You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 137 No. 2, February 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (22)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Diagnosis
 •Hepatobiliary Surgery
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Indication and Procedure for Treatment of Hepatolithiasis

Kazuhisa Uchiyama, MD; Hironobu Onishi, MD; Masaji Tani, MD; Hiroyuki Kinoshita, MD; Masaki Ueno, MD; Hiroki Yamaue, MD

Arch Surg. 2002;137:149-153.

Hypothesis  Because of its complicated clinicopathologic features, hepatolithiasis is difficult to treat, and there is no established method of treating patients with intrahepatic stones.

Design  Retrospective case-control study.

Setting  Second Department of Surgery, Wakayama Medical University, School of Medicine, Wakayama, Japan (January 1, 1971-December 31, 2000).

Patients  Eighty-nine patients treated for hepatolithiasis (43 male; median age, 56.9 years).

Main Outcome Measures  The rate of residual stones and complications after the treatments of hepatolithiasis.

Results  Between 1971 and 1985, 17 patients (41%) had stones located in the left or right intrahepatic duct, and 25 patients (60%) had stones located in the bilateral intrahepatic duct. From 1986 through 2000, 32 patients (68%) had stones located in the left or right intrahepatic duct, and 15 patients (32%) had stones located in the bilateral intrahepatic duct (P = .009). The rate of residual stones after surgical and nonsurgical treatment was 41% (17 of 42 patients) in 1971 through 1985, but decreased to 11% (5 of 47 patients) in 1986 through 2000 (P = .001). The rate of residual stones after cholangioenterostomy or T-tube insertion was 43.8% (21 of 48 patients), but the rate of residual stones after hepatectomy or percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy (PTCSL) was 2.4% (1 of 41 patients, P<.001). In cases treated by PTCSL, we used a holmium (Ho):YAG laser in 3 cases since 1999. To our knowledge, there have been no reports describing the use of Ho:YAG lasers to treat hepatolithiasis. Also, board-shaped stones can be sufficiently pulverized without inducing hemorrhage from the bile duct wall.

Conclusions  According to the current therapeutic strategy for hepatolithiasis, hepatectomy seems to be the most effective treatment for selected patients with isolated left hepatolithiasis if other surgical procedures cannot remove all the related lesions. In addition, PTCSL seems to be performed first in isolated right hepatolithiasis and bilateral lobe type hepatolithiasis. In PTCSL procedures, favorable results have been obtained using the Ho:YAG laser for fracturing intrahepatic stones.


From the Second Department of Surgery, Wakayama Medical University, School of Medicine, Wakayama, Japan.


RELATED ARTICLE

Archives of Surgery Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Surg. 2002;137(2):229-230.
FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Liver Resection for Primary Intrahepatic Stones: A Single-Center Experience
Nuzzo et al.
Arch Surg 2008;143:570-573.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2002 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.