Advertisement

Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery

, Volume 397, Issue 6, pp 909–916 | Cite as

Primary closure versus T-tube drainage in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

  • Xiangsong Wu
  • Yong Yang
  • Ping Dong
  • Jun Gu
  • Jianhua Lu
  • Maolan Li
  • Jiasheng Mu
  • Wenguang Wu
  • Jiahua Yang
  • Lin Zhang
  • Qichen Ding
  • Yingbin LiuEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the safety and effectiveness of primary closure with those of T-tube drainage in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) for choledocholithiasis.

Methods

A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed, EmBase, and Cochrane Library databases. Only randomized controlled trials comparing primary closure with T-tube drainage in LCBDE were considered eligible for this meta-analysis. The analyzed outcome variables included postoperative mortality, overall morbidity, biliary complication rate, biliary leak rate, reoperation, operating time, postoperative hospital stay, time to abdominal drain removal, and retained stone. All calculations and statistical tests were performed using ReviewerManager 5.1.2 software.

Results

A total of 295 patients (148 patients with primary closure and 147 patients with T-tube drainage) from three trials were identified and analyzed. No deaths occurred in any of the trials. Primary closure showed significantly better results in terms of morbidity (risk ratio (RR), 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.30 to 0.88), biliary complication without a combination of retained stone (RR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.97), reoperation (RR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.87), operating time (mean difference (MD), −20.72; 95% CI, −29.59 to −11.85), postoperative hospital stay (MD, −3.24; 95% CI, −3.96 to −2.52), and time to abdominal drainage removal (MD, −0.45; 95% CI, −0.86 to −0.04). Statistically significant differences were not found between the two methods in terms of biliary leak, biliary complication, and retained stones.

Conclusion

The current meta-analysis indicates that primary closure of the common bile duct is safer and more effective than T-tube drainage for LCBDE. Therefore, we do not recommend routine performance of T-tube drainage in LCBDE.

Keywords

Primary closure T-tube drainage Laparoscopy Common bile duct exploration Choledochostomy Meta-analysis 

Notes

Conflicts of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Ponsky JL, Heniford BT, Gersin K (2000) Choledocholithiasis: evolving intraoperative strategies. Am Surg 66:262PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hungness ES, Soper NJ (2006) Management of common bile duct stones. J Gastrointest Surg 10:612PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Verbesey JE, Birkett DH (2008) Common bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis. Surg Clin N Am 88:1315–1328, ixPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rhodes M, Sussman L, Cohen L et al (1998) Randomized trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones. Lancet 351:159–161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Noble H, Tranter S, Chesworth T et al (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 19:713–720PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rogers SJ, Cello JP, Horn JK et al (2010) Prospective randomized trial of LC+LCBDE vs ERCP/S+LC for common bile duct stone disease. Arch Surg 145:28–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wills VL, Gibson K, Karihaloo C et al (2002) Complications of biliary T-tubes after choledochotomy. ANZ J Surg 72:177–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    El-Geidie AA (2010) Is the use of T-tube necessary after laparoscopic choledochotomy? J Gastrointest Surg 14:844–848PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang L, Bie P, Wang S et al (2008) A randomized comparison of primary closure and T-tube drainage of the common bile duct after laparoscopic choledochotomy. Surg Endosc 22:1595–1600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Perez G, Escalona A, Jarufe N et al (2005) Prospective randomized study of T-tube versus biliary stent for common bile duct decompression after open choledocotomy. World J Surg 29:869–872PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gurusamy KS, Samraj K (2007) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after open common bile duct exploration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 24(1):CD005640Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ambreen M, Shaikh AR, Jamal A et al (2009) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after open choledochotomy. Asian J Surg 32:21–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J (2011) Chapter 6: searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org
  14. 14.
    Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC (eds) (2011) Chapter 8: assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org
  15. 15.
    Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG (eds) (2011) Chapter 9: analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org
  16. 16.
    Zhang WJ, Xu GF, Wu GZ et al (2009) Laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct with primary closure versus T-tube drainage: a randomized clinical trial. J Surg Res 157:e1–e5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    O’Rourke NA, Askew AR, Cowen AE et al (1993) The role of ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy in the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. ANZ J Surg 63:3–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tanaka M, Konomi H, Matsunaga H et al (1997) Endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones: impact of recent technical refinements. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 4:16–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Binmoeller KF, Schafer TW (2001) Endoscopic management of bile duct stones. J Clin Gastroenterol 32:106–118PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Coppola R, Riccioni ME, Ciletti S et al (1997) Analysis of complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy for biliary stones in a consecutive series of 546 patients. Surg Endosc 11:129–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Uchiyama K, Onishi H, Tani M et al (2003) Long-term prognosis after treatment of patients with choledocholithiasis. Ann Surg 238:97–102PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Martin DJ, Vernon DR, Toouli J (2006) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD003327Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Holdsworth RJ, Sadek SA, Ambikar S et al (1989) Dynamics of bile flow through the human choledochal sphincter following exploration of the common bile duct. World J Surg 13:300–306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    De Roover D, Vanderveken M, Gerard Y (1989) Choledochotomy: primary closure versus T-tube: a prospective trial. Acta Chir Belg 89:320–324PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Martin IJ, Bailey IS, Rhodes M et al (1998) Towards T-tube-free laparoscopic bile duct exploration: a methodological evolution during 300 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg 228:29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cuschieri A, Croce E, Faggioni A et al (1996) WEAES ductal stone study. Preliminary findings of multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage versus single-stage management. Surg Endosc 10:1130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wills VL, Gibson K, Karihaloot C et al (2002) Complications of biliary T-tubes after choledochotomy. ANZ J Surg 72:177–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lezoche E, Paganini AM, Guerrieri M (1996) A new T-tube applier in laparoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 10:445–448PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kumar P, Orizu M, Leung E (2009) Laparoscopic T-tube placement after common bile duct exploration: a simple technique. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 19:e36–e37PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gurusamy KS, Samraj K (2007) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct stone exploration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD005641Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ha JP, Tang CN, Siu WT et al (2004) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy for common bile duct stones. Hepatogastroenterology 51:1605–1608PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jameel M, Darmas B, Baker AL (2008) Trend towards primary closure following laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 90:29–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zhu QD, Tao CL, Zhou MT et al (2011) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after common bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis. Langenbecks Arch Surg 396:53–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Koch M, Garden OJ, Padbury R et al (2011) Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a definition and grading of severity by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery. Surgery 149:680–688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Egger M, Smith GD (1997) Meta-analysis. Potentials and promise. BMJ 315:1371–1374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mulrow CD (1994) Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ 309:597–599PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M et al (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315:629–634PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xiangsong Wu
    • 1
  • Yong Yang
    • 1
  • Ping Dong
    • 1
  • Jun Gu
    • 1
  • Jianhua Lu
    • 1
  • Maolan Li
    • 1
  • Jiasheng Mu
    • 1
  • Wenguang Wu
    • 1
  • Jiahua Yang
    • 1
  • Lin Zhang
    • 1
  • Qichen Ding
    • 1
  • Yingbin Liu
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of General Surgery, Xinhua HospitalShanghai JiaoTong University School of MedicineShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations