Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 28, Issue 3, pp 875–885 | Cite as

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

  • Virinder Kumar Bansal
  • Mahesh C. Misra
  • Karthik Rajan
  • Ragini Kilambi
  • Subodh Kumar
  • Asuri Krishna
  • Atin Kumar
  • Chandrakant S. Pandav
  • Rajeshwari Subramaniam
  • M. K. Arora
  • Pramod Kumar Garg



The ideal method for managing concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct (CBD) stones is debatable. The currently preferred method is two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This prospective randomized trial compared the success and cost effectiveness of single- and two-stage management of patients with concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones.


Consecutive patients with concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones were randomized to either single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration and cholecystectomy (group 1) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for endoscopic extraction of CBD stones followed by LC (group 2). Success was defined as complete clearance of CBD and cholecystectomy by the intended method. Cost effectiveness was measured using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed to compare outcomes.


From February 2009 to October 2012, 168 patients were randomized: 84 to the single-stage procedure (group 1) and 84 to the two-stage procedure (group 2). Both groups were matched with regard to demographic and clinical parameters. The success rates of laparoscopic CBD exploration and ERCP for clearance of CBD were similar (91.7 vs. 88.1 %). The overall success rate also was comparable: 88.1 % in group 1 and 79.8 % in group 2 (p = 0.20). Direct choledochotomy was performed in 83 of the 84 patients. The mean operative time was significantly longer in group 1 (135.7 ± 36.6 vs. 72.4 ± 27.6 min; p ≤ 0.001), but the overall hospital stay was significantly shorter (4.6 ± 2.4 vs. 5.3 ± 6.2 days; p = 0.03). Group 2 had a significantly greater number of procedures per patient (p < 0.001) and a higher cost (p = 0.002). The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of postoperative wound infection rates or major complications.


Single- and two-stage management for uncomplicated concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones had similar success and complication rates, but the single-stage strategy was better in terms of shorter hospital stay, need for fewer procedures, and cost effectiveness.


Common bile duct stones Gallstones Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration ERCP Laparoscopic cholecystectomy 


  1. 1.
    Fitzgibbons RJ, Gardner GC (2001) Laparoscopic surgery and the common bile duct. World J Surg 25:1317–1324PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cuschieri A, Lezoche E, Morino M, Croce E, Faggioni A, Jakimowicz J, Lacy A, Ribiero VM, Touli J, Visa J, Hanna GB (1999) E.A.E.S. multicentre prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage vs single-stage management of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi. Surg Endosc 13:952–957PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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 24:1986–1989PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martin DJ, Vernon DR, Toouli J (2006) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews CD003327. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003327.pub2
  5. 5.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6,336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Srivastava A, Srinivas G, Misra MC, Pandav CS, Seenu V, Goyal A (2001) Cost-effectiveness analysis of laparoscopic versus minilaparotomy cholecystectomy for gallstone disease: a randomized trial. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 17:497–502PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fenwick E, Marshall DA, Levy AR, Nichol G (2006) Using and interpreting cost-effectiveness acceptability curves: an example using data from a trial of management strategies for atrial fibrillation. BMC Health Serv Res 6:52PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Phillips EH, Liberman M, Carroll BJ, Fallas MJ, Rosenthal RJ, Hiatt JR (1995) Bile duct stones in the laparoscopic era: is preoperative sphincterotomy necessary? Arch Surg 130:880–886PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cuschieri A, Croce E, Faggioni J et al (1996) EAES ductal stone study: preliminary findings of multicentre prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage vs single-stage treatment. Surg Endosc 10:1130–1135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shapiro SJ, Gordon LA, Daykovsky L et al (1991) Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct: experience in 16 selected patients. J Laparoendosc Surg 6:33–41Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pereira-Lima JC, Jakobs R, Winter UH, Benz C, Martin WR, Adamek HE, Riemann JF (1998) Long-term results (7 to 10 years) of endoscopic papillotomy for choledocholithiasis: multivariate analysis of prognostic factors for the recurrence of biliary symptoms. Gastrointest Endosc 48:457–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rogers S, Cello JP, Horn JK, Siperstein AE, Schecter WP, Campbell AR, Mackersie RC, Rodas A, Kreuwel HTC, Harris HW (2010) Prospective randomized trial of LC + LCBDE vs ERCP/S + LC for common bile duct stone disease. Arch Surg 145:28–33PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Petelin JB (2003) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: lessons learned from 12 years’ experience. Surg Endosc 17:1705–1715PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paganini AM, Guerrieri M, Sarnari J, De Sanctis A, Ambrosio GD, Lezoche G, Lezoche E (2005) Long-term results after laparoscopic transverse choledochotomy for common bile duct stones. Surg Endosc 19:705–709PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    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 57:467–474PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Noble H, Tranter S, Chesworth T, Norton S, Thompson M (2009) A randomised 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
  17. 17.
    Stiegmann GV, Pearlman NW, Goff JS, Sun JH, Norton LW (1989) Endoscopic cholangiography and stone removal prior to cholecystectomy: a more cost-effective approach than operative duct exploration? Arch Surg 124:787–790PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bergman JJ, Rauws EAJ, Fockens P, van Berkel AM, Bossuyt PM, Tijssen JG, Tytgat GN, Huibregtse K (1997) Randomised trial of endoscopic balloon dilatation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of bile duct stones. Lancet 349:1124–1129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Garg PK, Tandon RK, Ahuja V, Makharia GK, Batra Y (2004) Predictors of unsuccessful mechanical lithotripsy and endoscopic clearance of large bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc 59:601–605PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    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 12:191–196PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Allen NL, Leeth RR (2006) Outcomes of cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis. J Gastrointest Surg 10:292–296PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Donkervoort SC, van Ruler O, Dijksman LM, van Geloven AA, Pierek EG (2010) Identification of risk factors for an unfavorable laparoscopic cholecystectomy course after endoscopic retrograde cholangiography in the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 24:798–804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nair MS, Uzzaman MM, Fafemi O, Athow A (2011) Elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the presence of common bile duct stent. Surg Endosc 25:429–436PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Topal B, Vromman K, Aerts R, Verslype C, Steenbergen WV, Penninckx F (2010) Hospital cost categories of one-stage versus two-stage management of common bile duct stones. Surg Endosc 24:413–416PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Urbach DR, Khajanchee YS, Jobe BA, Standage BA, Hanson PD, Swanstrom LL (2001) Cost-effective management of common bile duct stones: a decision analysis of the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), intraoperative cholangiography, and laparoscopic bile duct exploration. Surg Endosc 15:4–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    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 18:3156–3166PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fan ST, Lai ECS, Mok FPT, Lo C-M, Zheng S-S, Wong J (1993) Early treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis by endoscopic papillotomy. N Engl J Med 328:223–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Neoptolomos JP, London NJ, James D, Carr-Locke DL, Bailey IA, Fossard DP (1988) Controlled trial of urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment for acute pancreatitis due to gallstones. Lancet 2:979–983CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Virinder Kumar Bansal
    • 1
  • Mahesh C. Misra
    • 1
  • Karthik Rajan
    • 1
  • Ragini Kilambi
    • 1
  • Subodh Kumar
    • 1
  • Asuri Krishna
    • 1
  • Atin Kumar
    • 2
  • Chandrakant S. Pandav
    • 3
  • Rajeshwari Subramaniam
    • 4
  • M. K. Arora
    • 4
  • Pramod Kumar Garg
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Surgical DisciplinesAll India Institute of Medical SciencesNew DelhiIndia
  2. 2.Department of RadiodiagnosisAll India Institute of Medical SciencesNew DelhiIndia
  3. 3.Centre for Community MedicineAll India Institute of Medical SciencesNew DelhiIndia
  4. 4.Department of AnaesthesiologyAll India Institute of Medical SciencesNew DelhiIndia
  5. 5.Department of GastroenterologyAll India Institute of Medical SciencesNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations