Abstract
Abstract
Background
Complications following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and common bile duct exploration (CBDE) for the management of gallstones or choledocholithiasis impact negatively on patients’ quality of life and may lead to reinterventions. This study aims to evaluate the causes and types of reintervention following index admission LC with or without CBDE.
Methods
A prospectively maintained database of LC and CBDE performed by a single surgeon was analysed. Preoperative factors, difficulty grading and perioperative complications requiring reintervention and readmissions were examined.
Results
Reinterventions were required in 112 of 5740 patients (2.0%), 89 (1.6%) being subsequent to complications. The reintervention cohort had a median age of 64 years, were more likely to be females (p < 0.0023) and to be emergency admissions (67.9%, p < 0.00001) with obstructive jaundice (35.7%, p < 0.00001). 46.4% of the reintervention cohort had a LC operative difficulty grade IV or V and 65.2% underwent a CBDE. Open conversion was predictive of the potential for reintervention (p < 0.00001). The most common single cause of reintervention was retained stones (0.5%) requiring ERCP followed by bile leakage (0.3%) requiring percutaneous drainage, ERCP and relaparoscopy. Relaparoscopy was necessary in 17 patients and open surgery in 13, 6 of whom not resulting from complications. There were 5 deaths.
Conclusion
This large series had a low incidence of reinterventions resulting from complications in spite of a high workload of index admission surgery for biliary emergencies and bile duct stones. Surgical or endoscopic reinterventions following LC alone occurred in only 0.8%. The most common form of reintervention was ERCP for retained CBD stones. This important outcome parameter of laparoscopic biliary surgery can be optimised through early diagnosis and timely reintervention for complications.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference37 articles.
1. Ros A, Haglund B, Nilsson E (2002) Reintervention after laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy in Sweden 1987–1995. Analysis of data from a hospital discharge register. Eur J Surg. 168(12):695–700. https://doi.org/10.1080/00000000000000006
2. Nassar A, Ashkar K, Mohamed A, Hafiz A (1995) Is laparoscopic cholecystectomy possible without video technology? Minimally Invasive Therapy 4(2):63–65. https://doi.org/10.3109/13645709509152757
3. Griffiths E, Hodson J, Vohra R, Marriott P, Katbeh T, Zino S et al (2019) Utilisation of an operative difficulty grading scale for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 33:110–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6281-2
4. Nassar AHM, Ng H, Wysocki A, Khan K, Gill I (2020) Achieving the critical view of safety in the difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective study of predictors of failure. Surg Endosc 31(2):155–159
5. Nassar A, Nassar M, Gil I, Ng H, Yehia A (2020) One-session laparoscopic management of Mirizzi syndrome: feasible and safe in specialist units. Surg Endosc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07765-4
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献