Abstract:

Objective To compare the effects of duodenoscopic treatment and traditional treatment on bile leakage after cholecystectomy. Methods Thirty-five patients with bile leakage after cholecystectomy were divided into duodenoscopic treatment group (managed with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography method, n=17) and traditional treatment group (managed with conservative therapy and surgery, n=18). The percentages of bile leakage location confirmation, time of bile leakage closure, re-operation rates and prevalences of complications were compared between two groups. Results The percentage of bile leakage location confirmation in duodenoscopic treatment group was significantly higher than that in traditional treatment group (76.47% vs 38.89%, P<0.05), the time of bile leakage closure in duodenoscopic treatment group was significantly shorter than that in traditional treatment group [(13±3) d vs (23±5) d, P<0.05], the re-operation rate in duodenoscopic treatment group was significantly lower than that in traditional treatment group (11.76% vs 38.89%, P<0.05), and the prevalence of complications in duodenoscopic treatment group was significantly lower than that in traditional treatment group (17.65% vs 38.89%, P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with traditional treatment, duodenoscopic treatment for bile leakage after cholecystectomy is less invasive, more safe and more effective.

Key words: cholecystectomy, bile leakage, endoscope