Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Guerra-Filho,Vicente
Data de Publicação: 2007
Outros Autores: Nunes,Tarcizo Afonso, Araújo,Ivana Duval
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300017
Resumo: BACKGROUND: The use of routine or selective peroperatory cholangiography in cholecystectomy is a matter of controversy in literature. AIM: To compare the efficacy of selective or routine fluorocholangiography in diagnostic of common bile duct stone in patients underwent to laparoscopic cholecystectomy based on selective indication criteria. METHOD: Two hundred and fifty four patients with cholelithiasis were prospectively studied. The patients were divided in two groups: to the first 127 patients perioperative fluorocholangiography was indicated as routine (group 1), and to the other 127 patients perioperative fluorocholangiography indication followed clinical criteria (jaundice, choluria, fecal acholia and history of pancreatitis), laboratory criteria (increase in seric alkaline phosphatase, bilirubins, amylase) or ultra-sonographyc criteria (less than 6 mm diameter calculi, common bile duct stone, common bile duct diameter more than 6 mm). A comparative assessment of the difference in common bile duct stone diagnosis, fluorocholangiography success index and reliability of the selective criteria of indication for perioperative fluorocholangiography was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Perioperative fluorocholangiography was successfully performed in 102 of the 127 patients from group 1 (a rate of 80.3%), and in 59 of the 71 patients from group 2 (a rate of 83.1%). In the 102 patients of group 1 who underwent perioperative fluorocholangiography, 11 (10.8%) presented common bile duct stone, 4 (3.9%) presented common bile duct dilatation, and 1 (1%) had a false-positive image. In the 59 patients from group 2, 7 (11.7%) presented common bile duct stone and one (1.7%) presented a common bile duct diatation. In another situation, when application of selective indication criteria to perioperative fluorocholangiography was simulated in group 1 patients, we observed that only in one patient with common bile duct stone the diagnostic would not have been made. Fluorocholangiography selective indication criteria presented sensitivity of 90.9% and specificity of 46.2%. The main causes of fluorocholangiography failure were biliary pedicle inflammation and cystic duct size and caliber variations. CONCLUSION: There was not a significant difference in common bile duct stone diagnostic through perioperative fluorocholangiography between the groups of patients with selective and routine indication, validating the examination selective indication criteria, with a sensitivity of 90.9%, despite the specificity of 46.2 % - 43 patients were selected to the flourocholangiography and common bile duct stone was not diagnosed.
id IBEPEGE-1_410f3aefb5bcc43c2552c53ae56835d2
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0004-28032007000300017
network_acronym_str IBEPEGE-1
network_name_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomyCholangiographyCholecystectomy, laparoscopicCholedocholithiasisBACKGROUND: The use of routine or selective peroperatory cholangiography in cholecystectomy is a matter of controversy in literature. AIM: To compare the efficacy of selective or routine fluorocholangiography in diagnostic of common bile duct stone in patients underwent to laparoscopic cholecystectomy based on selective indication criteria. METHOD: Two hundred and fifty four patients with cholelithiasis were prospectively studied. The patients were divided in two groups: to the first 127 patients perioperative fluorocholangiography was indicated as routine (group 1), and to the other 127 patients perioperative fluorocholangiography indication followed clinical criteria (jaundice, choluria, fecal acholia and history of pancreatitis), laboratory criteria (increase in seric alkaline phosphatase, bilirubins, amylase) or ultra-sonographyc criteria (less than 6 mm diameter calculi, common bile duct stone, common bile duct diameter more than 6 mm). A comparative assessment of the difference in common bile duct stone diagnosis, fluorocholangiography success index and reliability of the selective criteria of indication for perioperative fluorocholangiography was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Perioperative fluorocholangiography was successfully performed in 102 of the 127 patients from group 1 (a rate of 80.3%), and in 59 of the 71 patients from group 2 (a rate of 83.1%). In the 102 patients of group 1 who underwent perioperative fluorocholangiography, 11 (10.8%) presented common bile duct stone, 4 (3.9%) presented common bile duct dilatation, and 1 (1%) had a false-positive image. In the 59 patients from group 2, 7 (11.7%) presented common bile duct stone and one (1.7%) presented a common bile duct diatation. In another situation, when application of selective indication criteria to perioperative fluorocholangiography was simulated in group 1 patients, we observed that only in one patient with common bile duct stone the diagnostic would not have been made. Fluorocholangiography selective indication criteria presented sensitivity of 90.9% and specificity of 46.2%. The main causes of fluorocholangiography failure were biliary pedicle inflammation and cystic duct size and caliber variations. CONCLUSION: There was not a significant difference in common bile duct stone diagnostic through perioperative fluorocholangiography between the groups of patients with selective and routine indication, validating the examination selective indication criteria, with a sensitivity of 90.9%, despite the specificity of 46.2 % - 43 patients were selected to the flourocholangiography and common bile duct stone was not diagnosed.Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. 2007-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300017Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.44 n.3 2007reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiainstacron:IBEPEGE10.1590/S0004-28032007000300017info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGuerra-Filho,VicenteNunes,Tarcizo AfonsoAraújo,Ivana Duvaleng2007-11-27T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-28032007000300017Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/aghttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br1678-42190004-2803opendoar:2007-11-27T00:00Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
spellingShingle Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
Guerra-Filho,Vicente
Cholangiography
Cholecystectomy, laparoscopic
Choledocholithiasis
title_short Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_full Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_fullStr Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_full_unstemmed Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
title_sort Perioperative fluorocholangiography with routine indication versus selective indication in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
author Guerra-Filho,Vicente
author_facet Guerra-Filho,Vicente
Nunes,Tarcizo Afonso
Araújo,Ivana Duval
author_role author
author2 Nunes,Tarcizo Afonso
Araújo,Ivana Duval
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Guerra-Filho,Vicente
Nunes,Tarcizo Afonso
Araújo,Ivana Duval
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Cholangiography
Cholecystectomy, laparoscopic
Choledocholithiasis
topic Cholangiography
Cholecystectomy, laparoscopic
Choledocholithiasis
description BACKGROUND: The use of routine or selective peroperatory cholangiography in cholecystectomy is a matter of controversy in literature. AIM: To compare the efficacy of selective or routine fluorocholangiography in diagnostic of common bile duct stone in patients underwent to laparoscopic cholecystectomy based on selective indication criteria. METHOD: Two hundred and fifty four patients with cholelithiasis were prospectively studied. The patients were divided in two groups: to the first 127 patients perioperative fluorocholangiography was indicated as routine (group 1), and to the other 127 patients perioperative fluorocholangiography indication followed clinical criteria (jaundice, choluria, fecal acholia and history of pancreatitis), laboratory criteria (increase in seric alkaline phosphatase, bilirubins, amylase) or ultra-sonographyc criteria (less than 6 mm diameter calculi, common bile duct stone, common bile duct diameter more than 6 mm). A comparative assessment of the difference in common bile duct stone diagnosis, fluorocholangiography success index and reliability of the selective criteria of indication for perioperative fluorocholangiography was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Perioperative fluorocholangiography was successfully performed in 102 of the 127 patients from group 1 (a rate of 80.3%), and in 59 of the 71 patients from group 2 (a rate of 83.1%). In the 102 patients of group 1 who underwent perioperative fluorocholangiography, 11 (10.8%) presented common bile duct stone, 4 (3.9%) presented common bile duct dilatation, and 1 (1%) had a false-positive image. In the 59 patients from group 2, 7 (11.7%) presented common bile duct stone and one (1.7%) presented a common bile duct diatation. In another situation, when application of selective indication criteria to perioperative fluorocholangiography was simulated in group 1 patients, we observed that only in one patient with common bile duct stone the diagnostic would not have been made. Fluorocholangiography selective indication criteria presented sensitivity of 90.9% and specificity of 46.2%. The main causes of fluorocholangiography failure were biliary pedicle inflammation and cystic duct size and caliber variations. CONCLUSION: There was not a significant difference in common bile duct stone diagnostic through perioperative fluorocholangiography between the groups of patients with selective and routine indication, validating the examination selective indication criteria, with a sensitivity of 90.9%, despite the specificity of 46.2 % - 43 patients were selected to the flourocholangiography and common bile duct stone was not diagnosed.
publishDate 2007
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2007-09-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300017
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032007000300017
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/S0004-28032007000300017
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.44 n.3 2007
reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron:IBEPEGE
instname_str Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron_str IBEPEGE
institution IBEPEGE
reponame_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
collection Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br
_version_ 1754193344294027264