The case for selective cholangiography.

Abstract

Seven hundred sixty-five patients were operated on in two hospitals in 1979 and 1980, 190 of whom were submitted to operative cholangiography, 41 to primary common duct exploration, and 534 to neither. The incidence of common duct stones was 4 percent in the minimal indications group, 21 percent in the moderate indications group, and 91 percent in the maximal indications group. Follow-up of 5 years revealed 1 recurrence in the minimal group subjected to cholangiography and none among the 534 in whom no cholangiogram was obtained. In the period from 1981 through 1985, eight patients returned with common duct stones, having had no common duct stones at the primary operation. In the same period, 1,722 of 2,533 patients were operated on without cholangiography. The ratio of recurrences to primary operations without cholangiography was 1:225 or 0.45 percent. From these findings, we conclude that on the basis of cost-effectiveness and insurance against subsequent disease and disability, cholangiography is only indicated in patients with moderate indications (minimal jaundice, moderately dilated common duct, pancreatitis, or an increased serum amylase level). Cholangiography is not indicated if there are no indications of obstruction of the common duct by stones (as a routine for small stones in the gallbladder, if the cystic duct is patent, or if there is an isolated increased serum alkaline phosphatase level). Cholangiography is also unnecessary, when the indications of common duct stones are maximal (deep jaundice, huge common duct, cholangitis, or palpable stone). In our geographic area, intraoperative cholangiography should be selected in 7 to 8 percent of patients.