Anzeige
Erschienen in:
01.10.2020 | Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses
Can T-tube drainage be replaced by primary suture technique in laparoscopic common bile duct exploration? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Erschienen in: Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery | Ausgabe 8/2020
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Background
Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is considered the best treatment and has the advantages of being minimally invasive for common bile duct (CBD) stones, the choice of T-tube drainage (TTD) or primary duct closure (PDC) after LCBDE is still controversial. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare the superiority of PDC versus TTD after LCBDE for choledocholithiasis.
Methods
All potential studies which compare the surgical effects between PDC with TTD were electronically searched for in PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library databases up to November 2019. Data synthesis and statistical analysis were carried out using RevMan 5.3 software.
Results
In total, six randomized controlled trials with 604 patients (307 in the PDC group and 297 in the TTD group) were included in the current meta-analysis. As compared with the TTD group, the pooled data showed that PDC group had shorter operating time (WMD = −24.30; 95% CI = −27.02 to −21.59; p < 0.00001; I2 = 0%; p < 0.88), less medical expenditure (WMD = −2255.73; 95% CI = −3330.59 to −1180.86; p < 0.0001; I2 = 96%; p < 0.00001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (OR = −2.88; 95% CI = −3.22 to −2.54; p < 0.00001; I2 = 60%; p < 0.03), and lower postoperative complications (OR = 0.49; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.78; p = 0.77; I2 = 0%; p = 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups concerning bile leakage (OR = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.36 to 1.53; p = 0.42; I2 = 0%; p = 0.90) and retained stones (OR = 0.96; 95% CI = 0.36 to 2.52; p < 0.93; I2 = 0%; p < 0.66).
Conclusions
LCBDE with PDC should be performed as a priority alternative compared with TTD for choledocholithiasis.