Surgeon versus radiologist interpretation of intraoperative cholangiography in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a population-based study

Abstract Introduction In laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) is recommended to clarify biliary anatomy, detect choledocholithiasis and identify complications. IOC interpretation may be performed by either surgeons or radiologists, but it remains unclear which approach is preferable. This study investigates how the type of medical specialist interpreting the IOC affects surgical outcomes and operating time. Method All LCs registered in GallRiks between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2020, were included. A complementary survey was distributed to all participating units to determine local IOC interpretation practices. Registry and survey data were linked and outcomes were analysed using mixed model analysis and logistic regression. Result A total of 118.556 procedures from 61 surgical units were included. Operating time was longer when radiologists assessed the IOC (mean differences 11.3 minutes; 95% CI 1.60-20.89). Intraoperative complications were more common with radiologist interpretation (2.6% vs 1.5%; OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.52-0.63), while postoperative complications were slightly higher with surgeon-led interpretation (8.2% vs 7.3%; OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.20). Bile duct injury rates (0.3%; OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.79-1.27) and detection of choledocholithiasis (12.4% vs 12.6%; OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90-0.99) were similar between groups. Discussion Surgeon-led IOC interpretation is associated with shorter operating times and fewer intraoperative complications, without increasing the risk of bile duct injury or missed choledocholithiasis. Routine radiologist involvement may be unnecessary and an inefficient use of resources.