Summary
We evaluated the impact of routine fluoroscopic cholangiography on our first 100 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Catheterization of the cystic duct was successfully performed in 89 of 99 attempts. The cholangiogram altered the course of the procedure in 9 (10%) of these cases. In three subjects, the information obtained revealed unsuspected choledocholithiasis. In the remaining six patients, unusual and potentially hazardous anatomic relationships were discovered that were not visible via laparoscopic exposure alone. Arguments for the selective use of cholangiography during open cholecystectomy are based only on the identification of unsuspected stones. The strongest argument for routine cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the additional anatomic information obtained. Based on our experience, we advocate that routine cholangiography be a part of all laparoscopic cholecystectomies.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Andren-Sandberg A, Alinder G, Bengmark S (1985) Accidental lesions of the common bile duct at choleeystectomy: preand perioperative factors of importance. Ann Surg 201: 328–332
Berci G, Sackier J (1991) The Los Angeles experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 161: 382–384
Bismuth H (1982) Postoperative stricture of the bile ducts. In: Blumgart LH (ed) The biliary tract. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 209–218
Collins PG, Gorey PG (1984) Iatrogenic biliary stricture: presentation and management. Br J Surg 71:980–981
Cotton PB, Baillie J, Pappas TN, Meyers WS (1991) Laparoscopic cholecystectomy and the biliary endoscopist (Editorial). Gastrointest Endosc 37:94–96
Deitch EA, Voci VE (1982) Operative cholangiography: the case for selective instead of routine operative cholangiography. Am Surg 48: 297–301
DenBesten L, Berci G (1986) The current status of biliary tract surgery: an international study of 1072 consecutive patients. World J Surg 10:116–131
Dubois F, Icard P, Berthelot G, Levard H (1990) Coelioscopic cholecystectomy: preliminary report of 36 eases. Ann Surg 211: 60–62
Gerber A (1986) A requiem for the routine operative cholangiogram. Surg Gynecol Obstet 163:363–364
Goor DA, Ebert PA (1972) Anomalies of the biliary tree: report of repair of an accessory bile duct and review of the literature. Arch Surg 104:302–309
Gregg RO (1988) The case for selective cholangiography. Am J Surg 155:540–544
Hermann RE, Hoerr SO (1985) The value of routine use of operative cholangiography. Surg Gynecol Obstet 161: 1015–1020
Kitahama A, Kerstein MD, Overby JL, Kappelman MD, Webb WR (1986) Routine intraoperative cholangiogram. Surg Gynecol Obstet 162:317–322
Mansberger JA, Davis JB, Scarborough C, Bowden TA (1988) Selective intraoperative cholangiography: a case for its use on an anatomic basis. Am Surg 54:31–33
Merenstein D, MacGowan KM, Kune GA (1985) Frequency of anatomical hazards during cholecystectomy. Dig Surg 2:121–125
Mirizzi PL (1932) La cholangiographia durante las operaciones de las vias biliares. Bol Soc Circ 16:1133–1161
Moossa AR, Mayer AD, Stabile B (1990) Iatrogenic injury to the bile duct. Arch Surg 125: 1028–1031
Pasquale MD, Nauta RJ (1989) Selective vs. routine use of intraoperative cholangiography: an argument. Arch Surg 124: 1041–1042
Puente SG, Bannura GC (1983) Radiological anatomy of the biliary tract: variations and congenital abnormalities. World J Surg 7: 271–276
Scher KS, Scott-Conner CE (1987) Complications of biliary surgery. Am Surg 53: 16–2l
Shively EH, Wieman TJ, Adams AL, Romines RB, Garrison RN (1990) Operative cholangiography. Am J Surg 159:380–384
Warren KW, Jefferson MF (1973) Prevention and repair of strictures of the extrahepatic bile ducts. Surg Clin North Am 53:1169–1190
Warren KW, McDonald WM (1964) Facts and fiction regarding strictures of the extrahepatic bile ducts. Ann Surg 159: 996–1010
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bruhn, E.W., Miller, F.J. & Hunter, J.G. Routine fluoroscopic cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: an argument. Surg Endosc 5, 111–115 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02653213
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02653213