Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Treatment of Common Bile Duct Stones in Sweden 1989–2006: An Observational Nationwide Study of a Paradigm Shift

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The preferred strategies for treatment of common bile duct stones have changed from choledochotomy with cholecystectomy to sphincterotomy with or without cholecystectomy. The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of these treatment strategies on a nationwide level in Sweden.

Methods

All patients with hospital care for benign biliary diagnoses 1988–2006 were identified in Swedish registers. Patients with common bile duct stones and a first admission with choledochotomy and or endoscopic sphincterotomy from 1989 through 2006 comprised the study group. These patients were analyzed with respect to readmission for biliary diagnoses and acute pancreatitis.

Results

Incidence of open and laparoscopic choledochotomy decreased from 19.4 to 5.2, whereas endoscopic sphincterotomy increased from 5.1 to 26.1 per 100,000 inhabitants per year, respectively. Among patients treated for common bile duct stones (n = 26,815), 60.0 % underwent cholecystectomy during the first hospital admission in 1989–1994, compared to 30.1 % in 2001–2006. The treatment strategy that included endoscopic sphincterotomy was associated with more readmissions for biliary diagnoses and increased risk for acute pancreatitis than the treatment strategy with choledochotomy. However, patients treated with endoscopic sphincterotomy and concurrent cholecystectomy at the index admission had the lowest risk of readmission.

Conclusions

Cholecystectomy has been increasingly separated from treatment of bile duct stones, and endoscopic sphincterotomy has superseded choledochotomy as a first alternative for bile duct clearance in Sweden. In patients fit for surgery, clearance of the common bile duct can be combined with cholecystectomy, as it probably reduces the need for biliary related readmissions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bateson MC (1999) Gallbladder disease. BMJ 318:1745–1748

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Aerts R, Penninckx F (2003) The burden of gallstone disease in Europe. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 18(Suppl 3):49–53

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tazuma S (2006) Gallstone disease: epidemiology, pathogenesis, and classification of biliary stones (common bile duct and intrahepatic). Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 20:1075–1083

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Williams EJ, Green J, Beckingham I et al (2008) Guidelines on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Gut 57:1004–1021

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Etzioni DA, Liu JH, Maggard MA et al (2003) The aging population and its impact on the surgery workforce. Ann Surg 238:170–177

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hüttl TP, Hrdina C, Geiger TK et al (2002) Management of common bile duct stones—results of a nationwide survey with analysis of 8,433 common bile duct explorations in Germany. Zentralbl Chir 127:282–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Livingston EH, Rege RV (2005) Technical complications are rising as common duct exploration is becoming rare. J Am Coll Surg 201:426–433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hopt UT, Adam U (2006) Therapeutic splitting as standard treatment for cholelithiasis. Chirurg 77:307–314

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Martin IJ, Bailey IS, Rhodes M et al (1998) Towards T-tube free laparoscopic bile duct exploration: a methodologic evolution during 300 consecutive procedures. Ann Surg 228:29–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Vecchio R, MacFadyen BV (2002) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Langenbecks Arch Surg 387:45–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tokumura H, Umezawa A, Cao H et al (2002) Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones: transcystic approach and choledochotomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 9:206–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Waage A, Stromberg C, Leijonmarck CE et al (2003) Long-term results from laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Surg Endosc 17:1181–1185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tai CK, Tang CN, Ha JP et al (2004) Laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct in difficult choledocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 18:910–914

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/register/halsodataregister/patientregistret/. Accessed May 2007

  15. http://www.scb.se/Pages/List____250611.aspx. Accessed May 2007

  16. McMahon AJ, Fischbacher CM, Frame SH et al (2000) Impact of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a population-based study. Lancet 356:1632–1637

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kang JY, Ellis C, Majeed A et al (2003) Gallstones–an increasing problem: a study of hospital admissions in England between 1989/1990 and 1999/2000. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 17:561–569

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Keus F, Gooszen HG, van Laarhoven CJ (2010) Open, small-incision, or laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. An overview of Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD008318

  19. Ledet WP Jr (1990) Ambulatory cholecystectomy without disability. Arch Surg 125:1434–1435

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Calland JF, Tanaka K, Foley E et al (2001) Outpatient laparoscopic cholecystectomy: patient outcomes after implementation of a clinical pathway. Ann Surg 233:704–715

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Leeder PC, Mattews T, Krzeminska K et al (2004) Routine day-case laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 91:312–316

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Martin DJ, Vernon DR, Toouli J (2006) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD003327

  23. Seale AK, Ledet WP Jr (1999) Primary common bile duct closure. Arch Surg 134:22–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gurusamy KS, Samraj K (2007) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after open common bile duct exploration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD005640

  25. Gurusamy KS, Samraj K (2007) Primary closure versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic common bile duct stone exploration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD005641

  26. McAlister VC, Davenport E, Renouf E (2007) Cholecystectomy deferral in patients with endoscopic sphincterotomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev: CD006233

  27. Reinders JS, Goud A, Timmer R et al (2010) Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy improves outcomes after endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledochocystolithiasis. Gastroenterology 138:2315–2320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hüttl TP, Hrdina C, Geiger TK et al (2002) Management of common bile duct stones—results of a nationwide survey with analysis of 8 433 common bile duct explorations in Germany. Zentralbl Chir 127:282–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sandzen B, Rosenmuller M, Haapamaki MM et al (2009) First attack of acute pancreatitis in Sweden 1988–2003: incidence, aetiological classification, procedures and mortality—register study. BMC Gastroenterol 9:18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Schulman CI, Levi J, Sleeman D et al (2007) Are we training our residents to perform open gall bladder and common bile duct operations? J Surg Res 142:246–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Chung RS, Wojtasik L, Pham Q et al (2002) The decline of training in open biliary surgery: effect on the residents’ attitude toward bile duct surgery. Surg Endosc 17:338–340 discussion 341

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chung RS, Ahmed N (2010) The impact of minimally invasive surgery on residents’ open operative experience: analysis of two decades of national data. Ann Surg 251:205–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Rosenmuller M, Haapamaki MM, Nordin P et al (2007) Cholecystectomy in Sweden 2000–2003: a nationwide study on procedures, patient characteristics, and mortality. BMC Gastroenterol 7:35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the County Councils of Northern Sweden and by grants from the Swedish Society of Medicine.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Surgery, Umeå University, SE-901 85, Umeå, Sweden

    Birger Sandzén, Markku M. Haapamäki, Erik Nilsson & Mikael Öman

  2. Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Epidemiology and Public Health Sciences, Umeå University, SE-901 87, Umeå, Sweden

    Hans C. Stenlund

Authors
  1. Birger Sandzén
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Markku M. Haapamäki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Erik Nilsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hans C. Stenlund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mikael Öman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Birger Sandzén.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sandzén, B., Haapamäki, M.M., Nilsson, E. et al. Treatment of Common Bile Duct Stones in Sweden 1989–2006: An Observational Nationwide Study of a Paradigm Shift. World J Surg 36, 2146–2153 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1648-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-012-1648-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation