Learning curve for performing choledochotomy bile duct exploration with primary closure after laparoscopic cholecystectomy
- 226 Downloads
Primary closure after laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is a safe and effective approach for treating cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the learning curve of performing primary closure after LC+LCBDE.
We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent primary closure after LC+LCBDE performed by a single surgeon from January 2009 to April 2015 in our institution, and analyzed preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis to evaluate the learning curve for this procedure.
Overall, there were 390 patients. The total postoperative complications rate was 7.2%, including bile leakage in 9 (2.3%) patients and retained common bile duct stone in 3 (0.8%) patients. The CUSUM operating time (OT) learning curve was best modeled by the equation: CUSUMOT = 312.209 × procedure0.599 × e(−0.011×procedure) + 122.608 (R2 = 0.96). The learning curve was composed of two phases, phase 1 (the initial 54 patients) and phase 2 (the remaining 336 patients). A significant decrease in the OT (116.8 ± 22.4 vs. 93.8 ± 17.8 min; p < 0.001) and complication rate (16.7 vs. 5.7%; p < 0.01) including the rate of bile leakage (7.4 vs. 1.5%; p < 0.01) and retained stone (3.7 vs. 0.3%; p < 0.01) was observed between the two phases. In addition, 20 patients had conversion to open surgery. Impacted stones were independently associated with conversion, as indicated by a multivariable analysis.
The data suggest that the learning curve of this procedure was achieved in approximately 54 cases. An impacted stone was the only risk factor that affected the conversion rate.
KeywordsLearning curve Cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis Laparoscopic cholecystectomy Common bile duct exploration Primary closure
This work was supported by Grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81760435), the Project of Jiangxi Provincial Department of Science and Technology (20161BBI90016), and the Advantage Innovation Team of Jiangxi Province (20153BCB24004).
Compliance with ethical standards
Hengqing Zhu, Linquan Wu, Rongfa Yuan, Yu Wang, Wenjun Liao, Jun Lei, and Jianghua Shao have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 6.Wandling MW, Hungness ES, Pavey ES, Stulberg JJ, Schwab B, Yang AD, Shapiro MB, Bilimoria KY, Ko CY, Nathens AB (2016) Nationwide assessment of trends in choledocholithiasis management in the United States from 1998 to 2013. JAMA Surg 151:1125–1130. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.2059 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Wu X, Yang Y, Dong P, Gu J, Lu J, Li M, Mu J, Wu W, Yang J, Zhang L, Ding Q, Liu Y (2012) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 397:909–916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-012-0962-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Khaled YS, Malde DJ, de Souza C, Kalia A, Ammori BJ (2013) Laparoscopic bile duct exploration via choledochotomy followed by primary duct closure is feasible and safe for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 27:4164–4170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-013-3015-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.Koch M, Garden OJ, Padbury R, Rahbari NN, Adam R, Capussotti L, Fan ST, Yokoyama Y, Crawford M, Makuuchi M, Christophi C, Banting S, Brooke-Smith M, Usatoff V, Nagino M, Maddern G, Hugh TJ, Vauthey JN, Greig P, Rees M, Nimura Y, Figueras J, DeMatteo RP, Buchler MW, Weitz J (2011) Bile leakage after hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a definition and grading of severity by the International Study Group of Liver Surgery. Surgery 149:680–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2010.12.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.Gigot JF, Navez B, Etienne J, Cambier E, Jadoul P, Guiot P, Kestens PJ (1997) A stratified intraoperative surgical strategy is mandatory during laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for common bile duct stones. Lessons and limits from an initial experience of 92 patients. Surg Endosc 11:722–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar