Advertisement

Laparoscopic Transcystic Versus Transductal Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

  • Shahin HajibandehEmail author
  • Shahab Hajibandeh
  • Diwakar Ryali Sarma
  • Sankar Balakrishnan
  • Mokhtar Eltair
  • Rajnish Mankotia
  • Misra Budhoo
  • Yogesh Kumar
Scientific Review
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic transcystic (TC) and transductal (TD) common bile duct (CBD) exploration.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN Register, and bibliographic reference lists. CBD clearance rate, perioperative complications, and biliary complications were defined as the primary outcome parameters. Procedure time, length of hospital stay, conversion to open procedure were the secondary outcomes. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using random-effects models.

Results

We identified 30 studies reporting a total of 4073 patients comparing outcomes of laparoscopic TC (n = 2176) and TD (N = 1897) CBD exploration. The TC approach was associated with significantly lower overall complications (RD: −0.07, P = 0.001), biliary complications (RD: −0.05, P = 0.0003), and blood loss (MD: −16.20, P = 0.02) compared to TD approach. Moreover, the TC approach significantly reduced the length of hospital stay (MD: −2.62, P < 0.00001) and procedure time (MD: −12.73, P = 0.005). However, there was no significant difference in rate of CBD clearance (RD: 0.00, P = 0.77) and conversion to open procedure (RD: 0.00, P = 0.86) between two groups.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic TC CBD exploration is safe and reduces overall morbidity and biliary complications compared to the TD approach. Moreover, it is associated with significantly shorter length of hospital stay and procedure time. High-quality randomised trials may provide stronger evidence with respect to impact of the cystic duct/CBD diameter, number or size of CBD stones, or cystic duct anatomy on the comparative outcomes of TC and TD approaches.

Notes

Authors’ contribution

Shahin Hajibandeh and Shahab Hajibandeh equally contributed to this paper and joined first authorship is proposed. Shahin H, YK, SK contributed to design and conception. Shahin H and Shahab H contributed to the literature search and study selection, data collection, analysis and interpretation, and writing of the article. All authors critically revised the article and provided final approval.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

There are no funding sources for this work and no conflicts of interest and financial disclosures for the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Petelin JB (2003) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Surg Endosc 17:1705–1715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Williams EJ, Green J, Beckingham I, Parks R, Martin D, Lombard M (2008) British Society of Gastroenterology. Guidelines on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Gut 57:1004–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    ASGE standards of Practice Committee, Maple JT, Ben-Menachem T, Anderson MA et al (2010) The role of endoscopy in the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc 71:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dasari BV, Tan CJ, Gurusamy KS et al (2013) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 12:CD003327Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alexakis N, Connor S (2012) Meta-analysis of one- vs. two-stage laparoscopic/endoscopic management of common bile duct stones. HPB (Oxford) 14:254–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lu J, Cheng Y, Xiong XZ, Lin YX, Wu SJ, Cheng NS (2012) Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones. World J Gastroenterol 18:3156–3166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Puhalla H, Flint N, O’Rourke N (2015) Surgery for common bile duct stones—a lost surgical skill; still worthwhile in the minimally invasive century? Langenbecks Arch Surg 400:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reinders JS, Gouma DJ, Ubbink DT, van Ramshorst B, Boerma D (2014) Transcystic or transductal stone extraction during single-stage treatment of choledochocystolithiasis: a systematic review. World J Surg 38:2403–2411.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-014-2537-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pang L, Zhang Y, Wang Y, Kong J (2018) Transcystic versus traditional laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: its advantages and a meta-analysis. Surg Endosc 32(11):4363–4376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ 339:b2700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Slim K, Haugh M, Fagniez P-L, Pezet D, Chipponi J (2000) Ten-year audit of randomised trials in digestive surgery from Europe. Br J Surg 87:1585–1586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Higgins JP, Altman DG, editors. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JP, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008]. http://hiv.cochrane.org/sites/hiv. cochrane.org/files/uploads/Ch08_Bias.pdf. Accessed Oct 27, 2018
  13. 13.
    Martin IJ, Bailey IS, Rhodes M, O’Rourke N, Nathanson L, Fielding G (1998) Towards T-tube free laparoscopic bile duct exploration: a methodologic evolution during 300 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg 228:29–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rhodes M, Sussman L, Cohen L, Lewis MP (1998) Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones. Lancet 351:159–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cuschieri A, Lezoche E, Morino M, Croce E, Lacy A, Toouli J, Faggioni A, Ribeiro VM, Jakimowicz J, Visa J, Hanna GB (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 13:952–957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    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 57:467–474Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tokumura H, Umezawa A, Cao H, Sakamoto N, Imaoka Y, Ouchi A, Yamamoto K (2002) Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones: transcystic approach and choledochotomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 9:206–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Waage A, StroÈmberg C, Leijonmarck CE, Arvidsson D (2003) Long-term results from laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Surg Endosc 17:1181–1185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Paganini AM, Guerrieri M, Sarnari J, De Sanctis A, D’Ambrosio G, Lezoche G, Perretta S, Lezoche E (2007) Thirteen years’ experience with laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration for stones. Effectiveness and long-term results. Surg Endosc 21(1):34–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Topal B, Aerts R, Penninckx F (2007) Laparoscopic common bile duct stone clearance with flexible choledochoscopy. Surg Endosc 21(12):2317–2321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen X, Ding Y, Wang W, Zhang A, Wang P, Wang B (2007) The comparative study on two types of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. J Clin Surg 15:520–521Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jameel M, Darmas B, Baker AL (2008) Trend towards primary closure following laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 90(1):29–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    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 19:713–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    ElGeidie AA, ElShobary MM, Naeem YM (2011) Laparoscopic exploration versus intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones: a prospective randomized trial. Dig Surg 28(5–6):424–431CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Grubnik VV, Tkachenko AI, Ilyashenko VV, Vorotyntseva KO (2012) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration versus open surgery: comparative prospective randomized trial. Surg Endosc 26(8):2165–2171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen XM, Zhang Y, Cai HH, Sun DL, Liu SY, Duan YF, Yang C, Jiang Y, Wu HR (2013) Transcystic approach with microincision of the cystic duct and its confluence part in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 23(12):977–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhou YP, Guo ZJ, Dai T, Chen B (2013) Curative effects of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration. Chin J Clin Med 20(3):294–296Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tao Y, Chen D, Li H, Zhu A, Xing J (2013) Comparison of transcyst with trarsduct incision in laparoscopic choledochotomy with primary ductal closure. Chin J Min Inv Surg 13:869–872Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang C, Gu H, He JY (2014) A comparative study of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic transcystic common bile exploration for secondary extrahepatic bile duct stones. J Xinjiang Med Univ 37(10):1318–1320Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tulati T (2014) Effects of laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration. Front Med. 6:21–22Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Poh B, Cashin P, Bowers K, Ackermann T, Tay YK, Dhir A, Croagh D (2014) Management of choledocholithiasis in an emergency cohort undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a single-centre experience. HPB (Oxford) 16(7):629–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wu S, Zhan S, Qiu H (2014) The clinical study of treatment common bile duct stones by laparoscopic cystic duct approach. Anhui Med J 35:685–686Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Abdelrahman T, Ward A, Nutt MR, Boyce TH, Rasheed AM (2014) A retrospective comparative study of the transcystic and transcholedochal approach to laparoscopic bile duct exploration. J Am Coll Surg 219(4):22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhang WJ, Xu GF, Huang Q, Luo KL, Dong ZT, Li JM, Wu GZ, Guan WX (2015) Treatment of gallbladder stone with common bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era. BMC Surg 15:7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hongjun H, Yong J, Baoqiang W (2015) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: choledochotomy versus transcystic approach? Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 25(3):218–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Aawsaj Y, Light D, Horgan L (2016) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: 15-year experience in a district general hospital. Surg Endosc 30(6):2563–2566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huang S (2015) Efficacy comparison of laparoscopic common bile duct through the cystic duct lithotomy and choledocholithotomy surgery. Mod Pract Med 27:213–214Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Li P, Wu Y, Huang ZY (2016) Clinical analysis of laparoscopic choledocholithotomy by choledochal duct exploration. Mod Diagn Treat 27(13):2453–2454Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Han MM, Bao Z, Yang ZJ (2016) Analysis of clinical efficacy of LTCBDE in patients with secondary extrahepatic bile duct stones. J Pract Med 32(12):1991–1993Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Liu Y, Han W, Gong PM, Shi W (2016) Clinical analysis of laparoscopic surgery for secondary bile duct stones via cystic duct. China J Endosc 22(4):31–33Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sun H (2017) The clinical efficacy of LTCBDE in the treatment of secondary extrahepatic bile duct stones. J Clin Med 4(11):2050–2051Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Al-Temimi MH, Rangarajan S, Chandrasekaran B, Kim EG, Trujillo CN, Mousa AF, Santos DA, Johna SD (2018) Predictors of failed transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: analysis of multicenter integrated health system database. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 29(3):360–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wills VL, Gibson K, Karihaloot C, Jorgensen JO (2002) Complications of biliary T-tubes after choledochotomy. ANZ J Surg 72(3):177–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ha JP, Tang CN, Siu WT, Chau CH, Li MK (2004) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy for common bile duct stones. Hepatogastroenterology 51(60):1605–1608Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ricci C, Pagano N, Taffurelli G, Pacilio CA, Migliori M, Bazzoli F, Casadei R, Minni F (2018) Comparison of efficacy and safety of 4 combinations of laparoscopic and intraoperative techniques for management of gallstone disease with biliary duct calculi: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 153(7):e181167CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shahin Hajibandeh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Shahab Hajibandeh
    • 2
  • Diwakar Ryali Sarma
    • 1
  • Sankar Balakrishnan
    • 1
  • Mokhtar Eltair
    • 1
  • Rajnish Mankotia
    • 1
  • Misra Budhoo
    • 1
  • Yogesh Kumar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General SurgerySandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS TrustBirminghamUK
  2. 2.Department of General Surgery, The Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS TrustNorth Manchester General HospitalManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations