Two-stage treatment with preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) compared with single-stage treatment with intraoperative ERCP for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis with possible choledocholithiasis

Rábago, Luís; Vicente, C.; Soler, Francesc; Delgado, María del Pilar Gutiérrez; Moral, I.; Guerra, Iván; Castro, José Luis; Quintanilla, E.; Romeo, José María; Llorente, Ricardo; Echarri, J Vázquez; Martinez-Veiga, JoseLuis; Gea, Francisco

doi:10.1055/s-2006-944617

Cited by 110 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The length of hospital stay (8 [SD 5] days v. 5 [SD 3] days, p < 0.001) and costs were lower in the intraoperative ERCP group, but the operative times were longer. 30 Similar results were obtained in a randomized trial involving patients whose stones were diagnosed by means of magnetic reso- Elevated bilirubin level; advanced; or evidence of stones in the common bile duct on ultrasound or computed tomography images…”

Section: Pre-or Postoperative Ercp Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomysupporting

confidence: 61%

Management of suspected stones in the common bile duct

Almadi

Barkun

2012

CMAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Pre-or Postoperative Ercp Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomysupporting

confidence: 61%

Management of suspected stones in the common bile duct

Almadi

Barkun

2012

CMAJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…comparative study of 200 patients, suggesting the superiority of RVT over preoperative ERCP in terms of hospital stay. In contrast, the RCT published by Rábago et al [86] reported similar percentages of CBD clearance between the two approaches. A study by Hong et al [87] compared LCDE and RVT, and no differences were found between the two groups regarding duration of surgery, success rate, complications, retained stones, hospital stay, and costs.…”

Section: Comparing the Different Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 76%

Modern approach to cholecysto-choledocholithiasis

Bencini¹

2014

WJGE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gallstones and common bile duct calculi are found to be associated in 8%-20% of patients, leading to possible life-threatening complications, such as acute biliary pancreatitis, jaundice and cholangitis. The gold standard of care for gallbladder calculi and isolated common bile duct stones is represented by laparoscopic cholecystectomy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, respectively, while a debate still exists regarding how to treat the two diseases at the same time. Many therapeutic options are also available when the two conditions are associated, including many different types of treatment, which local professionals often administer. The need to limit maximum discomfort and risks for the patients, combined with the economic pressure of reducing costs and utilizing resources, favors single-step procedures. However, a multitude of data fail to strongly demonstrate the superiority of any technique (including a two or multi-step approach), while rigorous clinical trials that include so many different types of treatment are still lacking, and it is most likely unrealistic to conduct them in the future. Therefore, the choice of the best management is often led by the local presence of professional expertise and resources, rather than by a real superiority of one strategy over another.

show abstract

“…The published papers describing patients treated with a single-stage laparoendoscopic treatment of gallstones and CBD stones are shown in Table 1 [7,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. The data were collected from 20 original papers reporting studies involving 8 [11] to 93 [26] patients.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simultaneous laparoendoscopic rendezvous for the treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis

Barbagallo

Miceli

et al. 2009

Surg Endosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is confusion concerning the definitions and techniques of RV due to differences in combining surgical and endoscopic steps of the procedure. The results are at least comparable with those of the other available approaches. The effectiveness of RV is greater with reciprocal implementation of surgical and endoscopic procedures. The morbidity and the risk of iatrogenic damage seem lower than with ERCP-ES and the risk of residual stones lower than with TL treatment. The RV procedure is safe and can sometimes be the preferable option, but collaboration between surgeon and endoscopist is mandatory.

show abstract

Two-stage treatment with preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) compared with single-stage treatment with intraoperative ERCP for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis with possible choledocholithiasis

Cited by 110 publications

References 14 publications

Management of suspected stones in the common bile duct

Management of suspected stones in the common bile duct

Modern approach to cholecysto-choledocholithiasis

Simultaneous laparoendoscopic rendezvous for the treatment of cholecystocholedocholithiasis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About