Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Operative Cholangiography

Operative Cholangiography Abstract To explore or not to explore the common bile duct during a cholecystectomy is an alternative which must be resolved by all who perform this operation. The complications resulting from an error in judgement in this decision have been well pointed out.1,2 An example of the earnest desire to avoid such errors is the paper of Bartlett et al,3 who have studied the predictability of the presence of common bile duct stones on the basis of certain clinical variables. However, despite all such precautions, most authors agree that not only is the incidence of residual stones at least 10%,2,4,5 but 50% of choledochostomies prove not to have been necessary. In 1931 Mirizzi6 first proposed a new method for exploring the biliary tract during an operation which he called operative cholangiography. Experience with and without this technique has resulted in innumerable controversial publications2,4-9 and, as well, References 1. Hight, D., and Lingley, J.R.: The Value of Cholangiograms During Biliary Tract Surgery , New Eng J Med 246:761-765 ( (May) ) 1952.Crossref 2. Hight, D.; Lingley, J.R.; and Hurtubise, F.: Valoracion de la colangiografia operatoria como guia para la exploracion del coledoco , Anal Cirugia 150:1137-1142, 1959. 3. Bartlett, M.K., and Waddell, W.R.: Indications for Common Duct Exploration: Evaluation in 1.000 Cases , New Eng J Med 258:164-167 ( (Jan) ) 1958.Crossref 4. Thomson, F.B.: Residual Stone in Biliary Ducts , Surg Gynec Obstet 103:78-84 ( (July) ) 1956. 5. Walters, W.: Operative and Postoperative Cholangiography , Arch Surg 70:323-325 ( (March) ) 1955.Crossref 6. Mirizzi, P.L., and Quiroga Losada, C.: La exploracion de las vias biliares principales en el curso de la operacion, Proceedings of the Third Argentinian Congress of Surgery, 1931, vol 1, pp 694-703. 7. Ashmore, J.D., et al: Experimental Evaluation of Operative Cholangiography in Relation to Calculus Size , Surgery 40:191-196 ( (July) ) 1956. 8. Mirizzi, P.L.: Operative Cholangiography , Surg Gynec Obstet 65:702-710 ( (Nov) ) 1937. 9. Mixter, C.G.; Hermanson, L.; and Segel, A.L.: Operative Cholangiography: Evaluation of 406 Cases , Ann Surg 134:346-350 ( (Sept) ) 1951.Crossref 10. Tejerina Fotheringham, W.: Colangiografia operatoria segmentaria , Bol Soc Cir Rosario 25:176-182, 1958. 11. Bancroft, H.: Introduccion a la Bioestadistica , ed 3, trans. from the English, Buenos Aires: Ed. Eudeba, 1965. 12. Snedecor, G.W.: Statistical Methods , ed 5, Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1956. 13. Colcock, B.P., and Liddle, H.V.: Common-Bile-Duct Stones , New Eng J Med 258:264-267 ( (Feb) ) 1958.Crossref http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Surgery American Medical Association

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/operative-cholangiography-IZkd80L72W
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1969 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0004-0010
eISSN
1538-3644
DOI
10.1001/archsurg.1969.01340130031006
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract To explore or not to explore the common bile duct during a cholecystectomy is an alternative which must be resolved by all who perform this operation. The complications resulting from an error in judgement in this decision have been well pointed out.1,2 An example of the earnest desire to avoid such errors is the paper of Bartlett et al,3 who have studied the predictability of the presence of common bile duct stones on the basis of certain clinical variables. However, despite all such precautions, most authors agree that not only is the incidence of residual stones at least 10%,2,4,5 but 50% of choledochostomies prove not to have been necessary. In 1931 Mirizzi6 first proposed a new method for exploring the biliary tract during an operation which he called operative cholangiography. Experience with and without this technique has resulted in innumerable controversial publications2,4-9 and, as well, References 1. Hight, D., and Lingley, J.R.: The Value of Cholangiograms During Biliary Tract Surgery , New Eng J Med 246:761-765 ( (May) ) 1952.Crossref 2. Hight, D.; Lingley, J.R.; and Hurtubise, F.: Valoracion de la colangiografia operatoria como guia para la exploracion del coledoco , Anal Cirugia 150:1137-1142, 1959. 3. Bartlett, M.K., and Waddell, W.R.: Indications for Common Duct Exploration: Evaluation in 1.000 Cases , New Eng J Med 258:164-167 ( (Jan) ) 1958.Crossref 4. Thomson, F.B.: Residual Stone in Biliary Ducts , Surg Gynec Obstet 103:78-84 ( (July) ) 1956. 5. Walters, W.: Operative and Postoperative Cholangiography , Arch Surg 70:323-325 ( (March) ) 1955.Crossref 6. Mirizzi, P.L., and Quiroga Losada, C.: La exploracion de las vias biliares principales en el curso de la operacion, Proceedings of the Third Argentinian Congress of Surgery, 1931, vol 1, pp 694-703. 7. Ashmore, J.D., et al: Experimental Evaluation of Operative Cholangiography in Relation to Calculus Size , Surgery 40:191-196 ( (July) ) 1956. 8. Mirizzi, P.L.: Operative Cholangiography , Surg Gynec Obstet 65:702-710 ( (Nov) ) 1937. 9. Mixter, C.G.; Hermanson, L.; and Segel, A.L.: Operative Cholangiography: Evaluation of 406 Cases , Ann Surg 134:346-350 ( (Sept) ) 1951.Crossref 10. Tejerina Fotheringham, W.: Colangiografia operatoria segmentaria , Bol Soc Cir Rosario 25:176-182, 1958. 11. Bancroft, H.: Introduccion a la Bioestadistica , ed 3, trans. from the English, Buenos Aires: Ed. Eudeba, 1965. 12. Snedecor, G.W.: Statistical Methods , ed 5, Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press, 1956. 13. Colcock, B.P., and Liddle, H.V.: Common-Bile-Duct Stones , New Eng J Med 258:264-267 ( (Feb) ) 1958.Crossref

Journal

Archives of SurgeryAmerican Medical Association

Published: Jul 1, 1969

References