Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Treatment of choledocholithiasis with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) ± transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is associated with fewer procedures and shorter length of stay (LOS) compared to preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by LC. Fluoroscopy is required for both LCBDE and ERCP but fluoroscopic time (FT) and radiation dose (RD) in LCBDE has not been studied.
Methods: The Choledocholithiasis Alliance for Research, Education, and Surgery (CARES) Working Group conducted this retrospective study on pediatric patients with suspected choledocholithiasis who received IOC. Demographics, type of LCBDE, FT and RD during IOC ± LCBDE, were analyzed. Statistical analysis was completed using Microsoft Excel and R software.
Results: From five centers, 157 patients were identified (79 without LCBDE, 78 with LCBDE). Wire access into the duodenum was successful in 67 patients (86%) and 64 patients (82%) had successful duct clearance. Median FT for all LCBDE cases was 3.3 min [1.6, 6.7] and RD was 59.8 mGy [30.1, 125.0] with no difference between successful and unsuccessful duct clearance (66.7 mGy [29.0, 115.0], 55.8 mGy [35.8, 154.1], respectfully; p = 0.51).
Conclusion: Although both ERCP and LCBDE approaches result in fluoroscopic radiation exposure, FT, and RD in LCBDE have not previously been studied and are inadequately described in ERCP. Limiting radiation exposure in children is essential and fluoroscopy stewardship is a key component of pediatric safety in LCBDE.
Level Of Evidence: Level III.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2024.08.009 | DOI Listing |