Comparison of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomized study

Eleven years of primary closure of common bile duct after choledochotomy for choledocholithiasis

“…A recent meta-analysis [1,5] found no differences in the mortality and morbidity rates, or the retained stone rate, between laparoscopic surgery and ERCP plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy. However, it has been generally observed that the one-stage treatment is associated with shorter hospital stays and lower costs, which makes it a more cost-effective strategy [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]22]. In our series, the mean hospital stay was 5.1 days, similar to other studies published to date [29,30].…”

“…Most authors consider choledochotomy an alternative to failed transcystic exploration, although some use it exclusively [10,12]. Many different reports have shown good results in terms of stone clearance [10,12,29,30].…”

“…Many different reports have shown good results in terms of stone clearance [10,12,29,30]. Choledochotomy is an effective technique that requires advanced laparoscopic skills.…”

“…Both strategies offer the same effectiveness and similar complication rates. However, the one-stage approach implies shorter hospital stays and lower costs, making it the more cost-effective strategy [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]. The LCBDE approach minimises the morbidity of open surgery and avoids Oddi sphincter manipulation, which can be particularly important in young patients [4].…”

Controversy and progress for treatment of acute cholangitis after Tokyo Guidelines (TG13)

“…Considering the success rates of stone clearance from the CBD, both procedures namely laparoscopic CBD exploration and ERC were similar (91.7 vs. 88.1%) (26). However, Koc et al (27) quoted that the success rate of the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) group were 96.5%, which was higher than that in the ERC + LC group (94.4%). The overall success total cost, and complication rate in the laparoscopic group were lower although the average operation time was longer than open surgery.…”