Skip to content
Open access

TPT 8.14 Index Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration Versus ERCP-First Strategy for Choledocholithiasis: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study with Propensity-Based Analyses

Aug 2026 · British Journal of Surgery · 0 citations

Abstract

ERCP followed by delayed cholecystectomy is a common pathway for choledocholithiasis, but exposes patients to recurrent biliary events and repeat interventions while awaiting definitive surgery. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) provides definitive single-stage management, but is variably adopted. We compared the outcomes of single-stage management versus two-stage management of choledocholithiasis. We analysed prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing index ERCP or index LCBDE for choledocholithiasis. Patients with prior cholecystectomy, ERCP for non-stone indications, or a recent ERCP within 6 months were excluded; patients with multiple ERCPs contributed only the index ERCP. Outcomes were further acute biliary admissions, repeat ERCP procedures, additional imaging (ultrasound/MRI/CT), and additional hospital bed-days after the index admission. We used negative binomial regression with log (person-time) offsets; propensity overlap weighting estimated effects in the overlap population (ATO). The cohort comprised 390 patients (ERCP-first 352, LCBDE-first 38) contributing 731.0 person-years of follow-up. Crude readmission rates were 3.9 versus 18.7 per 100 person-years and bed-day rates were 9.1 versus 161.5 per 100 person-years (LCBDE-first vs ERCP-first). In adjusted models, LCBDE-first was associated with fewer readmissions (IRR 0.16, 95% CI 0.05-0.51) and fewer bed-days (IRR 0.05, 95% CI 0.02-0.18). Overlap-weighted analyses were directionally consistent; estimates for repeat ERCP and imaging were less precise. In this observational cohort, the LCBDE-first strategy was associated with materially fewer subsequent admissions and bed-days than an ERCP-first pathway. Propensity-based analyses support these differences in the overlap population, but limited propensity overlap and unmeasured confounding warrant cautious causal interpretation.

Read PDF

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.