Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02515474

Comparison of LCBDE vs ERCP + LC for Choledocholithiasis

Protection of Oddi's sphincter remains a huge argument especially in the long term complications like common bile duct stone recurrence or cholangitis after ERCP, which determined to destroy the sphincter of Oddi. The purpose of this study is to compare the long-term outcomes of ERCP sequential LC versus LCBDE for choledocholithiasis.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year–65 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

The first hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China

Loading trial locations.

About this study

Cholelithiasis, a common etiology factor responsible for abdominal pain, is highly prevalent worldwide. According to data from general investigation, the morbidity of cholelithiasis differs from 2.36% to 42% in different areas, and about 5% to 29% (average 18%) of all cholelithiasis cases have both gallbladder stone and common bile duct stone. In the population with age above 70 years old, 30% of which suffers from gallbladder stone in China. A causal link between the development of gallbladder stone and common bile duct stone is that 10% to 15% of gallstone patients have high potential to develop secondary common bile duct stone. In 1987, the laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) came into being as a revolutionary surgical method. With minimally invasive effect and high safety, LC was soon accepted as a 'Golden standard' for the treatment of gallbladder stone. Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) was firstly reported by Kawai and Classen in 1970. As of now, the combination of EST with other endoscopic techniques, such as basket extraction, balloon dilation and lithotripsy, have significantly improved the stone removal rate from 85% up to 90%, and ERCP has been considered as the optimal method in regard to CBD stone treatment. In 1991, the laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) which reflected the advantage of rigid scopes had risen to be a very promising minimally invasive alternative for the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stone. Currently, there are mainly two kinds of minimally invasive treatments for choledocholithiasis, which refers to the "one-stage" laparoscopic method, LCBDE and the "sequential two-stage" method, ERCP followed by LC. Both methods are able to achieve the same therapeutic purpose. However, there has always been a controversy about the advantages and disadvantages due to lack of evidence from long-term follow-ups, especially the difference of long-term complications related to Oddi's sphincter functional status, which importantly refers to stone recurrence rates and cholangitis.

The potential long-term complications resulted from EST remains an issue now. It is believed that EST handles Oddi's sphincter stenosis, regurgitation cholangitis, and higher cholangiocarcinoma risks in a long run. By virtue of ERCP, multiple high stone clearance rates (87%~97%) were reported, but meanwhile high re-ERCP rates (around 25%) were also indicated because of stone residual, and whether great stone residual rates was linked to future stone recurrence and repeated cholangitis is not clear. Several randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies had compared ERCP plus LC and LCBDE, the results were similar to the aspects of stone removal rates, costs, and patient acceptance. However, the postoperative cholangitis rate of one single center study is quite different from another. Moreover, few studies have related the stone recurrence rate in the long term follow-up. Obviously, previous RCT studies were limited by few comparison of ERCP followed by LC versus LCBDE in long-term complications, especially stone recurrence and cholangitis. Therefore, this multicenter randomize control study is designed prospectively to compare the stone recurrence and cholangitis rates between ERCP plus LC and LCBDE which can reflects the valuable of Oddi's sphincter protection during the disease management, further dedicating the treatment of gallbladder and common duct stone.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age 18-65 years old
  • Choledocholithiasis patient did not perform any operation
  • Common bile duct stone less than 2cm in maximum diameter

Exclusion criteria

  • Unwillingness or inability to consent for the study
  • Coagulation dysfunction (INR> 1.3) and low peripheral blood platelet count (<50×109 / L) or using anti-coagulation drugs
  • Previous EST, EPBD or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD)
  • Prior surgery of Bismuth Ⅱ and Roux-en-Y
  • Benign or malignant CBD stricture
  • Preoperative coexistent diseases: acute pancreatitis, GI tract hemorrhage, severe liver disease, primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), septic shock
  • Combined with Mirizzi syndrome and intrahepatic bile duct stones
  • Malignancies
  • Biliary-duodenal fistula confirmed during ERCP
  • Pregnant women

Treatment and study plan

Laparoscopy

Procedure

After removing the gallbladder, Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) was performed by one fulltime attending in laparoscopy in a routine fashion. Access from the opening of the anterior wall of common bile duct or from the dilated cystic duct was acceptable, removed stone(s) and irrigated the duct followed by choledochoscope detection simultaneously. Cholangiograms were also can be a alternative method to obtain stone clearance. If needed, all fluoroscopy was performed by the principal author in the presence of and concurrence with the ERCP endoscopist. Once the LCBDE was completed, the incision of the bile duct was sewed intermittently by absorbed threads, or ligated cystic duct. T-tube was acceptable if needed.

Other names: Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE)

endoscopy

Procedure

Initially endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed by a fulltime attending and concurrence of the principal author in endoscopy. Patients randomized to ERCP+ LC group were scheduled to undergo the endoscopic procedure using fluoroscopy in the endoscopy center under moderate sedation (principally intravenous midazolam and meperidine) prior to the intended laparoscopy. Gastric intestinal atony during ERCP was routinely achieved using scopolamine butylbromide injection. Sphincterotomy (EST) and Endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) can be choose accordingly. The laparoscopic cholecystectomy was subsequently performed as soon as technically feasible following the ERCP in one month.

Other names: Endoscopic Retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)

Primary outcomes

  1. Common bile duct stone recurrence

    Time frame: Up to 5 years

    Stone was diagnosed by MRI or CT whenever be confirmed after 3 months after procedures.

Secondary outcomes

  1. The proportion of patients with all stones removed

    Time frame: Up to 8 hours

  2. Operation time

    Time frame: Up to 8 hours

    For arm1 (LCBED): the whole process of the operation; for arm2 (LC+ERCP): the total of the two procedures, LC and ERCP

  3. Length of stay in hospital

    Time frame: Up to 60 days

  4. The total hospitalization costs

    Time frame: Up to 60 days

  5. Upper abdominal pain after each procedure by Numerical Rating Scale

    Time frame: Up to 60 days

  6. Hemorrhage

    Time frame: Up to 60 days

    Maintained positive fecal occult blood test appears or Hb decreased by 10g/l

  7. Perforation

    Time frame: Up to 7 days

    CT scan shows retroperitoneal space fluid or gas

  8. Acute cholangitis

    Time frame: Up to 5 years

    Intermittent chills and fever after procedures

  9. Bile leakage

    Time frame: Up to 60 days

    Any bile juice aspirated from the abdominal cavity after procedures

  10. Stricture of the bile duct

    Time frame: Up to 5 years

    Any stricture appears after the procedures

  11. Number of Death connected with the procedures and complications

    Time frame: Up to 5 years

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Institute of Gansu Province

Other

Registry information

Official study title

A Long Term Comparison of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration and Cholecystectomy Versus Sequential ERCP Followed by Cholecystectomy for Choledocholithiasis: a Multicenter Prospected Non-randomized Controlled Study

Important dates

Study start
2015
Primary completion
2024
Study completion
2024
First posted
Aug 4, 2015
Registry last updated
Jan 5, 2024

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.