Laparoscopic choledochal cyst excision and biliary reconstruction in patients with previous surgery/ intervention: Feasibility and outcome.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-09 DOI:10.4103/jmas.jmas_269_22
Sunita Ojha, Lalit Bharadia, Ravi Sharma, Rajiv Kumar Bansal, Anupam Chaturvedi
{"title":"Laparoscopic choledochal cyst excision and biliary reconstruction in patients with previous surgery/ intervention: Feasibility and outcome.","authors":"Sunita Ojha, Lalit Bharadia, Ravi Sharma, Rajiv Kumar Bansal, Anupam Chaturvedi","doi":"10.4103/jmas.jmas_269_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcome of laparoscopic surgery in complicated choledochal cyst (CDC) with previous interventions (laparotomy or biliary drainage).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Patients with CDC who underwent surgery from July 2014 to July 2019 were evaluated. CDC without previous interventions (Group A) was compared with CDC that had previous interventions (Group B) to assess the feasibility and outcome of laparoscopic surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In 5 years' period, 38 patients were operated for CDC. The mean age was similar in both groups (3.78 ± 2.27 in Group A and 4.08 ± 2.73 in Group B). Out of six CDC with previous intervention (Group B), five patients were previously managed at other institutions as follows: (1) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) stenting. (2) Laparotomy for biliary peritonitis and ERCP. (3) Percutaneous drainage of the large cyst. (4) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. (5) ERCP stenting. (6) Percutaneous drainage for biliary ascites. All patients underwent laparoscopic CDC excision and hepatico-duodenostomy. The mean duration of surgery was 160.3 ± 17.22 in Group A and 169.2 ± 17.5 in Group B ( P = 0.258). None required intraoperative blood transfusion. None had a bile leak. Drain was removed at 4.47 ± 0.98 in Group A, while at 4.17 ± 0.75 days in Group B ( P = 0.481). There was statistically no significant difference in feed starting time or length of stay. In follow-up of 6 months-3 years, all patients are asymptomatic.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Laparoscopy in complicated CDC with previous intervention is technically tedious but is feasible. The procedure is safe and delivers a good outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":48905,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"121-126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11095812/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Minimal Access Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jmas.jmas_269_22","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility and outcome of laparoscopic surgery in complicated choledochal cyst (CDC) with previous interventions (laparotomy or biliary drainage).

Patients and methods: Patients with CDC who underwent surgery from July 2014 to July 2019 were evaluated. CDC without previous interventions (Group A) was compared with CDC that had previous interventions (Group B) to assess the feasibility and outcome of laparoscopic surgery.

Results: In 5 years' period, 38 patients were operated for CDC. The mean age was similar in both groups (3.78 ± 2.27 in Group A and 4.08 ± 2.73 in Group B). Out of six CDC with previous intervention (Group B), five patients were previously managed at other institutions as follows: (1) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) stenting. (2) Laparotomy for biliary peritonitis and ERCP. (3) Percutaneous drainage of the large cyst. (4) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy. (5) ERCP stenting. (6) Percutaneous drainage for biliary ascites. All patients underwent laparoscopic CDC excision and hepatico-duodenostomy. The mean duration of surgery was 160.3 ± 17.22 in Group A and 169.2 ± 17.5 in Group B ( P = 0.258). None required intraoperative blood transfusion. None had a bile leak. Drain was removed at 4.47 ± 0.98 in Group A, while at 4.17 ± 0.75 days in Group B ( P = 0.481). There was statistically no significant difference in feed starting time or length of stay. In follow-up of 6 months-3 years, all patients are asymptomatic.

Conclusions: Laparoscopy in complicated CDC with previous intervention is technically tedious but is feasible. The procedure is safe and delivers a good outcome.

曾接受过手术/介入治疗的患者的腹腔镜胆总管囊肿切除术和胆道重建术:可行性和结果。
简介该研究旨在评估腹腔镜手术治疗既往接受过介入治疗(开腹手术或胆道引流术)的复杂性胆总管囊肿(CDC)的可行性和效果:对2014年7月至2019年7月期间接受手术的CDC患者进行评估。将未接受过干预的 CDC(A 组)与接受过干预的 CDC(B 组)进行比较,以评估腹腔镜手术的可行性和结果:结果:5 年间,38 名患者接受了 CDC 手术。两组患者的平均年龄相似(A 组为 3.78±2.27 岁,B 组为 4.08±2.73 岁)。在 6 名曾接受过介入治疗的 CDC 患者(B 组)中,有 5 名患者曾在其他机构接受过以下治疗:(1) 腹腔镜胆囊切除术和内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)支架植入术。(2) 胆道腹膜炎腹腔镜手术和 ERCP。(3) 经皮引流大囊肿。 (4) 腹腔镜胆囊切除术。(5) ERCP 支架植入术。(6) 胆道腹水经皮引流术。所有患者都接受了腹腔镜 CDC 切除术和肝十二指肠造口术。A 组的平均手术时间为 160.3 ± 17.22,B 组为 169.2 ± 17.5(P = 0.258)。没有人需要术中输血。无一例出现胆漏。A 组在 4.47 ± 0.98 天拔除引流管,B 组在 4.17 ± 0.75 天拔除引流管(P = 0.481)。在开始喂食时间和住院时间上没有明显差异。在 6 个月至 3 年的随访中,所有患者均无症状:结论:腹腔镜手术治疗曾接受过介入治疗的复杂型 CDC 在技术上比较繁琐,但却是可行的。手术安全,效果良好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
151
审稿时长
36 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Minimal Access Surgery (JMAS), the official publication of Indian Association of Gastrointestinal Endo Surgeons, launched in early 2005. The JMAS, a quarterly publication, is the first English-language journal from India, as also from this part of the world, dedicated to Minimal Access Surgery. The JMAS boasts an outstanding editorial board comprising of Indian and international experts in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信