FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W111775931> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W111775931 endingPage "4" @default.
• W111775931 startingPage "330" @default.
• W111775931 abstract "Laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LECBD) has been proven to be an effective and preferred treatment approach for uncomplicated common bile duct stones. However there is still controversy regarding the choice of biliary decompression after laparoscopic choledochotomy.This is a retrospective comparison between the use of antegrade biliary stenting and T-tube drainage following successful laparoscopic choledochotomy. During the period between January 1995 and July 2003, biliary decompression was achieved by either antegrade biliary stenting or T-tube drainage based on the discretion of the operating surgeon. For antegrade biliary stenting, a 10-Fr Cotton-Leung biliary stent was inserted through the choledochotomy and passed down across the papilla. The stent position was confirmed by on-table choledochoscopy before interrupted single-layered closure of the common bile duct. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed to remove the stent 4 weeks after operation and at the same time to check for any residual stones or other complications like stricture or leak. In the T-tube group, a 16-Fr latex T-tube was used and the long limb was brought out through the subcostal trocar port followed by the same method of bile duct closure. Cholangiogram through the T-tube was performed on day 7 and the tube would be taken off 1 week later (about 2 weeks after operation) if the cholangiogram did not reveal any abnormality. The two groups were compared according to the demographic data, operation time, length of hospital stay and complication rates.During the study period, 108 laparoscopic explorations of the common bile duct were performed in our centre of which 95 were attempted laparoscopic choledochotomies and 13 were transcystic duct explorations. Of the 95 patients with attempted laparoscopic choledochotomy, there were 9 open conversions, 17 laparoscopic bilioenteric bypasses and 6 primary closures of the common bile duct. All of these patients together with those receiving transcystic duct explorations were excluded and the remaining 63 patients having postoperative bile diversion by either antegrade biliary stenting or T-tube drainage were included in this study. Bile diversion was achieved by antegrade biliary stenting in 35 patients whereas 28 patients had T-tube drainage. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of age, clinical presentation, bilirubin level, length of hospital stay, follow-up duration, common bile duct size, size of common bile duct stones, incidence of residual/recurrent stone and complication rate. It was observed that more patients in the stenting group developed bile leak (14.2% vs. 3.5%) and required more intramuscular pethidine injections (182.86 +/- 139.30 vs. 92.81+/-81.15mg, P=0.000). On the other hand, the T-tube group had longer operation time (141.4+/-45.1 vs. 11 1.1+/-33.9 minutes, P=0.006) and had a longer postoperative hospital stay (10.0+/-7.4 vs. 8.8+/-9.3 days, P=0.020) reaching statistical significance.Postoperative bile diversion by antegrade biliary stenting after laparoscopic choledochotomy is shown to shorten operation duration and postoperative stay as compared to T-tube drainage, but the problem of bile leak needs further refinement of insertion technique." @default.
• W111775931 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W111775931 creator A5039813450 @default.
• W111775931 creator A5043545243 @default.
• W111775931 creator A5048390439 @default.
• W111775931 creator A5060378463 @default.
• W111775931 creator A5063830141 @default.
• W111775931 creator A5072375134 @default.
• W111775931 date "2006-06-27" @default.
• W111775931 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W111775931 title "Antegrade biliary stenting versus T-tube drainage after laparoscopic choledochotomy--a comparative cohort study." @default.
• W111775931 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16795965" @default.
• W111775931 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W111775931 type Work @default.
• W111775931 sameAs 111775931 @default.
• W111775931 citedByCount "10" @default.
• W111775931 countsByYear W1117759312013 @default.
• W111775931 countsByYear W1117759312014 @default.
• W111775931 countsByYear W1117759312015 @default.
• W111775931 countsByYear W1117759312017 @default.
• W111775931 countsByYear W1117759312018 @default.
• W111775931 countsByYear W1117759312019 @default.
• W111775931 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W111775931 hasAuthorship W111775931A5039813450 @default.
• W111775931 hasAuthorship W111775931A5043545243 @default.
• W111775931 hasAuthorship W111775931A5048390439 @default.
• W111775931 hasAuthorship W111775931A5060378463 @default.
• W111775931 hasAuthorship W111775931A5063830141 @default.
• W111775931 hasAuthorship W111775931A5072375134 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C134984996 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C2775967933 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C2776884468 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C2778444009 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C2778583881 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C2779777945 @default.
• W111775931 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C134984996 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C141071460 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C2775967933 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C2776884468 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C2778444009 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C2778583881 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C2779777945 @default.
• W111775931 hasConceptScore W111775931C71924100 @default.
• W111775931 hasIssue "69" @default.
• W111775931 hasLocation W1117759311 @default.
• W111775931 hasOpenAccess W111775931 @default.
• W111775931 hasPrimaryLocation W1117759311 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W1508857098 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W1970153073 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W1972784082 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W1974011291 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W1990427760 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W1991054327 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W1998009107 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2002022609 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2004414613 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2022660875 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2027113096 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2029610544 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2045275239 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2049233407 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2084231274 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2096740910 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2136599231 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2162384924 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2317009842 @default.
• W111775931 hasRelatedWork W2326012714 @default.
• W111775931 hasVolume "53" @default.
• W111775931 isParatext "false" @default.
• W111775931 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W111775931 magId "111775931" @default.
• W111775931 workType "article" @default.