We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation | Pacific Coast Surgical Association

Nationwide Assessment of Trends in Choledocholithiasis Management in the United States From 1998 to 2013 ONLINE FIRST

Michael W. Wandling, MD, MS1,2,3,4; Eric S. Hungness, MD1; Emily S. Pavey, MA1,2; Jonah J. Stulberg, MD, PhD, MPH1,2,3; Ben Schwab, MD1; Anthony D. Yang, MD1,2,3; Michael B. Shapiro, MD1; Karl Y. Bilimoria, MD, MS1,2,3,4; Clifford Y. Ko, MD, MS, MSHS4,5,6; Avery B. Nathens, MD, PhD7
[+] Author Affiliations
1Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
2Surgical Outcomes and Quality Improvement Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
3Center for Healthcare Studies, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
4Division of Research and Optimal Patient Care, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois
5Department of Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles
6Department of Surgery, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California
7Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
JAMA Surg. Published online August 24, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.2059
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Importance  There are currently 2 widely accepted treatment strategies for patients presenting to the hospital with choledocholithiasis. However, the rate of use for each strategy in the United States has not been evaluated, and their trends over time have not been described. Furthermore, an optimal management strategy for choledocholithiasis has yet to be defined.

Objective  To evaluate secular trends in the management of choledocholithiasis in the United States and to compare hospital length of stay between patients with choledocholithiasis treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP+LC) vs laparoscopic common bile duct exploration with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC).

Design, Setting, and Participants  In this cohort study, we studied patients with a primary diagnosis of choledocholithiasis that were included in the National Inpatient Sample between 1998 and 2013 from a representative sample of acute care hospitals in the United States. Patients with cholangitis or pancreatitis were excluded.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Unadjusted and risk-adjusted median hospital length of stay.

Results  Of the 37 207 patients included in our analysis, 36 048 (96.9%) were treated with ERCP+LC and 1159 (3.1%) were treated with LCBDE+LC. The mean (SD) age of patients treated with ERCP+LC was 50.7 (21.1) years and was 51.9 (20.9) years for those treated with LCBDE+LC; 25 788 (69.3%) were female. Analysis of the National Inpatient Sample data indicates that there are an average of 26 158 patients with choledocholithiasis admitted in the United States each year. The overall use of CBDE for patients with choledocholithiasis decreased from 39.8% of admissions in 1998 to 8.5% in 2013 (P < .001). A decrease was also seen for open CBDE (30.6% vs 5.5%; P < .001) and laparoscopic CBDE (9.2% vs 3.0%; P < .001) independently. Rates of management with LCBDE+LC decreased from 5.3% to 1.5% (P < .001), while rates of ERCP+LC increased from 52.8% to 85.7% (P < .001). The unadjusted median hospital length of stay was shorter for patients treated with LCBDE+LC than for those treated with ERCP+LC (3.0 vs 4.0 days; P < .001). After risk-adjustment, the median length of stay remained 0.5 days shorter for patients treated with LCBDE+LC than with ERCP+LC (3.5 vs 4.0 days; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance  This study highlights the marked decline in the use of both open and laparoscopic CBDE in the United States as well as the benefit to the length of stay LCBDE+LC has over ERCP+LC. Despite a persistent need for CBDE and the potential benefits of LCBDE+LC over ERCP+LC for managing choledocholithiasis, if current trends continue, CBDE may be at risk of disappearing from the surgical armamentarium.

Figures in this Article


Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 1.
CONSORT Diagram for Study Sample

CBDE indicates common bile duct exploration; ERCP, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; LC, laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Graphic Jump Location
Place holder to copy figure label and caption
Figure 2.
National Trends in Common Bile Duct Exploration for Choledocholithiasis From 1998 to 2013

Annual national estimates of the number of hospitalizations for choledocholithiasis were calculated from 1998 to 2013 using NIS discharge weights and SAS survey sampling and analysis procedures. All trends were assessed using logistic regression and were significant at P < .001. CBDE indicates common bile duct exploration.

Graphic Jump Location




Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles