Clinical Consequences of Prompt vs. Delayed Treatment for Bile Duct Injuries

Abstract

Background: Evaluating the results of both prompt and postponed treatment for bile duct injuries1. Methods: One hundred patients, aged between 20 and 50 years, of any gender, who had suffered bile duct injuries, were separated into two groups. Group I underwent early repair (within 48 hours from the initial procedure), while Group II underwent delayed repair (more than 48 hours after the initial procedure). For all patients, details regarding operative findings, injury classification, procedural variables, and mortality were meticulously documented. Results: No significant differences were found among the parameters (P > 0.05). The etiology of the injuries included cholecystectomy in 35 cases in Group I and 20 cases in Group II, non-biliary abdominal procedures in 20 cases in Group I and 22 cases in Group II, and abdominal trauma in 6 cases in Group I and 9 cases in Group II. The Strasburg-Bismuth classification revealed that E1 was the most common classification in both groups, with 24 cases in Group I and 20 cases in Group II, followed by E2 with 22 cases in Group I and 28 cases in Group II4. Conclusion: Patients who underwent both early and delayed repair of Common Bile Duct Injuries (CBDI) experienced similar outcomes.