Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cost-effective management of common bile duct stones

A decision analysis of the use of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), intraoperative cholangiography, and laparoscopic bile duct exploration

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

There are a variety of approaches to the diagnosis and treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

Methods

Decision modeling was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four strategies for managing CBD stones around the time of LC: (a) routine preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (preoperative ERCP), (b) LC with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC), followed by laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCDE), (c) LC with IOC, followed by ERCP (postoperative ERCP), and (d) expectant management (LC without any tests for CBD stones). Local hospital data were used to estimate costs. Cost-effectiveness was expressed in terms of the cost per case of residual CBD stones prevented (in excess of the cost of LC alone). Diagnostic test characteristics, procedure success rates, and adverse event probabilities were derived from a systematic review of the literature. Sensitivity analysis was used to explore the effect of uncertainty on the results of the model.

Results

LC alone was the least costly strategy, but it was also the least effective. Of the more aggressive strategies, LCDE and preoperative ERCP were associated with marginal costs of $5993.60 and $299,259.35, respectively, per case of residual CBD stones prevented. Postoperative ERCP was more costly and less effective than LCDE, but it had a lower cost-effectiveness ratio than preoperative ERCP when the prevalence of CBD stones was <80%.

Conclusions

Compared to other common approaches, laparoscopic CBD exploration is a cost-effective method of managing CBD stones in patients who undergo LC. If expertise in LCDE is unavailable, selective postoperative ERCP is preferred over routine preoperative ERCP, unless the probability of CBD stones is very high (>80%).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abboud P-AC, Malet PF, Berlin JA, Staroscik R, Cabana MD, Clarke JR, Shea JA, Schwartz JS, Williams SV (1996) Predictors of common bile duct stones prior to cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 44: 450–459

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Aubertin JM, Levoir D, Bouillot JL, Becheur H, Bloch F, Aouad K, Alexandre JH, Petite JP (1996) Endoscopic ultrasonography immediately prior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective evaluation. Endoscopy 28: 667–673

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Barteau JA, Castro D, Arregui ME, Tetik C (1995) A comparison of intraoperative ultrasound versus cholangiography in the evaluation of the common bile duct during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 9: 490–496

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Berci G, Morganstern L (1994) Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones: a multi-institutional SAGES study. Surg Endosc 8: 1168–1175

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Birth M, Ehlers KU, Delinikolas K, Weiser HF (1998) Prospective randomized comparison of laparoscopic ultrasonography using a flexible-tip ultrasound probe and intraoperative dynamic cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 12: 30–36 DOI: 10.1007/s004649900587

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Blatner ME, Wittgen CM, Andrus CH, Kaminski DL (1991) Cystic duct cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Arch Surg 126: 646–649

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chan Y-L, Chan ACW, Lam WWM, Lee DWH, Chung SSC, Sung JJY, Cheung HS, Li AKC, Metreweli C (1996) Choledocholithiasis: comparison of MR cholangiography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. Radiology 200: 85–89

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chang L, Lo S, Stabile BE, Lewis RJ, Toosie K, de Virgilio C (2000) Preoperative versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography in mild to moderate gallstone pancreatitis: a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg 231: 82–87

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Cuschieri A, Lezoche E, Morino M, Croce E, Lacy A, Toouli J, Faggioni A, Ribeiro VM, Jakimowicz J, Visa J, Hanna GB (1999) E.A.E.S. multicenter prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage vs single-stage management of patients with gallstone disease and ductal calculi. Surg Endosc 13: 952–957 DOI: 10.1007/s004649901145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Detsky AS, Naglie IG (1990) A clinician’s guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 113: 147–154

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dwerryhouse SJ, Brown E, Vipond MN (1998) Prospective evaluation of magnetic resonance cholangiography to detect common bile duct stones before laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 85: 1364–1366

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fan ST, Lai ECS, Mok FPT, Lo C-M, Zheng S-S, Wong J (1993) Early treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis by endoscopic papillotomy. N Engl J Med 328: 228–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Finkler SA (1982) The distinction between cost and charges. Ann Int Med 96: 102–109

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Flowers JL, Zucker KA, Graham SM, Scolvill WA, Imbembo AL, Bailey RW (1992) Laparoscopic cholangiography: results and indications. Ann Surg 215: 209–216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Folsch UR, Nitsche R, Ludtke R, Hilgers RA, Creutzfeldt W (1997) Early ERCP and papillotomy compared with conservative treatment for acute biliary pancreatitis. N Engl J Med 336: 237–242

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S, Haber GB, Herman ME, Dorsher PJ, Moore JP, Fennerty MB, Ryan ME, Shaw MJ, Lande JD, Pheley AM (1996) Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 335: 909–918

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Frey CF, Burbige EJ, Meinke WB, Pullos TG, Wong HN, Hickman DM, Belber J (1982) Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Am J Surg 144: 109–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Goletti O, Buccianti P, Decanini L, Lippolis PV, Spisni R, Chiarugi M, Cavina E (1994) Intraoperative sonography of biliary tree during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 4: 9–12

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Greig JD, John TG, Mahadaven M, Garden OJ (1994) Laparoscopic ultrasonography in the evaluation of the biliary tree during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 81: 1202–1206

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Machi J, Tateishi T, Oishi AJ, Furumoto NL, Oishi RH, Uchida S, Sigel B (1999) Laparoscopic ultrasonography versus operative cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: review of the literature and a comparison with open intraoperative ultrasonography. Am J Surg 188: 361–367

    Google Scholar 

  21. McKay CJ, Curran F, Sharples C, Baxter JN, Imrie CW (1997) Prospective placebo-controlled randomized trial of lexipafant in predicted severe acute pancreatitis. Br J Surg 84: 1239–1243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Neoptolemos JP, Carr-Locke DL, Fossard DP (1987) Prospective randomised study of preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy versus surgery alone for common bile duct stones. Br Med J 294: 470–474

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Neoptolemos JP, London NJ, James D, Carr-Locke DL, Bailey IA, Fossard DP (1988) Controlled trial of urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic shincterotomy versus conservative treatment for acute pancreatitis due to gallstones. Lancet 3: 979–983

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. NIH Consensus Development Panel on Gallstones and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Gallstones and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. JAMA 269: 1018–1024

  25. Ohtani T, Kawai C, Shirai Y, Kawakami K, Yoshida K, Hatakeyama K (1997) Intraoperative ultrasonography versus cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective comparative study. J Am Coll Surg 185: 274–282

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Owings ME, Kozak LJ (1998) Ambulatory and inpatient procedures in the United States, 1996. National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 13: 139

    Google Scholar 

  27. Pietrabissa A, Di Candio G, Giulianotti PC, Shimi SM, Cushieri A, Mosca F (1995) Comparative evaluation of contact ultrasonography and transcystic cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective study. Arch Surg 130: 1110–1114

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Pofahl WE, Walczak SM, Rhone E, Izenberg SD (1998) Use of an artificial neural network to predict length of stay in acute pancreatitis. Am Surg 64: 868–872

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Prat F, Amouyal G, Amouyal P, Pelletier G, Fritsch J, Choury AD, Buffet C, Etienne J-P (1996) Prospective controlled study of endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography in patients with suspected common bile duct lithiasis. Lancet 347: 75–79

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Rhodes M, Sussman L, Cohen L, Lewis MP (1998) Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones. Lancet 351: 159–161

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Rothlin MA, Schlumpf R, Largiader F (1994) Laparoscopic sonography: an alternative to routine intraoperative cholangiography?. Arch Surg 129: 694–700

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Sahai AV, Mauldin PD, Marsi V, Hawes RH, Hoffman BJ (1999) Bile duct stones and laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a decision analysis to assess the roles of intraoperative cholagiography, EUS and ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 49: 334–343

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Scientific Committee for the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (E.A.E.S.) Diagnosis and treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS): results of a consensus development conference. Surg Endosc 12: 856–864 DOI: 10.1007/s004649900729

  34. Siperstein, A, Pearl J, Macho J, Hansen P, Gitomirsky A, Rogers S (1999) Comparison of laparoscopic ultrasonography and fluorocholangiography in 300 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 13: 113–117 DOI: 10.1007/s004649900917

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Soto JA, Barish MA, Yucel EK, Siegenberg D, Ferrucci JT, Chuttani R (1996) Magnetic resonance cholangiography: comparison with endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. Gastroenterology 110: 589–597

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Soto JA, Yucel EK, Barish MA, Chuttani R, Ferrucci JT (1996) MR cholangiography after unsuccessful or incomplete ERCP. Radiology 199: 91–98

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Stiegmann GV, Soper NJ, Filipi CJ, McIntyre RC, Callery MP, Cordova JF (1995) Laparoscopic ultrasonography as compared with static or dynamic cholangiography at laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a prospective multicenter trial. Surg Endosc 9: 1269–1273

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Thompson DM, Arregui ME, Tetik C, Madden MT, Wegener M, A comparison of laparoscopic ultrasound with digital fluorocholangiography for detecting choledocholithiasis, during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. A comparison of laparoscopic ultrasound with digital fluorocholangiography for detecting choledocholithiasis during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 12: 929–932 (1998) DOI: 10.1007/ s004649900749

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Yamashita Y, Kurohiji T, Hayashi J, Kimitsuki H, Hiraki M, Kakegawa T (1993) Intraoperative ultrasonography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 3: 167–171

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Surgical Research, Legacy Health Systems, 501 North Graham, Suite 120, 97227, Portland, OR, USA

    D. R. Urbach, Y. S. Khajanchee, B. A. Jobe, B. A. Standage, P. D. Hansen & L. L. Swanstrom

Authors
  1. D. R. Urbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Y. S. Khajanchee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. A. Jobe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B. A. Standage
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. D. Hansen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. L. L. Swanstrom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Online publication: 20 October 2000

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Urbach, D.R., Khajanchee, Y.S., Jobe, B.A. et al. Cost-effective management of common bile duct stones. Surg Endosc 15, 4–13 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640000322

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004640000322

Key words

Search

Navigation