Transcystic Choledochoscopy Utilizing a Disposable Choledochoscope: How We Do It

Campbell, John C.; Pryor, Aurora D.; Docimo, Salvatore

doi:10.1097/sle.0000000000001079

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As for laparoscopic and choledochoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy, choledochoscope is applied based on laparoscopic cholecystolithotomy, which helps improve the operative visual field and complete the stone extraction under direct vision. It not only reduces the difficulty of stone extraction, shortens the operation time, and facilitates postoperative recovery, but also avoids unnecessary injury of the gallbladder due to operation errors, causes less microstructure damage of the gallbladder, and contributes to postoperative recovery of gallbladder function [ 13 – 15 ]. The results of this study showed that the operation time was shortened and the intraoperative blood loss was reduced in the laparoscopic + choledochoscopic group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of laparoscopic and choledochoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy on levels of operation indicators, gallbladder function, and cholecystokinin type-A receptor in patients with gallstones.

Zhang,

Feng,

Cai

et al. 2023

Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Gallstones are a common digestive system disease. Aim: To assess the effects of laparoscopic and choledochoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy on the levels of operation indicators, gallbladder function, and cholecystokinin type-A receptor (CCKAR) in patients with gallstones. Material and methods:The medical records of 100 patients with gallstones receiving operation from July 2019 to August 2022 were collected for retrospective analysis. They were divided into a laparoscopic group (n = 48) and a laparoscopic + choledochoscopic group (n = 52). The laparoscopic group received totally laparoscopic cholecystolithotomy, while the laparoscopic + choledochoscopic group underwent laparoscopic and choledochoscopic cholecystolithotomy. Their perioperative indicators, gallbladder function, stress indicators (cortisol (Cor), norepinephrine (NE), and C-reactive protein (CRP)), serum biochemical indicators (liver receptor homologue 1 (LRH-1), CCKAR, and vasoactive intestinal peptide (VIP)), and complications were compared.Results: The fasting gallbladder volume and gallbladder contraction rate increased, and the minimum residual volume and gallbladder wall thickness decreased in the laparoscopic + choledochoscopic group in comparison with those of the laparoscopic group 6 months after operation (p < 0.05). The levels of serum Cor, NE, CRP, and CCKAR were elevated, whereas the levels of serum LRH-1 and VIP were lowered in both groups 3 d after operation compared with those before operation (p < 0.05). The levels of serum Cor, NE, CRP, LRH-1, and VIP were lower, and the level of serum CCKAR was higher in the laparoscopic + choledochoscopic group than those in the laparoscopic group 3 d after operation (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Both laparoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy and laparoscopic and choledochoscopic cholecystolithotomy are effective for treating gallstones. However, the latter combination method is superior in enhancing postoperative gallbladder function, decreasing the recurrence risk, regulating the expressions of LRH-1, CCKAR, and VIP, and promoting the postoperative recovery of gastrointestinal function.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of laparoscopic and choledochoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy on levels of operation indicators, gallbladder function, and cholecystokinin type-A receptor in patients with gallstones.

Zhang,

Feng,

Cai

et al. 2023

Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, transcystic choledochoscopy remains an important tool in the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients who have previously undergone a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. 21 There are, however, both complications and limitations associated with choledochoscopy. Overall, the rate of adverse events (AEs) for peroral cholangioscopy is estimated to be between 2% and 30%.…”

Section: Choledochoscopesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disposable Gastrointestinal Scopes: A Systematic Review

Udine,

Huff,

Tsay

et al. 2024

Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy &Amp; Percutaneous Techniques

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Endoscopes are an essential tool in the diagnosis, screening, and treatment of gastrointestinal diseases. In 2019, the Food and Drug Administration issued a news release, recommending that duodenoscope manufacturers and health care facilities phase out fully reusable duodenoscopes with fixed endcaps in lieu of duodenoscopes that are either fully disposable or those that contain disposable endcaps. With this study, we systematically reviewed the published literature on single-use disposable gastrointestinal scopes to describe the current state of the literature and provide summary recommendations on the role of disposable gastrointestinal endoscopes. Materials and Methods: For our inclusion criteria, we searched for studies that were published in the year 2015 and afterward. We performed a literature search in PubMed using the keywords, “disposable,” “reusable,” “choledochoscope,” “colonoscope,” “duodenoscope,” “esophagoscope,” “gastroscope,” and “sigmoidoscope.” After our review, we identified our final article set, including 13 articles relating to disposable scopes, published from 2015 to 2023. Results: In this review, we show 13 articles discussing the infection rate, functionality, safety, and affordability of disposable gastrointestinal scopes in comparison to reusable gastrointestinal scopes. Of the 3 articles that discussed infection rates (by Forbes and colleagues, Ridtitid and colleagues, and Ofosu and colleagues), each demonstrated a decreased risk of infection in disposable gastrointestinal scopes. Functionality was another common theme among these articles. Six articles (by Muthusamy and colleagues, Bang and colleagues, Lisotti and colleagues, Ross and colleagues, Kang and colleagues, and Forbes and colleagues) demonstrated comparable functionality of disposable scopes to reusable scopes. The most reported functionality issue in disposable scopes was decreased camera resolution. Disposable scopes also showed comparable safety profiles compared with reusable scopes. Six articles (by Kalipershad and colleagues, Muthusamy and colleagues, Bang and colleagues, Lisotti and colleagues, Luo and colleagues, and Huynh and colleagues) showed comparable rates of AEs, whereas 1 article (by Ofosu and colleagues) demonstrated increased rates of AEs with disposable scopes. Lastly, a cost analysis was looked at in 3 of the articles. Two articles (by Larsen et al and Ross and colleagues) remarked that further research is needed to understand the cost of disposable scopes, whereas 1 article (by Kang and colleagues) showed a favorable cost analysis. Conclusions: After a review of the literature published since the 2015 Food and Drug Administration safety communication, disposable scopes have been shown to be effective in decreasing infection risks while maintaining similar safety profiles to conventional reusable scopes. However, more research is required to compare disposable and reusable scopes in terms of functionality and cost-effectiveness.

show abstract

“…LC and LCBDE: This approach has all the benefits of a minimally invasive operation and ensures the resolution of concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones in a single session, as does traditional open CBD exploration[ 34 ], thus avoiding any complications of preoperative ERCP-ES (pancreatitis, cholangitis, bleeding, duodenal perforation)[ 35 , 36 ]. However, it requires specific equipment and advanced training that encourage the vast majority of surgeons to prefer the two-stage procedure by preoperative ERCP-ES[ 5 ].…”

Section: Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current management of concomitant cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones

Pavlidis¹,

Pavlidis²

2023

World J Gastrointest Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The management policy of concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis is based on a one- or two-stage procedure. It basically includes either laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration (LCBDE) in the same operation or LC with preoperative, postoperative and even intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-endoscopic sphincterotomy (ERCP-ES) for stone clearance. The most frequently used worldwide option is preoperative ERCP-ES and stone removal followed by LC, preferably on the next day. In cases where preoperative ERCP-ES is not feasible, the proposed alternative of intraoperative rendezvous ERCP-ES simultaneously with LC has been advocated. The intraoperative extraction of CBD stones is superior to postoperative rendezvous ERCP-ES. However, there is no consensus on the superiority of laparoendoscopic rendezvous. This is equivalent to a traditional two-stage procedure. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation reduces recurrence. LCBDE and intraoperative ERCP have similar good outcomes. The risk of recurrence after ERCP-ES is greater than that after LCBDE. Laparoscopic ultrasonography may delineate the anatomy and detect CBD stones. The majority of surgeons prefer the transcductal instead of the transcystic approach for CBDE with or without T-tube drainage, but the transcystic approach must be used where possible. LCBDE is a safe and effective choice when performed by an experienced surgeon. However, the requirement of specific equipment and advanced training are drawbacks. The percutaneous approach is an alternative when ERCP fails. Surgical or endoscopic reintervention for retained stones may be needed. For asymptomatic CBD stones, ERCP clearance is the first-choice method. Both one-stage and two-stage management are acceptable and can ensure improved quality of life.

show abstract

Transcystic Choledochoscopy Utilizing a Disposable Choledochoscope: How We Do It

Cited by 5 publications

References 35 publications

Effects of laparoscopic and choledochoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy on levels of operation indicators, gallbladder function, and cholecystokinin type-A receptor in patients with gallstones.

Effects of laparoscopic and choledochoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy on levels of operation indicators, gallbladder function, and cholecystokinin type-A receptor in patients with gallstones.

Disposable Gastrointestinal Scopes: A Systematic Review

Current management of concomitant cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About