Treatment of hydatid cyst of the liver ranges from surgical intervention (conventional or laparoscopic approach) to percutaneous drainage and to medical therapy. The aim of this systematic review was to provide "evidence-based" answers to the following questions: Should chemotherapy be used alone or in association with surgery? What is the best surgical technique? When is the percutaneous aspiration injection and reaspiration technique (PAIR) indicated? An extensive electronic search of the relevant literature without limiting it to the English language was carried out using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Key words used for the final search were "hydatid cyst," "liver," "treatment," "meta analysis," "randomized controlled trial," "prospective study," "retrospective study." All relevant studies reporting the assessment of one modality of treatment or a comparison of two or several therapeutic methods to treat hydatid cyst of the liver and published in a peer-reviewed journal were considered for analysis. This systematic review allowed us to conclude that chemotherapy is not the ideal treatment for uncomplicated hydatid cysts of the liver when used alone (level II evidence, grade B recommendation). The level of evidence was too low to help decide between radical or conservative treatment (level IV evidence, grade C recommendation). Omentoplasty associated with radical or conservative treatment is efficient in preventing deep abscesses (level II evidence, grade A recommendation). The laparoscopic approach is safe (level IV evidence, grade C recommendation). Drug treatment associated with surgery (level II evidence, grade C recommendation) requires further studies. Percutaneous drainage associated with albendazole therapy is safe and efficient in selected patients (level II evidence, grade B recommendation). The level of evidence is low concerning treatment of complicated cysts.

This systematic review was designed to provide "evidence-based" answers to identify the best treatment for a complicated hydatid cyst of the liver and the appropriate management of disseminated cystic echinococcosis. An extensive electronic search of the relevant literature was performed using Medline and the Cochrane Library. This systematic review enabled us make to determine the best treatment options for the following conditions. Liver hydatid cysts ruptured into the biliary tract: Common bile duct exploration should be conducted using intraoperative cholangiography and choledoscopy. When the biliary tract is cleared of all cystic content, T-tube drainage should be sufficient. The principal difficulty concerned the management of the large biliocystic fistula: suture or internal transfistulary drainage or fistulization. Medical treatment is indicated in association with surgery for 3 months postoperatively. During the preoperative period, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) combined with preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) may decrease the incidence of postoperative external fistula. Liver hydatid cysts involving the thorax: An abdominal approach is mandatory when common bile duct drainage is required, and it may be sufficient to treat a direct rupture into bronchi. An acute abdomen, owing to Liver hydatid cysts ruptured into peritoneum, requires an emergent operation. Medical treatment should be associated. Cystic echinococcosis of the lung: Surgery is still the main therapeutic option to remove the cyst, suture bronchial fistula if necessary, followed by capitonnage. Osseous cystic echinococcosis: Wide surgical excision is recommended. Cystic echinococcosis of the heart: Cystopericystectomy is the "gold standard" procedure but is sometimes unsuitable for particular sites. Cystic echinococcosis of the kidney: Cystectomy with pericystectomy is feasible in 75% of cases; nephrectomy must be reserved for destroyed kidney. Multiple associated cystic echinococcosis locations: Complicated cysts should be treated with high priority. In case of several cysts in the liver, spleen, and peritoneum, removal of all cysts in the same intervention is indicated when there is no threat to the life of the patient. Otherwise, a planned reoperation should be considered.

The large biliocystic fistula (> 5 mm) encountered with hydatic cyst of the liver produces clinical manifestations only when it allows the hydatic cyst content to pass into the common bile duct. Various therapeutic problems occur. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of the therapeutic methods used by 14 Tunisian centers to treat this specific aspect of the hydatic cyst of the liver associated with a large biliocystic fistula. This study concerned a period of 5 years between January 1988 and December 1992, and it included 244 cases associated with hydatic content in the common bile duct (158 cases) and with cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis (2 cases); 127 patients underwent an emergency operation (52%). The surgical procedures performed consisted in radical procedures (24 cases, 9.8%) and conservative procedures (220 cases, 90.2%). The latter included 52 cases of internal transfistulary drainage, 140 unroofing procedures associated in 20 cases with the fistula, in 93 cases with suture of the fistula, and in 27 cases with direct fistulization. In the 28 remaining cases, through the choledoctomy evacuation of the parasite was performed. The common bile duct was approached in 180 cases (73.7%). The postoperative course was uneventful in 57% of the cases and complicated in 38.5% others. The mortality rate was 4.5%. In conclusion, the presence (or not) of hydatic material in the common bile duct did not seem to be a determinant of the surgical procedure choice and did not influence the results. The only difficulty with treatment was the large biliocystic fistula itself. The internal transfistulary drainage on one part, and the unroofing procedure associated with suturing healthy fistula tissue and to omentoplasty or capitonnage of the remaining cavity on the other part, were easily performed and constituted efficient methods. Radical methods constituted operations that had excellent results, but they were feasible in only 10% of the cases.

No abstract

Because BDI is a rare event, it is difficult to generate evidence for prevention, diagnosis, or the management of BDI from clinical studies. Nevertheless, the panel has formulated recommendations. Due to the currently limited evidence, a European registry should be considered to collect and analyze more valid data on BDI upon which recommendations can be based.