Choledochotomy for biliary lithiasis: Is routine T-tube drainage necessary? A prospective controlled trail

S. M. Sheen-Chen, F. F. Chou

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

39 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Thirty patients with stones in the common bile duct were allocated alternately to have choledocholithotomy carried out with either T-tube drainage or with primary closure. Choledochoscopy was done during every operation, and the patency of the common bile duct tested by perfusion. There were no operative deaths. The length of operation was shorter with primary closure (p < 0.01) but there were no differences between the groups in operative blood loss, days in hospital after operation, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and final outcome at follow up. There was no change in the incidence of postoperative bacteraemia, the number of adverse reactions, and the incidence of bile peritonitis after removal of the T-tube. Patients who had T-tubes reported greater discomfort and inconvenience than those withou, and their treatment cost more. We conclude that primary closure of the common bile duct is a reasonable alternative to T-tube drainage in selected cases.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)387-390
Number of pages4
JournalActa Chirurgica Scandinavica
Volume156
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 1990
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Lithiasis
Common Bile Duct
Drainage
Incidence
Bacteremia
Peritonitis
Bile
Health Care Costs
Perfusion
Morbidity
Mortality

Keywords

  • choledochoscopy
  • choledochotomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Choledochotomy for biliary lithiasis : Is routine T-tube drainage necessary? A prospective controlled trail. / Sheen-Chen, S. M.; Chou, F. F.

In: Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica, Vol. 156, No. 5, 01.01.1990, p. 387-390.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9e2f05f8051f4d1cabec3d4377a44173,
title = "Choledochotomy for biliary lithiasis: Is routine T-tube drainage necessary? A prospective controlled trail",
abstract = "Thirty patients with stones in the common bile duct were allocated alternately to have choledocholithotomy carried out with either T-tube drainage or with primary closure. Choledochoscopy was done during every operation, and the patency of the common bile duct tested by perfusion. There were no operative deaths. The length of operation was shorter with primary closure (p < 0.01) but there were no differences between the groups in operative blood loss, days in hospital after operation, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and final outcome at follow up. There was no change in the incidence of postoperative bacteraemia, the number of adverse reactions, and the incidence of bile peritonitis after removal of the T-tube. Patients who had T-tubes reported greater discomfort and inconvenience than those withou, and their treatment cost more. We conclude that primary closure of the common bile duct is a reasonable alternative to T-tube drainage in selected cases.",
keywords = "choledochoscopy, choledochotomy",
author = "Sheen-Chen, {S. M.} and Chou, {F. F.}",
year = "1990",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "156",
pages = "387--390",
journal = "Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica",
issn = "0001-5482",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Choledochotomy for biliary lithiasis

T2 - Is routine T-tube drainage necessary? A prospective controlled trail

AU - Sheen-Chen, S. M.

AU - Chou, F. F.

PY - 1990/1/1

Y1 - 1990/1/1

N2 - Thirty patients with stones in the common bile duct were allocated alternately to have choledocholithotomy carried out with either T-tube drainage or with primary closure. Choledochoscopy was done during every operation, and the patency of the common bile duct tested by perfusion. There were no operative deaths. The length of operation was shorter with primary closure (p < 0.01) but there were no differences between the groups in operative blood loss, days in hospital after operation, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and final outcome at follow up. There was no change in the incidence of postoperative bacteraemia, the number of adverse reactions, and the incidence of bile peritonitis after removal of the T-tube. Patients who had T-tubes reported greater discomfort and inconvenience than those withou, and their treatment cost more. We conclude that primary closure of the common bile duct is a reasonable alternative to T-tube drainage in selected cases.

AB - Thirty patients with stones in the common bile duct were allocated alternately to have choledocholithotomy carried out with either T-tube drainage or with primary closure. Choledochoscopy was done during every operation, and the patency of the common bile duct tested by perfusion. There were no operative deaths. The length of operation was shorter with primary closure (p < 0.01) but there were no differences between the groups in operative blood loss, days in hospital after operation, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and final outcome at follow up. There was no change in the incidence of postoperative bacteraemia, the number of adverse reactions, and the incidence of bile peritonitis after removal of the T-tube. Patients who had T-tubes reported greater discomfort and inconvenience than those withou, and their treatment cost more. We conclude that primary closure of the common bile duct is a reasonable alternative to T-tube drainage in selected cases.

KW - choledochoscopy

KW - choledochotomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025274737&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025274737&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 2190441

AN - SCOPUS:0025274737

VL - 156

SP - 387

EP - 390

JO - Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica

JF - Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica

SN - 0001-5482

IS - 5

ER -