Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 3/2010

01-03-2010

Training Higher Surgical Trainees in Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration

Authors: Matthew G. Tutton, Nikhil Pawa, Tan H. A. Arulampalam, Roger W. Motson

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 3/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration is regarded as a safe, definitive procedure for ductal calculi, avoiding the complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of laparoscopic CBD exploration carried out by trainees compared to those of an experienced consultant (R.W.M.).

Methods

A prospective database of all cases of laparoscopic CBD exploration over a 15-year period was analyzed retrospectively. All patients underwent a four-port technique and intraoperative cholangiography. Patient demographics, operative technique, success, and complications were analyzed.

Results

The median age of patients undergoing laparoscopic CBD exploration was 65 years (range 14–94 years). In all, 187 (79%) of the CBD explorations were performed by one consultant and 48 (21%) by trainees. Calculi were successfully cleared in 141 (88%) and 43 (96%), respectively. There were two (<1%) conversions to an open procedure in the total group. The median operating time was 130 minutes in the consultant group versus 150 minutes in the trainee group (p < 0.05, Mann-Whitney U-test). There was no significant difference in CBD clearance rate, surgical approach, or complication rate between consultant and trainees (Fisher’s exact test).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic CBD exploration is a safe procedure in both consultant and trainee hands. With appropriate training, surgical trainees can achieve equivalent outcomes in CBD clearance with no significant difference in complication rates.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ko CW, Lee SP (2002) Epidemiology and natural history of common bile duct stones and prediction of disease. Gastrointest Endosc 56:S165–S169CrossRefPubMed Ko CW, Lee SP (2002) Epidemiology and natural history of common bile duct stones and prediction of disease. Gastrointest Endosc 56:S165–S169CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Lezoche E, Paganini AM, Carlei F et al (1996) Laparoscopic treatment of gallbladder and common bile duct stones: a prospective study. World J Surg 20:535–541CrossRefPubMed Lezoche E, Paganini AM, Carlei F et al (1996) Laparoscopic treatment of gallbladder and common bile duct stones: a prospective study. World J Surg 20:535–541CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Fiore NF, Ledniczky G, Wiebke EA et al (1997) An analysis of perioperative cholangiography in one thousand laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Surgery 122:817–821CrossRefPubMed Fiore NF, Ledniczky G, Wiebke EA et al (1997) An analysis of perioperative cholangiography in one thousand laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Surgery 122:817–821CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Soltan HM, Kow L, Toouli J (2001) A simple scoring system for predicting bile duct stones in patients with cholelithiasis. J Gastrointest Surg 5:434–437CrossRefPubMed Soltan HM, Kow L, Toouli J (2001) A simple scoring system for predicting bile duct stones in patients with cholelithiasis. J Gastrointest Surg 5:434–437CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Collins C, Maguire D, Ireland A et al (2004) A prospective study of common bile duct calculi in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: natural history of choledocholithiasis revisited. Ann Surg 239:28–33CrossRefPubMed Collins C, Maguire D, Ireland A et al (2004) A prospective study of common bile duct calculi in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: natural history of choledocholithiasis revisited. Ann Surg 239:28–33CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Metcalfe MS, Ong T, Bruening MH et al (2004) Is laparoscopic intraoperative cholangiogram a matter of routine? Am J Surg 187:475–481CrossRefPubMed Metcalfe MS, Ong T, Bruening MH et al (2004) Is laparoscopic intraoperative cholangiogram a matter of routine? Am J Surg 187:475–481CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Rhodes M, Sussman L, Cohen L et al (1998) Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones. Lancet 351:159–161CrossRefPubMed Rhodes M, Sussman L, Cohen L et al (1998) Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones. Lancet 351:159–161CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Cuschieri A, Lezoche E, Mornino M et al (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 13:952–957CrossRefPubMed Cuschieri A, Lezoche E, Mornino M et al (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 13:952–957CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Sgourakis G, Karaliotas K (2002) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus endoscopic stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomised study. Minerva Chir 57:467–474PubMed Sgourakis G, Karaliotas K (2002) Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus endoscopic stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomised study. Minerva Chir 57:467–474PubMed
10.
go back to reference Nathanson LK, O’Rouke NA, Martin IJ et al (2005) Postoperative ERCP versus laparoscopic choledochotomy for clearance of selected bile duct calculi: a randomised trial. Ann Surg 242:188–192CrossRefPubMed Nathanson LK, O’Rouke NA, Martin IJ et al (2005) Postoperative ERCP versus laparoscopic choledochotomy for clearance of selected bile duct calculi: a randomised trial. Ann Surg 242:188–192CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Hong DF, Xin Y, Chen DW (2006) Comparison of laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy and laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct for cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 20:424–427CrossRefPubMed Hong DF, Xin Y, Chen DW (2006) Comparison of laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy and laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct for cholecystocholedocholithiasis. Surg Endosc 20:424–427CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Clayton ES, Connor S, Alexakis N et al (2006) Meta-analysis of endoscopy and surgery versus surgery alone for common bile duct stones with the gallbladder in situ. Br J Surg 93:1185–1191CrossRefPubMed Clayton ES, Connor S, Alexakis N et al (2006) Meta-analysis of endoscopy and surgery versus surgery alone for common bile duct stones with the gallbladder in situ. Br J Surg 93:1185–1191CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Martin DJ, Vernon DR, Toouli J (2006) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 19:CD003327 Martin DJ, Vernon DR, Toouli J (2006) Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 19:CD003327
14.
go back to reference Andiriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G et al (2007) Incidence rates of post- ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies. Am J Gastroenterol 102:1781–1788CrossRef Andiriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G et al (2007) Incidence rates of post- ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies. Am J Gastroenterol 102:1781–1788CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S et al (1996) Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 335:909–918CrossRefPubMed Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S et al (1996) Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 335:909–918CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Cheng CL, Sherman S, Watkins JL et al (2006) Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 101:139–147CrossRefPubMed Cheng CL, Sherman S, Watkins JL et al (2006) Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Gastroenterol 101:139–147CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Christoforidis E, Goulimaris I, Kanellos I et al (2002) Post-ERCP pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia: patient-related and operative risk factors. Endoscopy 34:286–292CrossRefPubMed Christoforidis E, Goulimaris I, Kanellos I et al (2002) Post-ERCP pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia: patient-related and operative risk factors. Endoscopy 34:286–292CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Rojas-Ortega S, Arizpe-Bravo D, Marin Lopez ER et al (2003) Transcystic common bile duct exploration in the management of patients with choledocholithiasis. J Gastrointest Surg 7:492–496CrossRefPubMed Rojas-Ortega S, Arizpe-Bravo D, Marin Lopez ER et al (2003) Transcystic common bile duct exploration in the management of patients with choledocholithiasis. J Gastrointest Surg 7:492–496CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Voitk AJ, Tsao SG, Ignatius S (2001) The tail of the learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 182:250–253CrossRefPubMed Voitk AJ, Tsao SG, Ignatius S (2001) The tail of the learning curve for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Am J Surg 182:250–253CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Bresadola V, Intini S, Terrosu G et al (2001) Intraoperative cholangiography in laparoscopic cholecystectomy during residency in general surgery. Surg Endosc 15:812–815CrossRefPubMed Bresadola V, Intini S, Terrosu G et al (2001) Intraoperative cholangiography in laparoscopic cholecystectomy during residency in general surgery. Surg Endosc 15:812–815CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Training Higher Surgical Trainees in Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration
Authors
Matthew G. Tutton
Nikhil Pawa
Tan H. A. Arulampalam
Roger W. Motson
Publication date
01-03-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-009-0335-5

Other articles of this Issue 3/2010

World Journal of Surgery 3/2010 Go to the issue