Users Online : 47 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
  Search
 
  
 ¤   Similar in PUBMED
 ¤  Search Pubmed for
 ¤  Search in Google Scholar for
 ¤Related articles
 ¤   Article in PDF (125 KB)
 ¤   Citation Manager
 ¤   Access Statistics
 ¤   Reader Comments
 ¤   Email Alert *
 ¤   Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


 ¤  Abstract
 ¤ Introduction
 ¤ Discussion
 ¤ Conclusion
 ¤  References
 ¤  Article Figures

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1400    
    Printed43    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded115    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 


 
 Table of Contents     
HOW WE DO IT DIFFERENTLY
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 48-50
 

Combined laparoscopic cholecystectomy with ileostomy reversal: A method of delayed definitive management of postoperative gallstone pancreatitis


Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois 60153, USA

Date of Submission08-Jun-2012
Date of Acceptance10-Nov-2012
Date of Web Publication6-Jan-2014

Correspondence Address:
Gaurav V Kulkarni
Department of Surgery, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois 60153
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0972-9941.124482

Rights and Permissions

 ¤ Abstract 

Traditional management of gallstone pancreatitis (GP) has been to perform cholecystectomy during the same hospital admission after resolution. However, when GP develops in the immediate postoperative period from a major colorectal operation, cholecystectomy may be fraught with difficulty due to the inflammatory response that occurs. Thus, delaying cholecystectomy until the inflammatory response subsides may be worthwhile, and it maximizes the chances of completing the cholecystectomy laparoscopically. We have described our management of 2 patients with GP occurring after colorectal operations, which required proximal diverting ileostomy. In both cases, we deferred management of GP with either endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or medical conservative measures during the acute attack and performed laparoscopic cholecystectomy during ostomy reversal surgery utilizing the existing ostomy takedown site for port placement. Both patients tolerated this management well.


Keywords: Colorectal resection, gall stone pancreatitis, ileostomy, laparoscopic cholecystectomy


How to cite this article:
Kulkarni GV, Sarker S, Eberhardt JM. Combined laparoscopic cholecystectomy with ileostomy reversal: A method of delayed definitive management of postoperative gallstone pancreatitis. J Min Access Surg 2014;10:48-50

How to cite this URL:
Kulkarni GV, Sarker S, Eberhardt JM. Combined laparoscopic cholecystectomy with ileostomy reversal: A method of delayed definitive management of postoperative gallstone pancreatitis. J Min Access Surg [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 May 23];10:48-50. Available from: http://www.journalofmas.com/text.asp?2014/10/1/48/124482



 ¤ Introduction Top


The traditional management of gallstone pancreatitis (GP) has been to perform cholecystectomy during the same hospital admission after resolution. [1] However, when GP develops in the immediate postoperative period from a major colorectal operation, cholecystectomy may be fraught with difficulty due to the inflammatory response that occurs. Thus, delaying cholecystectomy until the inflammatory response subsides may be worthwhile, and it maximizes the chances of completing the cholecystectomy laparoscopically. The best management strategy for GP under these circumstances is not well described. Here, we have described our management of 2 patients with GP occurring after colorectal operations requiring proximal diverting ileostomy.

Case 1

A 31-year-old male with adenomatous polyposis coli gene mutation and familial adenomatous polyposis presented prophylactic surgical treatment. His preoperative endoscopic evaluation revealed no duodenal or ampullary pathology. He underwent an uncomplicated laparoscopic total proctocolectomy with ileal j-pouch anal anastomosis and diverting loop ileostomy. On postoperative day (POD) 8, he developed acute epigastric and right upper quadrant (RUQ) pain. His vital signs were normal and clinical exam was unrevealing. Laboratory studies revealed a white blood cell (WBC) count of 14,000, serum lipase and amylase of 1300, and normal bilirubin. Ultrasonography revealed gallbladder sludge. A diagnosis of GP was made. He was placed on bowel rest with IV hydration until pancreatitis improved clinically and biochemically. Cholecystectomy was deferred until planned ileostomy reversal. To decrease the risk of recurrent episodes of GP, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy (ERCP/S) was performed. He was discharged on POD 17. The patient then underwent ileostomy reversal and cholecystectomy as described below 6 weeks later.

Case 2

A 44-year-old male with a history of sigmoid colectomy for endoscopically unresectable adenoma presented to us with rectal bleeding. Colonoscopy revealed recurrent sessile mass at the colorectal anastomosis. Biopsy revealed villous adenoma with high grade dysplasia. He underwent re-do low anterior resection with diverting loop ileostomy. He had an uneventful recovery and was discharged on POD 10. However, 4 days later he presented with epigastric and RUQ abdominal pain. The patient's clinical examination revealed mild epigastric tenderness. Laboratory studies revealed a WBC count of 13,000, lipase and amylase above 400, and normal bilirubin. Ultrasonography revealed gallstones (GS). GP was diagnosed and then managed non-operatively, similar to our first case. He refused ERCP/S. After discharging, the patient returned in 6 weeks for ileostomy reversal and cholecystectomy as described below.

Surgical Technique

In both cases, anastomosis was found to be healed on pouchogram and pouchoscopy at 6 weeks postoperatively. After establishing general anesthesia and administration of pre-incisional antibiotics, the operation began with mobilization of the ileostomy using a peristomal incision. The terminal portion of each limb was resected with a stapler. The proximal and distal portions were marked with different colored sutures and placed within the abdomen. The fascial defect was then closed to approximately 1.5≈cm. A 12-mm balloon-tipped port was placed through the residual defect for the laparoscope. Pneumoperitoneum was established. Three 5 mm ports were placed in the RUQ away from any intra-abdominal adhesions [Figure 1]. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with cholangiogram was performed in the usual fashion. The gallbladder was removed using a laparoscopic specimen bag through the 12 mm port. Next, the fascial aperture was reopened. The two limbs of ileum were eviscerated in proper anatomic position using the colored sutures. A standard side-to-side stapled anastomosis was created. The fascia was then closed with interrupted absorbable sutures. The skin was left open. Both patients had unremarkable recoveries.
Figure 1: Ostomy site diagram and port placement

Click here to view



 ¤ Discussion Top


About 20% of patients harboring asymptomatic GS develop symptoms requiring cholecystectomy 3-5 years following colorectal surgery. [2] The mechanism is unclear, but studies have implicated changes in the enterohepatic circulation and cholesterol metabolism. [3],[4] The potential for GS related symptoms in these patients caused some to recommend cholecystectomy as an incidental procedure during the time of the index colorectal operation. [2] Proponents feel that this practice spares patients future complications and the morbidity of another operation. However, incidental surgery can be associated with additional risks and remains controversial.

Previous studies do not focus on the immediate postoperative period or comment on GP specifically. Therefore, the true incidence of this particular postoperative complication is unknown. In the absence of good data, we must rely on what is known about managing routine GP. Most patients presenting with GP undergo cholecystectomy during the same hospital admission to prevent the potential morbidity of future bouts. In our cases, both patients had recent major operations and were within the maximal inflammatory response phase. As such, we felt that delaying cholecystectomy would be preferable. This is also supported by the literature in the management of severe GS pancreatitis. [5] ERCP/S can be used as a temporizing procedure to prevent recurrent episodes of GP while awaiting cholecystectomy. [6] In addition, both of our patients had stomas that were planned to be reversed 6-8 weeks after the initial operation and, thus, provided the opportunity for a combined operation.

The technique we used is straightforward. Ports for laparoscopic procedures are routinely placed at sites of planned stomas in order to minimize the number of incisions. [7] Using the stoma site for the camera avoids an extra incision and is away from the midline, where adhesions are expected from previous operations. We feel that delaying the completion of the anastomosis until after cholecystectomy and marking the proximal and distal limbs are important to avoid trauma to the anastomosis and to prevent un-intended twisting of the bowel.


 ¤ Conclusion Top


Complications attributable to GS in the immediate postoperative period following colorectal surgery are difficult to manage. When the complication is GP, the episode is mild and resolves with non-operative measures, it may be preferable to delay cholecystectomy until the postoperative inflammatory response subsides. When the index operation is the first stage of a planned 2-stage operation, delaying the cholecystectomy seems even more attractive. As seen in these two cases, the fascial aperture of the ileostomy site can be easily used for the laparoscope, and combining the two operations is straightforward.

 
 ¤ References Top

1.Alimoglu O, Ozkan OV, Sahin M, Akcakaya A, Eryilmaz R, Bas G. Timing of cholecystectomy for acute biliary pancreattis: Outcomes of cholecystectomy on first admission and after recurrent biliary pancreatitis. World J Surg 2003;27:256-9.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]    
2.Juhasz ES, Wolff BG, Meagher AP, Kluiber RM, Weaver AL, van Heerden JA. Incidental cholecystectomy during colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 1994;219:467-74.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]    
3.Nissinen MJ, Gylling H, Järvinen HJ, Miettinen TA. Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, conventional ileostomy and ileorectal anastomosis modify cholesterol metabolism. Dig Dis Sci 2004;49:1444-53.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Akerlund JE, Einarsson C. Effects of colectomy on bile composition, cholesterol saturation and cholesterol crystal formation in humans. Int J Colorectal Dis 2000;15:248-52.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.Nealon WH, Bawduniak J, Walser EM. Appropriate timing of cholecystectomy in patients who present with moderate to severe gallstone-associated acute pancreatitis with peripancreatic fluid collections. Ann Surg 2004;239:741-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    
6.Hussain A, Singhal T, Ansari T, El-Hasani S. Recurrent acute biliary pancreatitis: The protective role of cholecystectomy and endoscopic sphincterotomy. Surg Endosc 2010;24:971.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.Koh DC, Law CW, Kristian I, Cheong WK, Tsang CB. Hand-assisted laparoscopic abdomino-perineal resection utilizing the planned end colostomy site. Tech Coloproctol 2010;14:201-6.  Back to cited text no. 7
[PUBMED]    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
 

    

© 2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04