Purpose Transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) seems safer than transductal LCBDE and is associated with fewer biliary complications. It has traditionally been limited to smaller bile duct stones however. This study aimed to assess the ability of laser-assisted bile duct exploration by laparoendoscopy (LABEL) to increase the rate of successful transcystic LCBDE in patients with bile duct stones at the time of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods Patients undergoing LCBDE between 2014 and 2018 were retrospectively analysed. Baseline demographic and medical characteristics were recorded, as well as intra-operative findings and post-procedure outcomes. Standard LCBDE via the transcystic route was initially attempted in all patients, and LABEL was only utilised if there was failure to achieve transcystic duct clearance. The transductal route was utilised for failed transcystic extraction. Results One hundred and seventy-nine consecutive patients underwent LCBDE; 119 (66.5%) underwent unaided transcystic extraction, 29 (16.2%) required LABEL to achieve transcystic extraction and 31 (17.3%) failed transcystic extraction (despite the use of LABEL in 7 of these cases) and hence required conversion to transductal LCBDE. As such, LABEL could be considered to increase the rate of successful transcystic extraction from 66.5% (119/179) to 82.7% (148/179). Patients requiring LABEL were however more likely to experience major complications (CD III-IV 5.6% vs 0.7%, p = 0.042) although none were specifically attributable to the laser intra-operatively. Conclusions LABEL is an effective adjunct to LCBDE that improves the rate of successful transcystic extraction.

Aim Medication-related incidents occur more frequently when medicine reconciliation happens more than 24 hours after admission. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends a complete reconciliation within 24 hours of admission. General Surgery is a busy specialty with a high patient turnover rate. Hence, this audit was conducted to assess the extent of a problem and mitigate it. Method Every adult General Surgery inpatient who were admitted for over 24 hours were included. Patients on intensive care or high dependency unit were excluded. Drug charts were reviewed every Thursday for nine weeks between October and December 2020. Data from the first three weeks were used to establish baseline. Three interventions were introduced, each lasting two weeks. Any significant harm to patients due to incomplete reconciliation was recorded. Results At baseline (n = 100), 38.0% of patients had incomplete reconciliation. This significantly reduced to 23.4% (n = 64, p-value=0.037) between Weeks 4 and 5 after baseline data was presented at a team meeting and posters were put up. Allowing pharmacists to flag up missing medications on a daily job’s list did not significantly reduce the incompletion rate (23.0%, n = 74, p-value>0.999). Finally, performing a medicine reconciliation ward round on Weeks 8 and 9 further reduced the incompletion rate to 2.8% (n = 74, p-value=0.001). One significant harm was noted on Week 1. Conclusions Medicine reconciliation is a vital aspect of patient safety. Raising awareness of the issue significantly reduced the incompletion rate. However, the most effective intervention is conducting a medicine reconciliation ward round.