FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2067689908> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2067689908 endingPage "192" @default.
• W2067689908 startingPage "188" @default.
• W2067689908 abstract "In Brief Objective: Prospectively evaluate whether for patients having laparoscopic cholecystectomy with failed trans-cystic duct clearance of bile duct (BD) stones they should have laparoscopic choledochotomy or postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP). Summary Background Data: Clinical management of BD stones found at laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the last decade has focused on pre-cholecystectomy detection with ERCP clearance in those with suspected stones. This clinical algorithm successfully clears the stones in most patients, but no stones are found in 20% to 60% of patients and rare unpredictably severe ERCP morbidity can result in this group. Our initial experience of 300 consecutive patients with fluoroscopic cholangiography and intraoperative clearance demonstrated that, for the pattern of stone disease we see, 66% of patients’ BD stones can be cleared via the cystic duct with dramatic reduction in morbidity compared to the 33% requiring choledochotomy or ERCP. Given the limitations of the preoperative approach to BD stone clearance, this trial was designed to explore the limitations, for patients failing laparoscopic trans-cystic clearance, of laparoscopic choledochotomy or postoperative ERCP. Methods: Across 7 metropolitan hospitals after failed trans-cystic duct clearance, patients were intraoperatively randomized to have either laparoscopic choledochotomy or postoperative ERCP. Exclusion criteria were: ERCP prior to referral for cholecystectomy, severe cholangitis or pancreatitis requiring immediate ERCP drainage, common BD diameter of less than 7 mm diameter, or if bilio-enteric drainage was required in addition to stone clearance. Drain decompression of the cleared BD was used in the presence of cholangitis, an edematous ampulla due to instrumentation or stone impaction and technical difficulties from local inflammation and fibrosis. The ERCP occurred prior to discharge from hospital. Mechanical and extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy was available. Sphincter balloon dilation as an alternative to sphincterotomy to allow stone extraction was not used. Major endpoints for the trial were operative time, morbidity, retained stone rate, reoperation rate, and hospital stay. Results: From June 1998 to February 2003, 372 patients with BD stones had successful trans-cystic duct clearance of stones in 286, leaving 86 patients randomized into the trial. Total operative time was 10.9 minutes longer in the choledochotomy group (158.8 minutes), with slightly shorter hospital stay 6.4 days versus 7.7 days. Bile leak occurred in 14.6% of those having choledochotomy with similar rates of pancreatitis (7.3% versus 8.8%), retained stones (2.4% versus 4.4%), reoperation (7.3% versus 6.6%), and overall morbidity (17% versus 13%). Conclusions: These data suggest that the majority of secondary BD stones can be diagnosed at the time of cholecystectomy and cleared trans-cystically, with those failing having either choledochotomy or postoperative ERCP. However, because of the small trial size, a significant chance exists that small differences in outcome may exist. We would avoid choledochotomy in ducts less than 7 mm measured at the time of operative cholangiogram and severely inflamed friable tissues leading to a difficult dissection. We would advocate choledochotomy as a good choice for patients after Billroth 11 gastrectomy, failed ERCP access, or where long delays would occur for patient transfer to other locations for the ERCP. For 372 patients with bile duct stones detected on operative cholangiography, after failed laparoscopic trans-cystic duct stone clearance in 86, laparoscopic choledochotomy was randomly compared with postoperative ERCP. Retained stone rate 2.4% versus 4.4%, reoperation 7.3% versus 6.6%, overall morbidity and hospital stay, 6.4 days versus 7.7 days, appeared comparable. These data suggest surgical experience, ERCP availability, and patient factors may be the most important determinants of which modality is chosen." @default.
• W2067689908 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5002061116 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5004495061 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5021738324 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5026357419 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5041153348 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5052346954 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5056858025 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5065923165 @default.
• W2067689908 creator A5076124663 @default.
• W2067689908 date "2005-08-01" @default.
• W2067689908 modified "2023-10-06" @default.
• W2067689908 title "Postoperative ERCP Versus Laparoscopic Choledochotomy for Clearance of Selected Bile Duct Calculi" @default.
• W2067689908 cites W1235351994 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W1980319070 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W1988291513 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W1999742399 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2022660875 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2023287514 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2045275239 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2045401981 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2046024459 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2046922718 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2051014842 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2057511812 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2071765980 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2072619780 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2074228074 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2080779352 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2088459164 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2112036441 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2154666676 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2154921269 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2162384924 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2171290005 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2342149733 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W2799838055 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W3103450570 @default.
• W2067689908 cites W4322388311 @default.
• W2067689908 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000171035.57236.d7" @default.
• W2067689908 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/1357723" @default.
• W2067689908 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16041208" @default.
• W2067689908 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W2067689908 type Work @default.
• W2067689908 sameAs 2067689908 @default.
• W2067689908 citedByCount "214" @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082012 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082013 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082014 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082015 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082016 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082017 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082018 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082019 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082020 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082021 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082022 @default.
• W2067689908 countsByYear W20676899082023 @default.
• W2067689908 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5002061116 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5004495061 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5021738324 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5026357419 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5041153348 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5052346954 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5056858025 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5065923165 @default.
• W2067689908 hasAuthorship W2067689908A5076124663 @default.
• W2067689908 hasBestOaLocation W20676899082 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C126894567 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C138944611 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2775967933 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2776641081 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2776884468 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2777153553 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2777522975 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2777683338 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2778444009 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C2780740041 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C126894567 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C138944611 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C141071460 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2775967933 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2776641081 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2776884468 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2777153553 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2777522975 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2777683338 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2778444009 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C2780740041 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C61434518 @default.
• W2067689908 hasConceptScore W2067689908C71924100 @default.
• W2067689908 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2067689908 hasLocation W20676899081 @default.

• next