Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 27, Issue 6, pp 1907–1912 | Cite as

ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a combined (one-step) procedure: a random comparison to the standard (two-step) procedure

  • Maris Jones
  • Matthew Johnson
  • Edward Samourjian
  • Karen Slauch
  • Nathan Ozobia



Current treatment of complicated calculous biliary disease typically involves a two-step procedure consisting of preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Alternatively, laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) and intraoperative common bile duct exploration or ERCP at a later date may be performed. This study compared the benefits of the traditional two-step procedure to the novel one-step procedure for the management of calculous biliary disease.


A retrospective review of 20 patients was conducted comparing one-step to two-step procedures for the management of choledocholithiasis. We define the one-step procedure to be a laparoscopic cholecystectomy with IOC to confirm the presence or absence of stones. Intraoperative ERCP with stone extraction was conducted if necessary as part of the one-step procedure.


A statistically significant difference existed between hospital charges for one-step ($58,145.30, SD $17,963.09) and two-step ($78,895.53, SD $21,954.78) procedures (p = 0.033). Other parameters (length of stay, preoperative days) trended toward significance; however, statistical significance was not achieved.


There appears to be a significant cost reduction with implementation of the one-step treatment of calculous biliary disease. Further research with a larger study population is necessary to determine the additional benefits of this procedure and to help augment the surgical endoscopists’ armamentarium.


Cholecystectomy Choledocholithiasis Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) GI endoscopy One-step Two-step 



We thank the University of Nevada School of Medicine Department of Surgery, the University Medical Center of Southern Nevada Department of Endoscopy, and the University of Nevada, Reno, Bioinformatics Center. Statistical support provided via National Institute of General Medical Sciences (8 P20 GM103440-11).


Drs. Jones, Johnson, Samourjian, Slauch, and Ozobia have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Martin DJ, Vernon DR, Toouli J (2006) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 19(2):CD003327Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Maple JT, Ikenberry SO, Anderson MA, Appalaneni V, Decker GA, Early D, Evans JA, Fanelli RD, Fisher D, Fisher L, Fukami N, Hwang JH, Jain R, Jue T, Khan K, Krinsky ML, Malpas P, Ben-Menachem T, Sharaf RN, Dominitz JA (2011) The role of endoscopy in the management of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc 74(4):731–744PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Guidelines Committee (2007) Guidelines for training in diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Surg Endosc 21(6):1010–1011Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ferreira LE, Baron TH (2008) Comparison of safety and efficacy of ERCP performed with the patient in supine and prone positions. Gastrointest Endosc 67(7):1037–1043PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Das A (2008) Performing an ERCP with the patient in the supine position: necessity is the mother of improvisation. Gastrointest Endosc 67(7):1044–1045PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wilcox CM (2008) Should patients undergoing ERCP be placed in the prone or supine position? Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 5(9):488–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cavina E, Franceschi M, Sidoti F, Goletti O, Buccianti P, Chiarugi M (1998) Laparo-endoscopic “rendezvous”: a new technique in the choledocholithiasis treatment. Hepatogastroenterology 45(23):1430–1435PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tzovaras G, Baloyiannis I, Kapsoritakis A, Psychos A, Paroutoglou G, Potamianos S (2010) Laparoendoscopic rendezvous: an effective alternative to a failed preoperative ERCP in patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 24(10):2603–2606PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    La Greca G, Barbagallo F, Di Blasi M, Chisari A, Lombardo R, Bonaccorso R, Latteri S, Di Stefano A, Russello D (2008) Laparo-endoscopic “rendezvous” to treat cholecysto-choledocolithiasis: effective, safe and simplifies the endoscopist’s work. World J Gastroenterol 14(18):2844–2850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Enochsson L, Lindberg B, Swahn F, Arnelo U (2004) Intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to remove common bile duct stones during routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not prolong hospitalization: a 2-year experience. Surg Endosc 18(3):367–371PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iodice G, Giardiello C, Francica G, Sarrantonio G, Angelone G, Cristiano S, Finelli R, Tramontano G (2001) Single-step treatment of gallbladder and bile duct stones: a combined endoscopic-laparoscopic technique. Gastrointest Endosc 53(3):336–338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Morino M, Baracchi F, Miglietta C, Furlan N, Ragona R, Garbarini A (2006) Preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy versus laparoendoscopic rendezvous in patients with gallbladder and bile duct stones. Ann Surg 244(6):889–893PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lella F, Bagnolo F, Rebuffat C, Scalambra M, Bonassi U, Colombo E (2006) Use of the laparoscopic–endoscopic approach, the so-called “rendezvous” technique, in cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a valid method in cases with patient-related risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis. Surg Endosc 20(3):419–423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rábago LR, Vicente C, Soler F, Delgado M, Moral I, Guerra I, Castro JL, Quintanilla E, Romeo J, Llorente R, Vázquez Echarri J, Martínez-Veiga JL, Gea F (2006) Two-stage treatment with preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) compared with single-stage treatment with intraoperative ERCP for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis with possible choledocholithiasis. Endoscopy 38(8):779–786PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Del Rio P, Dell’Abate P, Labonia D, Negri M, Sianesi N, Arcuri MF, Sianesi M (2011) Choledocholithiasis and endo-laparoscopic rendezvous. Analysis of 59 consecutive cases. Ann Ital Chir 82(3):221–224PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tzovaras G, Baloyiannis I, Zachari E, Symeonidis D, Zacharoulis D, Kapsoritakis A, Paroutoglou G, Potamianos S (2012) Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis: interim analysis of a controlled randomized trial. Ann Surg 3:435–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tabone LE, Sarker S, Fisichella PM, Conlon M, Fernando E, Yi S, Luchette FA (2011) To “gram or not”? Indications for intraoperative cholangiogram. Surgery 150(4):810–819PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pierce RA, Jonnalagadda S, Spitler JA, Tessier DJ, Liaw JM, Lall SC, Melman LM, Frisella MM, Todt LM, Brunt LM, Halpin VJ, Eagon JC, Edmundowicz SA, Matthews BD (2008) Incidence of residual choledocholithiasis detected by intraoperative cholangiography at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients having undergone preoperative ERCP. Surg Endosc 22(11):2365–2372PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nathanson LK, O’Rourke NA, Martin IJ, Fielding GA, Cowen AE, Roberts RK, Kendall BJ, Kerlin P, Devereux BM (2005) Postoperative ERCP versus laparoscopic choledochotomy for clearance of selected bile duct calculi: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 242(2):188–192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Azary SY, Kalbasi H, Setayesh A, Mousavi M, Hashemi A, Khodadoostan M, Zali MR, Mohammad Alizadeh AH (2011) Predictive value and main determinants of abnormal features of intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 10(3):308–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ford JA, Soop M, Du J, Loveday BP, Rodgers M (2012) Systematic review of intraoperative cholangiography in cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 99(2):160–167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sheffield KM, Han Y, Kuo YF, Townsend CM Jr, Goodwin JS, Riall TS (2012) Variation in the use of intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 214(4):668–679PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sheffield KM, Ramos KE, Djukom CD, Jimenez CJ, Mileski WJ, Kimbrough TD, Townsend CM Jr, Riall TS (2011) Implementation of a critical pathway for complicated gallstone disease: translation of population-based data into clinical practice. J Am Coll Surg 212(5):835–843PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Oztas E, Parlak E, Kucukay F, Arhan M, Daglı U, Etik DO, Onder FO, Olcer T, Sasmaz N (2012) The impact of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography education on radiation exposure to experienced endoscopist: “trainee effect”. Dig Dis Sci 57(5):1134–1143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wong HP, Chiu YL, Shiu BH, Ho LC (2012) Preoperative MRCP to detect choledocholithiasis in acute calculous cholecystitis. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 19(4):458–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Srinivasa S, Sammour T, McEntee B, Davis N, Hill AG (2010) Selective use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in clinical practice may miss choledocholithiasis in gallstone pancreatitis. Can J Surg 53(6):403–407PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rahman R, Ju J, Shamma’s J, Goebel S, Sundaram U (2010) Correlation between MRCP and ERCP findings at a tertiary care hospital. W V Med J 106(5):14–19PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maris Jones
    • 1
  • Matthew Johnson
    • 1
  • Edward Samourjian
    • 1
  • Karen Slauch
    • 2
  • Nathan Ozobia
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of Nevada School of MedicineLas VegasUSA
  2. 2.Bioinformatics CenterUniversity of NevadaRenoUSA

Personalised recommendations