Natural course vs interventions to clear common bile duct stones: data from the Swedish Registry for Gallstone Surgery and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (GallRiks).

IMPORTANCE: The optimal strategy for common bile duct stones (CBDSs) encountered during cholecystectomy is yet to be determined. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes after various interventional techniques to clear the bile ducts and the natural course of CBDSs found during intraoperative cholangiography. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a large retrospective cohort analysis, we analyzed data from the Swedish Registry for Gallstone Surgery and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (GallRiks). We included all patients with CBDSs found on intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy from May 1, 2005, through December 31, 2009. EXPOSURES: Presence of CBDSs on intraoperative cholangiography. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Relation between strategies for handling CBDSs in terms of complication rates and/or incomplete clearance with need of intervention (ie, unfavorable outcomes). RESULTS: In 38,864 cholecystectomies, CBDSs were found in 3969 patients, of whom 3828 underwent analysis. Earlier or ongoing symptoms were more common with increasing stone size (P < .001). In total, postoperative unfavorable outcomes were found in 14.9% but less frequently for patients with smaller stones (P < .01). Among patients in whom no intraoperative measures were taken (representing natural course), the risk for unfavorable outcomes was 25.3%. This risk was significantly lower in patients in whom any measure was taken to clear the ducts (12.7%; odds ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.35-0.55]). The same was found when small (<4 mm) and medium (4-8 mm) stones were analyzed separately (odds ratio, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.34-0.79] and 0.24 [95% CI, 0.17-0.32], respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The high rates of unfavorable outcomes associated with taking no measures when CBDSs are found during cholecystectomy suggest that the natural course might not be as favorable as earlier suggested. This finding implies that, in general, efforts should be made to clear the bile ducts.

Improved outcome after laparoscopic cholecystectomy with ultrasonic dissection: a randomized multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: In conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy, dissection with electrocautery starts at the triangle of Calot. In a randomized single-center trial, the fundus-first method (dome down) using ultrasonic dissection was faster, involved less pain or nausea, and had a shorter postoperative sick leave. This may relate to the fundus-first method or to the ultrasonic dissection. METHODS: In a multicenter trial, 243 elective patients were randomized to conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy using electrocautery (n = 85) or the fundus-first method using either electrocautery (n = 81) or ultrasonic dissection (n = 77). RESULTS: The fundus-first method had a shorter operating time with ultrasonic dissection (58 min) than with electrocautery (74 min; p = 0.002). The fundus-first method using ultrasonic dissection compared with electrocautery or the conventional method produced less blood loss (12 vs. 53 or 36 ml; p < 0.001) and fewer gallbladder perforations (26% vs. 46% or 49%; p = 0.005). Also, the pain and nausea scores at 4 and 6 h were lower, and the sick leave was shorter (6.1 vs. 9.4 and 9 days, respectively; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The fundus-first method using ultrasonic dissection is associated with less blood loss, fewer gallbladder perforations, less pain and nausea, and shorter sick leave than the conventional and fundus-first method using electrocautery. The difference seems related to the use of ultrasonic dissection.

[Randomized study of alcohol screening at a surgical emergency unit. Effective method for uncovering risky alcohol use--especially in young women]. / Randomiserad studie av alkoholscreening vid kirurgisk akutmottagning. Bra metod upptäcka spritbruk i riskzon--särskilt hos unga kvinnor.

This study examined whether alcohol screening identifies a larger percentage of patients with hazardous alcohol use compared with standard procedures at a surgical emergency unit. Patients were randomised into a study group, where a screening procedure was offered, and a control group, where standard procedures were followed. In the study group 20.9 per cent (using a conservative estimate, 14.8 per cent) of the patients screened positive for hazardous alcohol use, compared with 6.8 per cent in the control group. The screening procedure was particularly effective compared with normal routine in identifying hazardous alcohol use among young women.