Intraoperative assessment of biliary anatomy for prevention of bile duct injury: a review of current and future patient safety interventions

Background Bile duct injury (BDI) is a dreaded complication of cholecystectomy, often caused by misinterpretation of biliary anatomy. To prevent BDI, techniques have been developed for intraoperative assessment of bile duct anatomy. This article reviews the evidence for the different techniques and discusses their strengths and weaknesses in terms of efficacy, ease, and cost-effectiveness. Method PubMed was searched from January 1980 through December 2009 for articles concerning bile duct visualization techniques for prevention of BDI during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Results Nine techniques were identified. The critical-view-of-safety approach, indirectly establishing biliary anatomy, is accepted by most guidelines and commentaries as the surgical technique of choice to minimize BDI risk. Intraoperative cholangiography is associated with lower BDI risk (OR 0.67, CI 0.61-0.75). However, it incurs extra costs, prolongs the operative procedure, and may be experienced as cumbersome. An established reliable alternative is laparoscopic ultrasound, but its longer learning curve limits widespread implementation. Easier to perform are cholecystocholangiography and dye cholangiography, but these yield poor-quality images. Light cholangiography, requiring retrograde insertion of an optical fiber into the common bile duct, is too unwieldy for routine use. Experimental techniques are passive infrared cholangiography, hyperspectral cholangiography, and near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography. The latter two are performed noninvasively and provide real-time images. Quantitative data in patients are necessary to further evaluate these techniques. Conclusions The critical-view-of-safety approach should be used during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Intraoperative cholangiography or laparoscopic ultrasound is recommended to be performed routinely. Hyperspectral cholangiography and near-infrared fluorescence cholangiography are promising novel techniques to prevent BDI and thus increase patient safety

Kumar versus Olsen cannulation technique for intraoperative cholangiography:a randomized trial

<p>There is resistance to routine intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) during cholecystectomy because it prolongs surgery and may be experienced as cumbersome. An alternative instrument may help to reduce these drawbacks and lower the threshold for IOC. This trial compared the Kumar cannulation technique to the more commonly used Olsen clamp for IOC (KOALA trial; Dutch Trial Register NTR2582).</p><p>Patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized between IOC using the Kumar clamp and the Olsen clamp. Primary end points were the time that the IOC procedure took and its perceived ease as measured on a visual analog scale from 0 (impossible) to 10 (effortless). To detect a difference of 33 % in IOC time, a total sample size of 40 patients was required.</p><p>Fifty-nine patients were randomized. Nine were excluded because of conversion to open cholecystectomy before the IOC procedure. Twenty-eight patients underwent IOC with the Kumar clamp and 22 with the Olsen clamp. The success rate was 23 (82.1 %) of 28 for the Kumar clamp and 19 (86.4 %) of 22 for the Olsen clamp (p > 0.999). The mean IOC time was 10 min 27 s +/- A 6 min 17 s using the Kumar clamp and 11 min 34 s +/- A 7 min 27 s using the Olsen clamp (p = 0.537). Surgeons graded the ease of the Kumar clamp as 6.8 +/- 2.7 and the Olsen clamp as 6.8 +/- A 2.1 (p = 0.977).</p><p>IOC using the Kumar clamp was neither faster nor easier than using the Olsen clamp. Both clamps facilitated IOC in just over 10 min. Individual surgeon preference should dictate which clamp is used.</p>