Intraoperative measurement of the bile flow resistance in the terminal portion of the common bile duct and its clinical significance in biliary surgery
- 11 Downloads
A practical method, safe and relatively simple to perform, which we have developed for the intra-operative measurement of the resistance to bile flow in the terminal portion of the common bile duct is described. This method performed routinely in conjunction with the operative cholangiography in the operating room, proved to be a powerful diagnostic aid for detecting abnormalities in the terminal portion of the common bile duct. In gallstone disease, the results by this method were compared with the operative results. It was found that minimal organic changes or functional disturbances in the terminal portion of the common bile duct, even those without jaundice, can be detected, and unnecessary choledochotomy or sphincteroplasty avoided. This method has a further advantage in that it gives universality to the resistance R and the residual pressure P as quantitative discriptive indices for the qualitative state of bile flow in the terminal portion of the common bile duct, and, if adopted as a standard and routine method, should make the comparison of works by different investigators easier and more significant.
Key Wordsbile flow resistance cholangiomanometry sphincteroplasty choledochotomy sphincter of Oddi
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2).Judd ES, Mann FC: The effect of removal of the gallbladder: An experimental study. Surg Gynecol Obstet 24: 437, 1917Google Scholar
- 4).Doubilet H, Colp R: Resistance of the sphincter of Oddi in the human. Surg Gynecol Obstet 64: 622, 1937.Google Scholar
- 5).Besançon F, Pironneau A, Lopes-Macedo L, Longuet YJ, Debray C: Technique nouvelle et simple d’exploration opératoire du cholédoque: Le débit-mètre à flotteur perfusé sous pression et élevée. Arch Mal Appar Diag 54: 59, 1965Google Scholar
- 13).Braasch JW, McCann JC: Normal luminal size of choledochoduodenal junction as determined by probe at choledochostomy. Surgery 62: 258, 1967Google Scholar