Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 1997
Common bile duct exploration and laparoscopic cholecystectomy: role of intraoperative ultrasonography.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Santambrogio R, Montorsi M, Bianchi P, Opocher E, Verga M, Panzera M, Cosentino F
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: In October 1993, to detect associated common bile duct (CBD) stones, we started an evaluation program of patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis who were candidates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
STUDY DESIGN: We used a standard preoperative algorithm and a laparoscopic ultrasonographic (LUS) examination. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was reserved for high-risk patients for CBD stones. Laparoscopic ultrasonographic examination during cholecystectomy was routinely performed to identify stones unsuspected preoperatively. Two-hundred-sixteen patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis were included in the study; 177 patients (82%) were at low risk for choledocholithiasis and 39 patients (18%) were at high risk and had preoperative ERCP. In 17 patients (43.5%) CBD stones were found, and in 16 patients (41%) they were removed by endoscopic sphincterotomy.
RESULTS: In all patients, the main intra- and extrahepatic ducts were well documented by LUS, but in eight cases the distal tract of the CBD was not well-visualized. In eight patients, small stones were found in the CBD. A subsequent peroperative cholangiography or CBD exploration confirmed the diagnosis. In one patient, both LUS and cholangiography suspected a small stone; the CBD exploration did not confirm it (false positive). In two patients a small stone in the CBD was found during the followup period (two false negatives). An endoscopic sphincterotomy solved the problem.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic ultrasonographic examination may be a real alternative to cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: this may be reserved for selected instances on the basis of LUS findings. On the other hand, considerable ultrasonographic experience is required for LUS to be performed successfully.
STUDY DESIGN: We used a standard preoperative algorithm and a laparoscopic ultrasonographic (LUS) examination. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was reserved for high-risk patients for CBD stones. Laparoscopic ultrasonographic examination during cholecystectomy was routinely performed to identify stones unsuspected preoperatively. Two-hundred-sixteen patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis were included in the study; 177 patients (82%) were at low risk for choledocholithiasis and 39 patients (18%) were at high risk and had preoperative ERCP. In 17 patients (43.5%) CBD stones were found, and in 16 patients (41%) they were removed by endoscopic sphincterotomy.
RESULTS: In all patients, the main intra- and extrahepatic ducts were well documented by LUS, but in eight cases the distal tract of the CBD was not well-visualized. In eight patients, small stones were found in the CBD. A subsequent peroperative cholangiography or CBD exploration confirmed the diagnosis. In one patient, both LUS and cholangiography suspected a small stone; the CBD exploration did not confirm it (false positive). In two patients a small stone in the CBD was found during the followup period (two false negatives). An endoscopic sphincterotomy solved the problem.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic ultrasonographic examination may be a real alternative to cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: this may be reserved for selected instances on the basis of LUS findings. On the other hand, considerable ultrasonographic experience is required for LUS to be performed successfully.