Abstract
Background
The ideal management of common bile duct (CBD) stones associated with gall stones is a matter of debate. We planned a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration and cholecystectomy (LCBDE) with two-stage preoperative endoscopic stone extraction followed by cholecystectomy (ERCP + LC).
Methods
We searched the Pubmed/Medline, Web of science, Science citation index, Google scholar and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials electronic databases till June 2017 for all English language randomized trials comparing the two approaches. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program], Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014 and results were expressed as odds ratio for dichotomous variables and mean difference for continuous. p value ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed using TSA version 0.9.5.5 (Copenhagen: The Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, 2016). PROSPERO trial registration number is CRD42017074673.
Results
A total of 11 trials were included in the analysis, with a total of 1513 patients (751-LCBDE; 762-ERCP + LC). LCBDE was found to have significantly lower rates of technical failure [OR 0.59, 95% CI (0.38, 0.93), p = 0.02] and shorter hospital stay [MD − 1.63, 95% CI (− 3.23, − 0.03), p = 0.05]. There was no significant difference in mortality [OR 0.37, 95% CI (0.09, 1.51), p = 0.17], morbidity [OR 0.97, 95% CI (0.70, 1.33), p = 0.84], cost [MD − 379.13, 95% CI (− 784.80, 111.2), p = 0.13] or recurrent/retained stones [OR 1.01, 95% CI (0.38, 2.73), p = 0.98]. TSA showed that although the Z-curve crossed the boundaries of conventional significance, the estimated information size is yet to be achieved.
Conclusions
Single-stage LCBDE is superior to ERCP + LC in terms of technical success and shorter hospital stay in good-risk patients with gallstones and CBD stones, where expertise, operative time and instruments are available.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Neuhaus H, Feussner H, Ungeheuer A, Hoffmann W, Siewert JR, Classen M (1992) Prospective evaluation of the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography prior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Endoscopy 24(9):745–749
Wenckert A, Robertson B (1966) The natural course of gallstone disease: eleven-year review of 781 nonoperated cases. Gastroenterology 50(3):376–381
Bingener J, Schwesinger WH (2006) Management of common bile duct stones in a rural area of the United States: results of a survey. Surg Endosc 20(4):577–579
Vannijvel M, Lesurtel M, Bouckaert W, Houben B, Knol J, Vangertruyden G et al (2016) A survey of European-African surgeons’ management of common bile duct stones. HPB 18(12):959–964
Wandling MW, Hungness ES, Pavey ES, Stulberg JJ, Schwab B, Yang AD et al (2016) Nationwide assessment of trends in choledocholithiasis management in the United States from 1998 to 2013. JAMA Surg 151(12):1125–1130
Alexakis N, Connor S (2012) Meta-analysis of one- vs. two-stage laparoscopic/endoscopic management of common bile duct stones. HPB 14(4):254–259
Dasari BVM, Tan CJ, Gurusamy KS, Martin DJ, Kirk G, McKie L et al (2013) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 12(12):CD003327
Prasson P, Bai X, Zhang Q, Liang T (2016) One-stage laproendoscopic procedure versus two-stage procedure in the management for gallstone disease and biliary duct calculi: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 30(8):3582–3590
Lu J, Cheng Y, Xiong X-Z, Lin Y-X, Wu S-J, Cheng N-S (2012) Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones. World J Gastroenterol 18(24):3156–3166
Nagaraja V, Eslick GD, Cox MR (2014) Systematic review and meta-analysis of minimally invasive techniques for the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. J Hepato-Biliary-Pancreat Sci 21(12):896–901
Zhu H-Y, Xu M, Shen H-J, Yang C, Li F, Li K-W et al (2015) A meta-analysis of single-stage versus two-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol 39(5):584–593
Deeks J, Higgins J, Altman D (2011) Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 510 (updated March 2011) The Cochrane Collaboration. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org
Bansal VK, Misra MC, Garg P, Prabhu M (2010) A prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage versus single-stage management of patients with gallstone disease and common bile duct stones. Surg Endosc 24(8):1986–1989
Bansal VK, Misra MC, Rajan K, Kilambi R, Kumar S, Krishna A et al (2014) Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 28(3):875–885
Cuschieri A, Lezoche E, Morino M, Croce E, Lacy A, Toouli J et al (1999) E.A.E.S. multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage vs single-stage management of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi. Surg Endosc 13(10):952–957
González JEB, Torres Peña R, Ruiz Torres J, Martínez Alfonso M, Brizuela Quintanilla R, Morera Pérez M (2016) Endoscopic versus laparoscopic treatment for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Endosc Int Open 4(11):E1188–E1193
Ding G, Cai W, Qin M (2014) Single-stage vs. two-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones: a prospective randomized trial with long-term follow-up. J Gastrointest Surg Off J Soc Surg Aliment Tract 18(5):947–951
Ferulano GP, Dilillo S, D’Ambra M, Lionetti R, Silverio PD, Capasso S et al (2011) Laparoscopic one-stage vs endoscopic plus laparoscopic management of common Bile duct stones—a prospective randomized study. In: Iancu C (ed) Advances in endoscopic surgery. InTech. Available from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/advances-in-endoscopic-surgery/laparoscopic-one-stage-vs-endoscopic-plus-laparoscopic-management-of-common-bile-duct-stones-a-prosp
Koc B, Karahan S, Adas G, Tutal F, Guven H, Ozsoy A (2013) Comparison of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomized study. Am J Surg 206(4):457–463
Noble H, Tranter S, Chesworth T, Norton S, Thompson M (2009) A randomized, clinical trial to compare endoscopic sphincterotomy and subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with primary laparoscopic bile duct exploration during cholecystectomy in higher risk patients with choledocholithiasis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19(6):713–720
Rogers SJ, Cello JP, Horn JK, Siperstein AE, Schecter WP, Campbell AR et al (2010) Prospective randomized trial of LC + LCBDE vs ERCP/S + LC for common bile duct stone disease. Arch Surg 145(1):28–33
Sgourakis G, Karaliotas K (2002) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus endoscopic stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis. A prospective randomized study. Minerva Chir 57(4):467–474
Lv F, Zhang S, Ji M, Wang Y, Li P, Han W (2016) Single-stage management with combined tri-endoscopic approach for concomitant cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 30(12):5615–5620
Williams E, Beckingham I, El Sayed G, Gurusamy K, Sturgess R, Webster G et al (2017) Updated guideline on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Gut 66(5):765–782
Keeling NJ, Menzies D, Motson RW (1999) Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct: beyond the learning curve. Surg Endosc 13(2):109–112
Baucom RB, Feurer ID, Shelton JS, Kummerow K, Holzman MD, Poulose BK (2016) Surgeons, ERCP, and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: do we need a standard approach for common bile duct stones? Surg Endosc 30(2):414–423
Christensen M, Matzen P, Schulze S, Rosenberg J (2004) Complications of ERCP: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 60(5):721–731
Donkervoort SC, van Ruler O, Dijksman LM, van Geloven AA, Pierik EG (2010) Identification of risk factors for an unfavorable laparoscopic cholecystectomy course after endoscopic retrograde cholangiography in the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 24(4):798–804
Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G, Chilovi F, Costan F, De Berardinis F et al (1998) Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc 48(1):1–10
Thompson MH, Tranter SE (2002) All-comers policy for laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct. Br J Surg 89(12):1608–1612
Wei Q, Wang J-G, Li L-B, Li J-D (2003) Management of choledocholithiasis: Comparison between laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy. World J Gastroenterol WJG 9(12):2856–2858
Tang CN, Tsui KK, Ha JPY, Siu WT, Li MKW (2006) Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct: 10-year experience of 174 patients from a single centre. Hong Kong Med J Xianggang Yi Xue Za Zhi 12(3):191–196
Ebner S, Rechner J, Beller S, Erhart K, Riegler FM, Szinicz G (2004) Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones. Surg Endosc 18(5):762–765
Li MKW, Tang CN, Lai ECH (2011) Managing concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era: a systematic review. Asian J Endosc Surg 4(2):53–58
Costi R, DiMauro D, Mazzeo A, Boselli AS, Contini S, Violi V et al (2007) Routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis in octogenarians: is it worth the risk? Surg Endosc 21(1):41–47
Pring CM, Skelding-Millar L, Goodall RJR (2005) Expectant treatment or cholecystectomy after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for choledocholithiasis in patients over 80 years old? Surg Endosc 19(3):357–360
Lai J-H, Chen C-J, Chu C-H, Lin C-C, Sun F-J (2017) Cholecystectomy after sphincterotomy for preventing recurrence in elderly patients with acute cholangitis. Int J Gerontol. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1873959817302156
Topal B, Vromman K, Aerts R, Verslype C, Van Steenbergen W, Penninckx F (2010) Hospital cost categories of one-stage versus two-stage management of common bile duct stones. Surg Endosc 24(2):413–416
Heili MJ, Wintz NK, Fowler DL (1999) Choledocholithiasis: endoscopic versus laparoscopic management. Am Surg 65(2):135–138
Mattila A, Mrena J, Kellokumpu I (2017) Cost-analysis and effectiveness of one-stage laparoscopic versus two-stage endolaparoscopic management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Surg 17(1):79
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
RK, AN: conception and design of this work; acquisition and interpretation of data; drafting this work; and revising it critically for important intellectual content. Both authors also approve the manuscript in its current form for publication and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of this work will be appropriately investigated and resolved.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Disclosures
Anand Narayan Singh and Ragini Kilambi have no conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Additional information
Study conducted at Department of HPB Surgery, Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, New Delhi and Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Liver Transplantation, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Singh, A.N., Kilambi, R. Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with gallbladder stones with common bile duct stones: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials with trial sequential analysis. Surg Endosc 32, 3763–3776 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6170-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6170-8