Complications following Repair of Extrahepatic Bile Duct Injuries after Blunt Abdominal Trauma

• Published in: World journal of surgery Vol. 25; no. 10; pp. 1313 - 1316
• Main Authors: Rodriguez‐Montes, Jose A., Rojo, Esther, García‐Sancho Martín, Luis
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin/Heidelberg Springer‐Verlag 01.10.2001; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Abdominal Injuries - complications; Adult; Anastomosis, Surgical; Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic - injuries; Bile Ducts, Extrahepatic - surgery; Cholecystectomy; Choledochostomy; Common Bile Duct - injuries; Common Bile Duct - surgery; Female; Gallbladder - injuries; Hepatic Duct, Common - injuries; Hepatic Duct, Common - surgery; Humans; Lacerations - etiology; Lacerations - surgery; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Rupture; Stents; Wounds, Nonpenetrating - complications
• ISSN: 0364-2313; 1432-2323
• DOI: 10.1007/s00268-001-0116-2

. Extrahepatic bile duct traumatic injuries are extremely rare and their treatment is difficult and with several controversies. The aim of this study was to offer some more clinical information on their surgical repair and outcome. We present seven patients with extrahepatic biliary tract lesions after blunt abdominal trauma, (isolated gallbladder lesions were excluded) four males and three females from 23 to 51 years of age (mean age 35.1 years). All patients had suffered high‐energy blunt abdominal trauma and presented associated injuries, mostly liver trauma and lung contusions. Six gallbladder lesions and six common bile duct injures were identified; a right hepatic duct laceration and a left hepatic duct transection were also present. Injuries were treated either with primary repair or with duct‐jejunal anastomoses with Roux‐en‐Y reconstruction. Principal complications were postoperative anastomotic leakage (1 case) and recurrent cholangitis (3 cases) with or without stricture. Not‐diagnosed injuries caused substantial morbidity. We prefer and recommend the use of primary repair in partial ruptures with no significant tissue loss and biliary‐enteric anastomoses in large injuries and complete transections because they offer the best long‐term drainage with less risk of stricture formation than end‐to‐end anastomoses. We defend the use of long duration (6 to 9 months) transanastomotic stents.