Purpose: This study was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of one-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with those of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) plus LC for concomitant gallbladder (GB) and common bile duct (CBD) stones in elderly patients.Methods: This single-center retrospective study reviewed the medical records of patients aged >80 years who were diagnosed with concomitant GB and CBD stones between January 2010 and December 2020. Results:Of the 137 patients included in this study, 46 underwent one-stage LCBDE + LC and 91 underwent two-stage EST + LC. The frequency of previous gastrectomy (23.9% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.002) and multiple stones (76.1% vs. 49.5%, p = 0.003) was higher in the LCBDE + LC group than in the EST + LC group. Further, patients in LCBDE + LC group had larger CBD stones (11.9 mm vs. 6.0 mm, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the clearance (91.3% vs. 95.6%, p = 0.311) and recurrence (4.3% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.345) rates between the groups. The incidence of posttreatment overall complications (17.4% vs. 22.0%, p = 0.530) and total hospital stay (12.7 days vs. 11.7 days, p = 0.339) were similar in the two groups. Conclusion:One-stage LCBDE + LC is a safe and effective treatment for concomitant GB and CBD stones, even in elderly patients, and may be considered as the first treatment option in elderly patients with previous gastrectomy, multiple large (≥ 15 mm) CBD stones, or inability to cooperate with endoscopic procedures.

Purpose This study was performed to investigate the effect of drain placement on complicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy (cLC) for acute cholecystitis (AC). Methods This single-center retrospective study reviewed patients with AC who underwent cLC between January 2010 and December 2020. cLC was defined as open conversion, subtotal cholecystectomy, adjacent organ injury during surgery, operation time of ≥90 minutes, or estimated blood loss of ≥100 mL. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to compare the surgical outcomes between patients with and without drain on cLC. Results A total of 216 patients (mean age, 65.8 years; 75 female patients [34.7%]) underwent cLC, and 126 (58.3%) underwent intraoperative abdominal drainage. In the propensity score-matched cohort (61 patients in each group), early drain removal (≤postoperative day 3) was performed in 42 patients (68.9%). The overall rate of surgical site infection (SSI) was 10.7%. Late drain removal demonstrated significantly worse surgical outcomes than no drain placement and early drain removal for overall complications (13.1% vs. 21.4% vs. 47.4%, p = 0.006), postoperative hospital stay (3.8 days vs. 4.4 days vs. 12.7 days, p < 0.001), and SSI (4.9% vs. 11.9% vs. 31.6%, p = 0.006). In the multivariate analysis, late drain removal was the most significant risk factor for organ space SSI. Conclusion This study demonstrated that drain placement is not routinely recommended, even after cLC for AC. When placing a drain, early drain removal is recommended because late drain removal is associated with a higher risk of organ space SSI.

Purpose This study was performed to investigate the role of the perioperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) as an early predictor of major postoperative complications after total gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods This single-center, retrospective study reviewed consecutive patients with gastric cancer who underwent total gastrectomy at a single institution from March 2009 to March 2021. The postoperative complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. We analyzed the patient demographics and surgical outcomes according to the grade of postoperative complications in the major complications group (≥grade III) and the no major complications group (

Backgrounds/Aims: Mid bile duct cancers often involve the proximal intrapancreatic bile duct, and resection of the extrahepatic bile duct (EHBD) can result in a tumor-positive distal resection margin (RM). We attempted a customized surgical procedure to obtain a tumor-free distal RM during EHBD resection, so that R0 resection can be achieved without performing pancreaticoduodenectomy through extended EHBD resection. Methods: We previously reported the surgical procedures of extended EHBD resection, in which the intrapancreatic duct excavation resembles a ≥2 cm-long funnel. This unique procedure was performed in 11 cases of mid bile duct cancer occurring in elderly patients between the ages of 70 and 83 years. Results: The tumor involved the intrapancreatic duct in all cases. Deep pancreatic excavation per se required about 30-60 minutes. Cancer-free hepatic duct RM was obtained in 10 patients. Prolonged leakage of pancreatic juice occurred in 2 patients, but all were controlled with supportive care. Adjuvant therapies were primarily applied to RM-positive or lymph node-positive patients. Their 1-year and 3-year survival rates were 90.9% and 60.6%, respectively. Conclusions: We suggest that extended EHBD resection can be performed as a beneficial option to achieve R0 resection in cases in which pancreaticoduodenectomy should be avoided due to various causes including old age and expectation of a poor outcome.