4.3 Article

Predictive value and main determinants of abnormal features of intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy

期刊

出版社

ZHEJIANG UNIV SCH MEDICINE
DOI: 10.1016/S1499-3872(11)60051-9

关键词

intraoperative cholangiography; common bile duct stone; cholecystectomy; predictive value; diagnostic accuracy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: The major issue with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) is whether its diagnostic accuracy for common bile duct (CBD) stones matches that of other diagnostic procedures, and thus, whether it will become a routine diagnostic procedure. The current study aimed to address the main determinants of CBD stone diagnosis in IOC among an Iranian population. METHODS: In a retrospective review database-based study conducted in Taleghani Hospital in Tehran between 2006 and 2008, baseline data and perioperative information of 2060 patients (male to female ratio 542 : 1518, mean age 53.7 years) who were candidates for cholecystectomy and underwent concomitant IOC for confirming CBD stones were reviewed. The predictive power of this procedure for diagnosis of abnormal biliary ducts with the focus on biliary stones was determined. RESULTS: Overall mortality and morbidity following cholecystectomy in the study population were 0.6% and 2.6%, respectively. Both early mortality and morbidity due to cholecystectomy were higher in male than female. The prevalence of CBD stones in IOC was 3.4% (5.2% in male and 2.8% in female, P=0.008). Among those without gallstones, 8.7% had CBD stones and only 3.1% had concomitant gallstones and CBD stones. The main predictors of stone appearance as an abnormal feature of IOC during cholecystectomy were: advanced age (OR=1.022, P=0.001), male gender (OR=1.498, P=0.050), history of abdominal surgery (OR=1.543, P=0.040) and preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (OR=5.400, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: IOC is a safe and accurate method for the assessment of bile duct anatomy and stones. Therefore, the routine use of IOC within cholecystectomy seems reasonable and is recommended.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据