The Application of a New Model for Disease Classification in Minimally Invasive Treatment of Concomitant Cholecystolithiasis and Choledocholithiasis.

Abstract

Aim: There is no consensus regarding the minimally invasive treatment method for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Therefore, this study aimed to develop a universal classification system for minimally invasive surgeries, thereby supporting development of consensus in guidelines for diagnosing choledocholithiasis.

Methods: This retrospective study included 1044 consecutive patients with concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis who underwent different minimally invasive surgical treatments at the Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, China, between January 2014 and April 2021. To identify the key factors influencing the choice of different minimally invasive surgical procedures, clinical data for all hospitalized patients were analyzed. The patients were followed up through outpatient visits or telephonic calls at 1 week, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year or immediately if symptoms developed following discharge from the hospital. This information was integrated in the form of a new disease classification model, and the optimal treatment approaches were screened.

Results: A significant correlation was observed between the choice of minimally invasive surgical procedures and the concomitant common bile duct (CBD) (p < 0.001), stone size (p < 0.001), or stone number (p < 0.001). A new clinical classification model was developed for patients with concomitant gallbladder (GB) and CBD stones based on the CBD diameter, stone sizes, and stone numbers, and the patients were sorted into Type I, II, III, and Ⅳ, respectively. Three invasive surgical methods were performed in patients with type I patients, revealing the laparoscopic cholecystectomy + Laparoscopic Transcystic Common Bile Duct Exploration (LC + LTCBDE) method as a preferred option for these patients. Furthermore, five surgical methods were performed on patients with type II CBD stones, demonstrating LC + LTCBDE as the viable option for these patients. Additionally, among the four minimally invasive surgical methods applied in patients with type III, the LC + laparoscopic choledochotomy for common bile duct exploration (LCCBDE) + Duodenoscope or LC + LCCBDE + primary closure demonstrated favorable results in this group of patients. Among the three methods applied in type IV patients, LC + laparoscopic choledocholithotomy and T-tube drainage (LCTD) were found to be more favorable.

Conclusions: In summary, this novel and simple clinical classification system, which is based on CBD diameter, stone sizes, and stone numbers, can assist clinicians in selecting a minimally invasive treatment approach for managing concomitant GB and CBD stones.