Is Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Safe in Patients with Acute Cholangitis Caused by Common Bile Duct Stones? Results of a Systematic Review.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Ines Bejaoui, Mohamed Maatouk, Ghassen Hamdi Kbir, Yasser Karoui, Nada Essid, Mounir Ben Moussa
{"title":"Is Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Safe in Patients with Acute Cholangitis Caused by Common Bile Duct Stones? Results of a Systematic Review.","authors":"Ines Bejaoui, Mohamed Maatouk, Ghassen Hamdi Kbir, Yasser Karoui, Nada Essid, Mounir Ben Moussa","doi":"10.1089/lap.2024.0053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The traditional method of performing open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) was replaced by a less invasive procedure known as laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) in elective surgery. But at present, the application of this technique is considered novel and controversial to treat acute cholangitis (AC). The aim of our systematic review was to investigate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery in patients with AC. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Studies containing information on patients diagnosed with AC who underwent LCBDE were included. A search for relevant articles was carried out, in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. All studies included in the systematic review were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. <b><i>Results:</i></b> A total of 10 studies were included. Seven were retrospective and three were prospective. Only one was a randomized controlled trial. There were three studies that compared elective LCBDE and emergency LCBDE. Two studies compared between primary closure and T-tube drainage. Two other studies focused on the comparison between LCBDE and OCBDE. One study examined the comparison of LCBDE and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Another study addressed the issue of conversion in LCBDE. One study compared early and delayed LCBDE. Conversion rates ranged from 0% to 16.92%. Morbidity ranged from 0% to 26.3%, and mortality ranged from 0% to 3.07%. There was no difference in terms of retained, residual, or recurrent stones, bile leak, hemorrhage, and postoperative pancreatitis, and this, comparing the different groups of patients. Bile duct and intestinal injuries as well as biliary stricture were not common. The average length of hospital stays was approximately 5.86 days, ranging from 2 to 11.12 days. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> The one-stage urgent LCBDE, while subject to debate, proves to be a secure, feasible, approach for managing nonsevere AC.</p>","PeriodicalId":50166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","volume":"35 1","pages":"55-64"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2024.0053","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The traditional method of performing open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) was replaced by a less invasive procedure known as laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) in elective surgery. But at present, the application of this technique is considered novel and controversial to treat acute cholangitis (AC). The aim of our systematic review was to investigate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery in patients with AC. Methods: Studies containing information on patients diagnosed with AC who underwent LCBDE were included. A search for relevant articles was carried out, in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. All studies included in the systematic review were assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Results: A total of 10 studies were included. Seven were retrospective and three were prospective. Only one was a randomized controlled trial. There were three studies that compared elective LCBDE and emergency LCBDE. Two studies compared between primary closure and T-tube drainage. Two other studies focused on the comparison between LCBDE and OCBDE. One study examined the comparison of LCBDE and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Another study addressed the issue of conversion in LCBDE. One study compared early and delayed LCBDE. Conversion rates ranged from 0% to 16.92%. Morbidity ranged from 0% to 26.3%, and mortality ranged from 0% to 3.07%. There was no difference in terms of retained, residual, or recurrent stones, bile leak, hemorrhage, and postoperative pancreatitis, and this, comparing the different groups of patients. Bile duct and intestinal injuries as well as biliary stricture were not common. The average length of hospital stays was approximately 5.86 days, ranging from 2 to 11.12 days. Conclusion: The one-stage urgent LCBDE, while subject to debate, proves to be a secure, feasible, approach for managing nonsevere AC.

腹腔镜胆总管探查对胆总管结石引起的急性胆管炎安全吗?系统评价的结果。
引言:传统的开放式胆总管探查(OCBDE)方法在择期手术中被一种侵入性较小的手术方法——腹腔镜胆总管探查(LCBDE)所取代。但目前,该技术在急性胆管炎(AC)治疗中的应用被认为是新颖和有争议的。本系统综述的目的是探讨腹腔镜手术治疗AC患者的安全性和有效性。方法:纳入包含诊断为AC的患者行LCBDE信息的研究。在Cochrane图书馆、PubMed和谷歌Scholar数据库中检索相关文章。所有纳入系统评价的研究均采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华质量评估量表进行评估。结果:共纳入10项研究。7项是回顾性研究,3项是前瞻性研究。只有一项是随机对照试验。有三项研究比较了选择性LCBDE和急诊LCBDE。两项研究比较了初次闭合和t管引流。另外两项研究侧重于LCBDE和OCBDE之间的比较。一项研究检查了LCBDE和内窥镜逆行胆管造影的比较。另一项研究解决了LCBDE的转化问题。一项研究比较了早期和延迟LCBDE。转化率从0%到16.92%不等。发病率为0% ~ 26.3%,死亡率为0% ~ 3.07%。在结石的保留、残留或复发、胆漏、出血和术后胰腺炎方面,比较不同组的患者没有差异。胆管、肠道损伤及胆道狭窄不常见。平均住院时间约为5.86天,从2天到11.12天不等。结论:一期紧急LCBDE虽然存在争议,但被证明是治疗非严重AC的一种安全、可行的方法。
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
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (JLAST) is the leading international peer-reviewed journal for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest thinking and advanced surgical technologies in laparoscopy, endoscopy, NOTES, and robotics. The Journal is ideally suited to surgeons who are early adopters of new technology and techniques. Recognizing that many new technologies and techniques have significant overlap with several surgical specialties, JLAST is the first journal to focus on these topics both in general and pediatric surgery, and includes other surgical subspecialties such as: urology, gynecologic surgery, thoracic surgery, and more.
×
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