Open Surgery versus Endoscopic Intervention in the Management of Bile Duct Stones

Alghamdi, Bayan Saeed A; Sind, Omar Abdulelah; Rajab, Wahhaj Hani; Alzahrani, Saeed Hamed; Alrayes, Hezab Abdulrahman T; Moshref, Leena Hatem; Al Jabri, Nibras Khaled; Al yami, Mana abdullah saud; Alsbhani, Wafaa Mohammed; Al-Ghuraybi, Shaima Mohammed; Alasmari, Mohammed Hundur

doi:10.12816/0037825

	Open Surgery versus Endoscopic Intervention in the Management of Bile Duct Stones
The Egyptian Journal of Hospital Medicine
Article 25, Volume 67, Issue 2, April 2017, Pages 705-712 PDF (300.68 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.12816/0037825
Authors
Bayan Saeed A Alghamdi¹; Omar Abdulelah Sind¹; Wahhaj Hani Rajab²; Saeed Hamed Alzahrani³; Hezab Abdulrahman T Alrayes⁴; Leena Hatem Moshref⁵; Nibras Khaled Al Jabri²; Mana abdullah saud Al yami³; Wafaa Mohammed Alsbhani¹; Shaima Mohammed Al-Ghuraybi⁶; Mohammed Hundur Alasmari³
¹Ibn Sina national College
²Umm alqura university
³Najran University
⁴Aljouf university
⁵King Abdulaziz university
⁶Battarjee medical colleges
Abstract
Background: Choledocholithiasis or the presence of common bile duct stones (CBDS) is one of the medical conditions that requires surgical intervention. The management of choledocholithiasis has evolved from open common bile duct exploration (OCBDE) to therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE). Each entails a degree of difficulty. In this review we aim toassess and compare the benefits and pitfalls of open surgery (OCBDE) versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in management of common bile duct stones. Methods: A systematic review of the electronically searched publications of the scientific literature. We searched the Cochrane HepatoBiliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to 2016), EMBASE (1974 to 2016), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to 2016). Initially all randomized clinical trials which compared the results from open surgery versus endoscopic clearance for common bile duct stones were included, articles were selectively screened according to the eligibility criteria. Results: eight publications were selectively included with 761 participants compared to open surgical clearance with ERCP. All trials had a high risk of bias. There was no significant difference in the mortality between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 5/371 (1%) versus 10/358 (3%) OR 0.51;95% CI 0.18 to 1.44). Neither was there a significant difference in the morbidity between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 76/371 (20%) versus 67/358 (19%) OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.62). Participants in the open surgery group had significantly fewer retained stones compared with the ERCP group (seven trials; 609 participants; 20/313 (6%) versus 47/296 (16%) OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.62), P = 0.0002. Meta-analysis of the outcomes duration of hospital stay, quality of life, and cost of the procedures could not be performed due to lack of data. Conclusion: open surgery intervention in order to remove the gallbladder and trapped gallstones appears to be as safe as endoscopy and further suggested to be more successful than the endoscopic technique in clearing the duct stones.
Keywords
CBDS; bile duct stones; gallstones; Choledocholithiasis; Cholecystectomy; ERCP

Statistics Article View: 180 PDF Download: 454