Cargando…

Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression

The occurrence of retained/recurrent calculi after primary CBDE followed by temporary T-tube decompression, have remained at rates varying from 5.4% to 20.9% over the last 10 years in spite of sophisticated pre and intraoperative imaging techniques. It is postulated that a functional obstruction, du...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Almeida, António Castro Mendes, Aldeia, Fernando José, dos Santos, Noel Medina, Gracias, Caetano Winston
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 1992
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2443014/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1467315
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/1992/38293
_version_ 1782156767680004096
author de Almeida, António Castro Mendes
Aldeia, Fernando José
dos Santos, Noel Medina
Gracias, Caetano Winston
author_facet de Almeida, António Castro Mendes
Aldeia, Fernando José
dos Santos, Noel Medina
Gracias, Caetano Winston
author_sort de Almeida, António Castro Mendes
collection PubMed
description The occurrence of retained/recurrent calculi after primary CBDE followed by temporary T-tube decompression, have remained at rates varying from 5.4% to 20.9% over the last 10 years in spite of sophisticated pre and intraoperative imaging techniques. It is postulated that a functional obstruction, due to dysmotility of the SO, lies behind most stone-containing ducts. Thus it seems logical to us that a permanent “fenestration” should be the management of most such ducts. We prospectively followed-up, for one to 10 years, two groups of patients submitted to primary CBDE aiming to assess the short and long-term results of two different surgical approaches to duct lithiasis. In one (Group A) 162 CBDE's were performed, out of 680 CHE's (24%), with a “positivity” of 68% and in the other (Group B) 80 CBDE's, out of 438 CHE's (18%), with a “positivity” of 70%. In Group A a T-tube decompression was used in 79(49%) and a definitive drainage in 83(51%) whereas in Group B the T-tube was employed in only 3(4%) and some form of permanent “fenestration” in 77(96%). There were no significant differences between the operative mortality rates, which were 2.5% in Group A (1 death post T-tube, 3 post CDJ) and 1.3% in Group B (1 death post CDD). The long-term results, though, were significantly worse among patients of Group A whose ducts were temporarily decompressed: 10/79 (12.7%) required further aggressive interventional therapy for retained/recurrent stones while only 3.8% (3/80) in Group A and 1.3% (1/76) in Group B required revisional surgery for bilio-digestive anastomotic complications with cholangitis. It is concluded that it is against the long-term efficiency of the approach utilized in Group B that the new laparoscopic techniques should be compared.
format Text
id pubmed-2443014
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 1992
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-24430142008-07-08 Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression de Almeida, António Castro Mendes Aldeia, Fernando José dos Santos, Noel Medina Gracias, Caetano Winston HPB Surg Research Article The occurrence of retained/recurrent calculi after primary CBDE followed by temporary T-tube decompression, have remained at rates varying from 5.4% to 20.9% over the last 10 years in spite of sophisticated pre and intraoperative imaging techniques. It is postulated that a functional obstruction, due to dysmotility of the SO, lies behind most stone-containing ducts. Thus it seems logical to us that a permanent “fenestration” should be the management of most such ducts. We prospectively followed-up, for one to 10 years, two groups of patients submitted to primary CBDE aiming to assess the short and long-term results of two different surgical approaches to duct lithiasis. In one (Group A) 162 CBDE's were performed, out of 680 CHE's (24%), with a “positivity” of 68% and in the other (Group B) 80 CBDE's, out of 438 CHE's (18%), with a “positivity” of 70%. In Group A a T-tube decompression was used in 79(49%) and a definitive drainage in 83(51%) whereas in Group B the T-tube was employed in only 3(4%) and some form of permanent “fenestration” in 77(96%). There were no significant differences between the operative mortality rates, which were 2.5% in Group A (1 death post T-tube, 3 post CDJ) and 1.3% in Group B (1 death post CDD). The long-term results, though, were significantly worse among patients of Group A whose ducts were temporarily decompressed: 10/79 (12.7%) required further aggressive interventional therapy for retained/recurrent stones while only 3.8% (3/80) in Group A and 1.3% (1/76) in Group B required revisional surgery for bilio-digestive anastomotic complications with cholangitis. It is concluded that it is against the long-term efficiency of the approach utilized in Group B that the new laparoscopic techniques should be compared. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 1992 /pmc/articles/PMC2443014/ /pubmed/1467315 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/1992/38293 Text en Copyright © 1992 Hindawi Publishing Corporation. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
de Almeida, António Castro Mendes
Aldeia, Fernando José
dos Santos, Noel Medina
Gracias, Caetano Winston
Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression
title Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression
title_full Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression
title_fullStr Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression
title_full_unstemmed Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression
title_short Standard Surgical Approaches to Primary Choledocholithiasis — Definitive Versus Temporary Decompression
title_sort standard surgical approaches to primary choledocholithiasis — definitive versus temporary decompression
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2443014/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1467315
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/1992/38293
work_keys_str_mv AT dealmeidaantoniocastromendes standardsurgicalapproachestoprimarycholedocholithiasisdefinitiveversustemporarydecompression
AT aldeiafernandojose standardsurgicalapproachestoprimarycholedocholithiasisdefinitiveversustemporarydecompression
AT dossantosnoelmedina standardsurgicalapproachestoprimarycholedocholithiasisdefinitiveversustemporarydecompression
AT graciascaetanowinston standardsurgicalapproachestoprimarycholedocholithiasisdefinitiveversustemporarydecompression