Laparoscopic versus open surgery for the management of post-cholecystectomy benign biliary strictures

Surgical management by a bilioenteric anastomosis is the standard for the repair of post-cholecystectomy benign biliary strictures (BBS). This is traditionally done as an open operation. There are a few reports describing the procedure by a laparoscopic technique. The aim of the present study was to describe our experience of laparoscopic bilio-enteric anastomosis [Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy (LRYHJ)/laparoscopic hepaticoduodenostomy (LHD)] in the management of post-cholecystectomy BBS and compare the outcomes with our patients operated by the open approach.

Retrospective analysis of prospective data of post-cholecystectomy BBS patients treated by laparoscopic bilio-enteric anastomosis. The outcomes were compared with patients who underwent an open repair.

Between January 2016 and February 2019, 63 patients underwent surgery for post-cholecystectomy BBS. Twenty-nine patients who underwent laparoscopic bilio-enteric anastomosis (LRYHJ-13, LHD-16) were compared with 34 patients who underwent an open repair. The median age (40 vs 39) years, type of index surgery [laparoscopic cholecystectomy (13 vs 15), laparoscopic converted to open cholecystectomy (10 vs 16), and open cholecystectomy (6 vs 3)], type of injury low stricture (7 vs 5) and high stricture (22 vs 29), preoperative biliary fistula (23 vs 30), and time from injury to repair (6 vs 7 months) were similar in the 2 groups. The median duration of surgery was also similar (210 vs 200 min, p = 0.937); however, the median intraoperative blood loss (50 mL vs 200 mL, p = 0.001), time to resume oral diet (2 vs 4 days p = 0.023),** and median duration of postoperative hospital stay (6 vs 8 days, p = 0.001) were significantly less in the laparoscopy group. Overall morbidity rate (within 30 days post-surgery) was significantly higher in the open repair group (38% vs 20%). In a subgroup analysis of the laparoscopic repair group, the operative time in patients who underwent an LHD was significantly less than LRYHJ (190 vs 230 min, p = 0.034). The other parameters like the mean intraoperative blood loss, time to initiate oral diet, duration of postoperative hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative bile leak were similar. Patients undergoing open repair had a median follow-up of 26 months with two developing anastomotic stenosis and those undergoing laparoscopic repair had a median follow-up for 9 months with one developing anastomotic stenosis.

Laparoscopic surgery for post-cholecystectomy BBS with an LRYHJ or LHD is feasible and safe and compares favourably with the open approach.