After controlling for patient-level factors and surgeon-level factors, the risk of injury was increased when IOC was not used (adjusted relative risk, 1.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.38-2.28). While surgeons performing IOCs routinely had a lower rate of CBD injuries than those who did not, this difference disappeared when IOC was not used. In this study of Medicare patients undergoing cholecystectomy in the 1990s, the risk of CBD injury was significantly higher when IOC was not used. Although IOCs may not prevent all CBD injuries, this study suggests that the routine use of IOC may decrease the rate of CBD injury.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Surgical management of bile duct injuries sustained during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: perioperative results in 200 patients.

              A single institution retrospective analysis of 200 patients with major bile duct injuries was completed. Three patients died without surgery due to uncontrolled sepsis. One hundred seventy-five patients underwent surgical repair, with a 1.7% postoperative mortality and a complication rate of 42.9%. The widespread application of laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has led to a rise in the incidence of major bile duct injuries (BDI). Despite the frequency of these injuries and their complex management, the published literature contains few substantial reports regarding the perioperative management of BDI. From January 1990 to April 2003, a prospective database of all patients with a BDI following LC was maintained. Patients' charts were retrospectively reviewed to analyze perioperative surgical management. Over 13 years, 200 patients were treated for a major BDI following LC. Patient demographics were notable for 150 women (75%) with a mean age of 45.5 years (median 44 years). One hundred eighty-eight sustained their BDI at an outside hospital. The mean interval from the time of BDI to referral was 29.1 weeks (median 3 weeks). One hundred nine patients (58%) were referred within 1 month of their injury for acute complications including bile leak, biloma, or jaundice. Twenty-five patients did not undergo a surgical repair at our institution. Three patients (1.5%) died after delayed referral before an attempt at repair due to uncontrolled sepsis. Twenty-two patients, having intact biliary-enteric continuity, underwent successful balloon dilatation of an anastomotic stricture. A total of 175 patients underwent definitive biliary reconstruction, including 172 hepaticojejunostomies (98%) and 3 end-to-end repairs. There were 3 deaths in the postoperative period (1.7%). Seventy-five patients (42.9%) sustained at least 1 postoperative complication. The most common complications were wound infection (8%), cholangitis (5.7%), and intraabdominal abscess/biloma (2.9%). Minor biliary stent complications occurred in 5.7% of patients. Early postoperative cholangiography revealed an anastomotic leak in 4.6% of patients and extravasation at the liver dome-stent exit site in 10.3% of patients. Postoperative interventions included percutaneous abscess drainage in 9 patients (5.1%) and new percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography and stent placement in 4 patients (2.3%). No patient required reoperation in the postoperative period. The mean postoperative length of stay was 9.5 days (median 9 days). The timing of operation (early, intermediate, delayed), presenting symptoms, and history of prior repair did not affect the incidence of the most common perioperative complications or length of postoperative hospital stay. This series represents the largest single institution experience reporting the perioperative management of BDI following LC. Although perioperative complications are frequent, nearly all can be managed nonoperatively. Early referral to a tertiary care center with experienced hepatobiliary surgeons and skilled interventional radiologists would appear to be necessary to assure optimal results.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Gastroenterol Res Pract
                Gastroenterol Res Pract
                GRP
                Gastroenterology Research and Practice
                Hindawi Publishing Corporation
                1687-6121
                1687-630X
                2015
                2 February 2015
                : 2015
                : 104235
                Affiliations
                1st Department of Surgery, University of Athens Medical School, Laikon General Hospital, Agiou Thoma 17 Street, 11527 Athens, Greece
                Author notes
                *Demetrios Moris: dimmoris@ 123456yahoo.com

                Academic Editor: Daiming Fan

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2988-4116
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7937-4122
                Article
                10.1155/2015/104235
                4333332
                25722718
                6950c0dc-ad43-4b79-a55b-b53ade37ea4b
                Copyright © 2015 Evangelos Felekouras et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 27 October 2014
                : 16 January 2015
                Categories
                Research Article

                Gastroenterology & Hepatology
                Gastroenterology & Hepatology

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                44
                3
                38
                0
                Smart Citations
                44
                3
                38
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content65

                Cited by14

                Most referenced authors449