Comparing One-Stage vs Two-Stage Approaches for the Management of Choledocholithiasis.

backgroundThe management of symptomatic choledocholithiasis remains a controversial issue. At present, the three most common management options for choledocholithiasis include a preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy and stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy, then by either an intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy or a laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. The purpose of this study was to assess the consequences of the decision to pursue each of these three methods.

methodsWe conducted a review of the existing data comparing these three management options. The literature from 2009 to 2021 pertaining to these three methods was reviewed for data on duct clearance, morbidity, mortality, recurrence rate, length of stay, and operative time. Next, we constructed decision trees for each method using a utility score analysis, and these utility scores were used to create a sensitivity analysis based on stone clearance rate.

resultsLaparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography had a utility score of 0.9910, a stone clearance rate of 95.5%, a morbidity of 6.3%, and a mortality of 0.2%. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with laparoscopic cholecystectomy had a utility score of 0.9629, a stone clearance rate of 85.5%, a morbidity of 13.3%, and a mortality of 0.8%. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with common bile duct exploration had a utility score of 0.9882, a stone clearance rate of 88.3%, a morbidity of 12.9%, and a mortality of 0.3%.

conclusionWe have shown that a laparoscopic cholecystectomy with an intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is associated with the best overall outcomes.