Volume : 09, Issue : 10, October – 2022



Authors :

Talha Bin Awan, Muhammad Uzair, Maryam Khan

Abstract :

Around 1990, laparoscopic cholecystectomy became widely used and has since been shown to be beneficial to patients. But it was linked to a dramatic rise in serious bile duct injuries. Biliary injuries are unpleasant, expensive, and the subject of lawsuits. Although they are mostly iatrogenic and not the result of neglect, they lessen the benefits of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Misidentification is the leading cause of serious bile duct damage. The common bile duct is believed to be the cystic duct and is separated in the “classical damage.” Additionally, the cavernous conduit or cystic artery may be misinterpreted for abnormal hepatic ducts. The cystic duct and the cystic artery are the targets of the Critical View of Safety (CVS), a technique for target identification. Today, CVS is extensively taught and used. Its usage complies with the established standards of care and is recognized as a reliable method of identifying cystic formations. The goal of this surgical viewpoint is to assess if CVS has become the sole procedure recognized for identifying structures during laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Keywords: Critical View, Safety, Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Standard, Care, Ductal Identification Method.

Cite This Article:

Please cite this article in press Talha Bin Awan et al, The Critical View Of Safety: Why Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Standard Of Care Does Not Require It As The Only Ductal Identification Method., Indo Am. J. P. Sci, 2022; 09(10).


1. Mohan Rao Voruganti, D., Mohammed, N., & Aditya, V. (2022). Evaluation of “critical view of safety” in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. International Journal of Surgery, 6(1), 01-05.
2. Sherrill, W. C., & Brunt, L. M. (2022). The Critical View of Safety: Creating Procedural Safety Benchmarks. In The SAGES Manual of Quality, Outcomes and Patient Safety (pp. 663-685). Springer, Cham.
3. Terho, P., Sallinen, V., Lampela, H., Harju, J., Koskenvuo, L., & Mentula, P. (2022). The Critical View of Safety in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: User Trends Among Residents and Consultants. Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques, 32(4), 453-461.
4. Jin, Y., Liu, R., Chen, Y., Liu, J., Zhao, Y., Wei, A., … & Li, A. (2022). Critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A prospective investigation from both cognitive and executive aspects. Frontiers in surgery, 9.
5. Afaque, M. Y., Rehman, N., Alam, J., Varshney, H., Rizvi, S. A. A., & Aslam, M. (2022). Importance of Critical View of Safety, Rouviere’s Sulcus, and Minimal Energy Device Usage in Reducing Biliary Injury in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Surgery Insights.
6. Iftikhar, M., Ahmad, S., & Aziz, K. (2022). Comparative Study of Critical View of Safety vs Infundibular Technique in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Journal of Gandhara Medical and Dental Science, 9(2), 8-12.
7. Narlapati, H. M., Telian, S. H., Peirce, G. S., & Kaplan, A. J. (2022). A Type V Aberrant Right Hepatic Duct Branching from the Cystic Duct: The Paramount Importance of Intraoperative Cholangiography in Supplementing the Critical View of Safety Technique in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. CRSLS: MIS case reports from SLS, 9(2).
8. Terho, P. (2022). Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy For Cholecystitis and Gallstone Disease: Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes, and the Role of the Surgeon and Surgical Technique.
9. Jin, H., Yang, J., Lu, L., & Cui, M. (2022). Propensity score matching between conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy and indocyanine green cholangiography–guided laparoscopic cholecystectomy: observational study. Lasers in Medical Science, 37(2), 1351-1359.
10. Broderick, R. C., Li, J. Z., Huang, E. Y., Blitzer, R. R., Lee, A. M., Serra, J. L., … & Horgan, S. (2022). Lighting the Way with Fluorescent Cholangiography in Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Reviewing 7 Years of Experience. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 235(5), 713-723.
11. Lucocq, J., Taylor, A., Driscoll, P., Naqvi, S., MacMillan, A., Bennett, S., … & Robertson, A. G. (2022). Laparoscopic Lumen-guided cholecystectomy in face of the difficult gallbladder. Surgical Endoscopy, 1-8.
12. Lucocq, J., Hamilton, D., Scollay, J., & Patil, P. (2022). Subtotal Cholecystectomy Results in High Peri-operative Morbidity and Its Risk-Profile Should be Emphasised During Consent. World Journal of Surgery, 46(12), 2955-2962.
13. Choudhury, N., Choudhury, M. K., & Kowalski, R. B. (2022). Prevention of Common Bile Duct Injury: What Are we as Surgeons Doing to Prevent Injury. In The SAGES Manual of Quality, Outcomes and Patient Safety (pp. 923-932). Springer, Cham.
14. Khan, Z. U. (2022). Difficult Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy, Primum non nocere!. Pak J Surg, 38(1), 3-7.
15. Seretis, C., Zohdy, M., Padgett, B., & Janardhanan, P. (2022). Routine extensive dissection of the cystic duct during laparoscopic cholecystectomy to reduce the risk of residual choledocholithiasis: an unnecessary step and a potentially hazardous concept. Gastroenterology Review/Przegląd Gastroenterologiczny, 17(1), 67-72.
16. Lunevicius, R. (2022). Cholecystectomy: Advances and Issues. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 11(12), 3534.
17. Santorelli, J., & Costantini, T. (2022). Acute Cholecystitis. In The Acute Management of Surgical Disease (pp. 197-209). Springer, Cham.
18. Brunt, L. M. (2022). Should We Utilize Routine Cholangiography?. Advances in Surgery, 56(1), 37-48.
19. She, W. H., Cheung, T. T., Chan, M. Y., Chu, K. W., Ma, K. W., Tsang, S. H., … & Lo, C. M. (2022). Routine use of ICG to enhance operative safety in emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Surgical Endoscopy, 36(6), 4442-4451.
20. Mistry, J., Rao, S., & Vala, H. (2022). Our Experience of Zero Bile Duct Injury in Consecutive 427 Laparoscopic Cholecystectomies: a Safe Zone of Dissection in Reference to Right Posterior Pedicle. Indian Journal of Surgery, 84(3), 491-497.