Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 32, Issue 3, pp 1184–1191 | Cite as

Characterization of common bile duct injury after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a high-volume hospital system

  • Julia F. Kohn
  • Alexander Trenk
  • Kristine Kuchta
  • Brittany Lapin
  • Woody Denham
  • John G. Linn
  • Stephen Haggerty
  • Ray Joehl
  • Michael B. Ujiki
Article

Abstract

Background

Despite the popularity of laparoscopic cholecystectomy, rates of common bile duct injury remain higher than previously observed in open cholecystectomy. This retrospective chart review sought to determine the prevalence of, and risk factors for, biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy within a high-volume healthcare system.

Methods

800 of approximately 3000 cases between 2009 and 2015 were randomly selected and retrospectively reviewed. A single reviewer examined all operative notes, thereby including all cases of BDI regardless of ICD code or need for a second procedure. Biliary injuries were classified per Strasberg et al. (J Am Coll Surg 180:101–125, 1995). Logistic regression models were utilized to identify univariable and multivariable predictors of biliary injuries.

Results

31.0% of charts stated that the Critical View of Safety was obtained, and 12.4% of charts correctly described the critical view in detail. Three patients (0.4%) had a cystic duct leak, and 4 (0.5%) had a common bile duct injury. Of the four CBDI, three patients had a partial transection of the CBD and one had a partial stricture. Patients who suffered BDI were more likely to have had lower hemoglobin, urgent surgery, choledocholithiasis, or acutely inflamed gallbladder. Multivariable analysis of BDI risk factors showed higher preoperative hemoglobin to be independently protective against CBDI. Acutely inflamed gallbladder and choledocholithiasis were independently predictive of CBDI.

Conclusions

The rate of CBDI in this study was 0.5%. Acutely inflamed conditions were risk factors for biliary injury. Multivariable analysis suggests a protective effect of higher preoperative hemoglobin. There was no correlation of CVS with prevention of biliary injury, although only 12.4% of charts could be verified as following the technique correctly. Better implementation of CVS, and increased caution in patients with perioperative inflammatory signs, may be important for preventing bile duct injury. Additionally, counseling patients with acute inflammation on increased risk is important.

Keywords

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy Common bile duct injury Critical View of Safety Complications 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Disclosures

Julia Kohn, Dr. Trenk, Kristine Kuchta, Dr. Lapin, Dr. Denham, Dr. Linn, Dr. Joehl, and Dr. Ujiki have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose. Dr. Haggerty reports personal fees from Medtronic and personal fees from Gore outside the submitted work.

References

  1. 1.
    McKinley SK, Brunt LM, Schwaitzberg SD (2014) Prevention of bile duct injury: the case for incorporating educational theories of expertise. Surg Endosc 28:3385–3391. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3605-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Keus F, de Jong J, Gooszen H, Laarhoven C (2006) Laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy for patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006231 Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gurusamy KS, Davidson C, Gluud C, Davidson BR (2013) Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for people with acute cholecystitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005440.pub3 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gurusamy KS, Koti R, Fusai G, Davidson BR (2013) Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for uncomplicated biliary colic. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007196.pub3 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gurusamy KS, Nagendran M, Davidson BR (2013) Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute gallstone pancreatitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010326.pub2 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chuang KI, Corley D, Postlethwaite DA, Merchant M, Harris HW (2012) Does increased experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy yield more complex bile duct injuries? Am J Surg 203:480–487. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2011.08.018 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    MacFadyen BV, Vecchio R, Ricardo A, Mathis C (1998) Bile duct injury after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the United States experience. Surg Endosc 12:315–321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yamashita Y, Kimura T, Matsumoto S (2010) A safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy depends upon the establishment of a critical view of safety. Surg Today 40:507–513. doi: 10.1007/s00595-009-4218-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    (2014) The sages safe cholecystectomy program. http://www.sages.org/safe-cholecystectomy-program/
  10. 10.
    Aziz H, Pandit V, Joseph B, Jie T, Ong E (2015) Age and obesity are independent predictors of bile duct injuries in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. World J Surg 39:1804–1808. doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-3010-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Strasberg SM, Hertl M, Soper NJ (1995) An analysis of the problem of biliary injury during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 180:101–125PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP (2014) The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg 12:1495–1499. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strasberg SM, Brunt LM (2010) Rationale and use of the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg 211:132–138. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.02.053 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chinnery GE, Krige JEJ, Bornman PC, Bernon MM, Al-Harethi S, Hofmeyr S, Banderker MA, Burmeister S, Thomson SR (2013) Endoscopic management of bile leaks after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. South African J Surg 51:116–121. doi: 10.7196/sajs.1829 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wu X-D, Tian X, Liu M-M, Wu L, Zhao S, Zhao L (2015) Meta-analysis comparing early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Br J Surg 102:1302–1313. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9886 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Banz V, Gsponer T, Candinas D, Güller U (2011) Population-based analysis of 4113 patients with acute cholecystitis: defining the optimal time-point for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 254:964–970. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318228d31c CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gutt CN, Encke J, Köninger J, Harnoss J-C, Weigand K, Kipfmüller K, Schunter O, Götze T, Golling MT, Menges M, Klar E, Feilhauer K, Zoller WG, Ridwelski K, Ackmann S, Baron A, Schön MR, Seitz HK, Daniel D, Stremmel W, Büchler MW (2013) Acute cholecystitis: early versus delayed cholecystectomy, a multicenter randomized trial. Ann Surg 258:385–393. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182a1599b CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    de Mestral C, Rotstein OD, Laupacis A, Hoch JS, Zagorski B, Alali AS, Nathens AB (2014) Comparative operative outcomes of early and delayed cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: a population-based propensity score analysis. Ann Surg 259:10–15. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182a5cf36 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mihaileanu F, Zaharie F, Mocan L, Iancu C, Vlad L (2012) Management of bile duct injuries secondary to laparoscopic and open cholecystectomy. The experience of a single surgical department. Chirurgia (Bucur) 107:454–460Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Musallam KM, Tamim HM, Richards T, Spahn DR, Rosendaal FR, Habbal A, Khreiss M, Dahdaleh FS, Khavandi K, Sfeir PM, Soweid A, Hoballah JJ, Taher AT, Jamali FR (2011) Preoperative anaemia and postoperative outcomes in non-cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 378:1396–1407. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61381-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim YW, Kim IY (2016) Factors associated with postoperative complications and 1-year mortality after surgery for colorectal cancer in octogenarians and nonagenarians. Clin Interv Aging 11:689–697CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    White MC, Longstaff L, Lai PS (2017) Effect of pre-operative anaemia on post-operative complications in low-resource settings. World J Surg 41:644–649. doi: 10.1007/s00268-016-3785-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tohme S, Varley PR, Landsittel DP, Chidi AP, Tsung A (2016) Preoperative anemia and postoperative outcomes after hepatectomy. HPB 18:255–261. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2015.09.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sanford DE, Strasberg SM (2014) A simple effective method for generation of a permanent record of the critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy by intraoperative “doublet” photography. J Am Coll Surg 218:170–178. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.11.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nijssen MAJ, Schreinemakers JMJ, Meyer Z, Van Der Schelling GP, Crolla RMPH, Rijken AM (2015) Complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a video evaluation study of whether the critical view of safety was reached. World J Surg 39:1798–1803. doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-2993-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Illinois at Chicago College of MedicineChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgery, Section of Minimally Invasive SurgeryNorthShore University HealthSystemEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations