Wait-and-see policy versus cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile-duct stones in high-risk patients with co-existing gallbladder stones: A prospective randomised trial

The role of cholecystectomy following endoscopic sphincterotomy and bile duct stone removal

INTRODUCTION

Choledocholithiasis is common, with patients usually treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and subsequent cholecystectomy to remove the presumed source of common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, previous investigations into the management of patients following ERCP have focused on recurrent CBD stones, negating the risks of cholecystectomy. This article appraises the role of cholecystectomy following successful endoscopic clearance of bile duct stones.

METHODS

Patients undergoing ERCP and CBD clearance for choledocholithiasis at St James's University Hospital January 2015-December 2018 were included. Patients were divided into those who received cholecystectomy and those managed non-operatively. Readmissions, operative morbidity, mortality and treatment costs were investigated.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and forty-four patients received ERCP and CBD clearance with 3.9 years follow-up. Two hundred and nine patients underwent cholecystectomy with 15% requiring complex surgery. Three hundred and seventy-three patients were non-operatively managed. Unplanned readmissions occurred in 15% following ERCP, mostly within two years. There was no difference in readmissions between the two groups. Accounting for the entire patient pathway, non-operative management was less expensive.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients do not require readmission following ERCP for CBD stones, and cholecystectomy did not reduce the risk of readmission. Few patients have recurrent CBD stones, but complex biliary surgery is frequently required. Routine cholecystectomy following ERCP needs to be re-evaluated and a more stratified approach to future risk developed.

National clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of symptomatic gallstone disease: 2021 recommendations from the Danish Surgical Society

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Gallstones are highly prevalent, and more than 9000 cholecystectomies are performed annually in Denmark. The aim of this guideline was to improve the clinical course of patients with gallstone disease including a subgroup of high-risk patients. Outcomes included reduction of complications, readmissions, and need for additional interventions in patients with uncomplicated gallstone disease, acute cholecystitis, and common bile duct stones (CBDS).

METHODS

An interdisciplinary group of clinicians developed the guideline according to the GRADE methodology. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were primarily included. Non-RCTs were included if RCTs could not answer the clinical questions. Recommendations were strong or weak depending on effect estimates, quality of evidence, and patient preferences.

RESULTS

For patients with acute cholecystitis, acute laparoscopic cholecystectomy is recommended (16 RCTs, strong recommendation). Gallbladder drainage may be used as an interval procedure before a delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with temporary contraindications to surgery and severe acute cholecystitis (1 RCT and 1 non-RCT, weak recommendation). High-risk patients are suggested to undergo acute laparoscopic cholecystectomy instead of drainage (1 RCT and 1 non-RCT, weak recommendation). For patients with CBDS, a one-step procedure with simultaneous laparoscopic cholecystectomy and CBDS removal by laparoscopy or endoscopy is recommended (22 RCTs, strong recommendation). In high-risk patients with CBDS, laparoscopic cholecystectomy is suggested to be included in the treatment (6 RCTs, weak recommendation). For diagnosis of CBDS, the use of magnetic resonance imaging or endoscopic ultrasound prior to surgical treatment is recommended (8 RCTs, strong recommendation). For patients with uncomplicated symptomatic gallstone disease, observation is suggested as an alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (2 RCTs, weak recommendation).

CONCLUSIONS

Seven recommendations, four weak and three strong, for treating patients with symptomatic gallstone disease were developed. Studies for treatment of high-risk patients are few and more are needed.

ENDORSEMENT

The Danish Surgical Society.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of gallstone disease treatment outcomes in early cholecystectomy versus conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy

Background

The effectiveness of early cholecystectomy for gallstone diseases treatment is uncertain compared with conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy.

Aims

To synthesise treatment outcomes of early cholecystectomy versus conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy in terms of its safety and effectiveness.

Design

We systematically searched randomised control trials investigating the effectiveness of early cholecystectomy compared with conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy. We pooled the risk ratios with a 95% CI, also estimated adjusted number needed to treat to harm.

Results

Of the 40 included studies for systematic review, 39 studies with 4483 patients are included in meta-analysis. Among the risk ratios of gallstone complications, pain (0.38, 0.20 to 0.74), cholangitis (0.52, 0.28 to 0.97) and total biliary complications (0.33, 0.20 to 0.55) are significantly lower with early cholecystectomy. Adjusted number needed to treat to harm of early cholecystectomy compared with conservative management/delayed cholecystectomy are, for pain 12.5 (8.3 to 33.3), biliary pancreatitis >1000 (50–100), common bile duct stones 100 (33.3 to 100), cholangitis (100 (25–100), total biliary complications 5.9 (4.3 to 9.1) and mortality >1000 (100 to100 000).

Conclusions

Early cholecystectomy may result in fewer biliary complications and a reduction in reported abdominal pain than conservative management.

PROSPERO registration number

2020 CRD42020192612.

Cholecystectomy outcomes after endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with choledocholithiasis: a meta-analysis

Background

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is the standard treatment for common bile duct stones. The reported findings regarding complications, such as biliary pancreatitis and cholangitis, differ between cholecystectomy after ES. The purpose of this study is to compare cholecystectomy outcomes after endoscopic treatment of common bile duct stones whether or not the incidence of recurrent pancreatitis and cholangitis is reduced, especially in high-risk patients.

Methods

We analyzed 8 studies, including 7 randomized controlled trials retrieved from the PubMed (1990–2019), Embase (1990–2019), and Cochrane (1990–2019) databases for trials comparing the two strategies for treatment of gallstones after ES. A related study on gallbladder removal after ES was acquired, followed by analysis of each group using RevMan. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated for categorical variables and differences in means were calculated for continuous variables.

Results

We retrieved a total of 8 studies, including seven randomized controlled trials and one retrospective study. A total of 12,717 patients were included in the study (4922 in the early cholecystectomy group and 7795 in the gallbladder in situ group). During the follow-up period, 41 patients had pancreatitis after ES in the cholecystectomy group and 177 patients in the wait-and-see group. The incidence of pancreatitis in the cholecystectomy group was significantly reduced (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.27–0.53; P < 0.00001; I² = 0%). The incidence of cholangitis and jaundice in the cholecystectomy group was also less than the preserved gallbladder group (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.26–0.38; P < 0.00001; I² = 0%). There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52–1.02; P = 0.07; I² = 14%). There was a significant difference in cholecystitis and biliary colic (RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.24–0.32; P < 0.00001; I² = 17%).

Conclusion

Early cholecystectomy after removal of common bile duct stones can effectively reduce biliary complications. This is still true for high-risk patients and has no significant effect on the mortality of patients. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is recommended after ES.

Role of Cholecystectomy After Endoscopic Sphincterotomy in the Management of Choledocholithiasis in High-risk Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) with subsequent cholecystectomy is the standard of care for the management of patients with choledocholithiasis. There is conflicting evidence in terms of mortality reduction, prevention of complications specifically biliary pancreatitis and cholangitis with the use of early cholecystectomy particularly in high-risk surgical and elderly patients.

AIMS

We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the early cholecystectomy versus wait and watch strategy after ES.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane database for randomized controlled trials comparing the 2 strategies in the management of choledocholithiasis after ES. Our primary outcome of interest was difference in mortality. We evaluated several secondary outcomes including difference in development of acute pancreatitis, biliary colic and cholecystitis, cholangitis and recurrent jaundice, nonbiliary adverse events, and length of hospital stay. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for categorical variables and difference in means was calculated for continuous variables. These were pooled using random effects model.

RESULTS

Seven studies with 916 patients (455 cholecystectomy group and 461 wait and watch group) were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled RR with 95% confidence interval for mortality was 1.43 (0.93-2.18), I=9%. In the high-risk patient group, pooled RR was 1.39 (0.64-3.03) and in low-risk population pooled RR was 1.53 (0.79-2.96). Pooled RR for acute pancreatitis was 1.64 (0.46-5.81) with no heterogeneity. There was no difference in the rate of acute pancreatitis patients based on high-risk versus low-risk patients. Pooled RR for occurrence of biliary colic and cholecystitis during follow-up was 9.82 (4.27-22.59), I=0%. Pooled RR for cholangitis and recurrent jaundice was 2.16 (1.14-4.07), I=0%. However, there was no difference in the rate of cholangitis between the 2 groups in low-risk patients. Length of stay was shorter in the wait and watch group with a pooled mean difference was -2.70 (-4.71, -0.70) with substantial heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Although we found no difference in mortality between the 2 strategies after ES, laparoscopic cholecystectomy should be recommended as it is associated with lower rates of subsequent recurrent cholecystitis, cholangitis, and biliary colic down the road even in high-risk surgical patients.

Gallbladder function predicts subsequent biliary complications in patients with common bile duct stones after endoscopic treatment?

BACKGROUND

In patients with common bile duct stones (CBDS) and intact gallbladder, further management for the gallbladder after the CBDS clearance is still controversial. The relationship between gallbladder motility and the biliary complications were seldom discussed. Our study is to predict the subsequent biliary complications by gallbladder function test using fatty meal sonography (FMS) in patients with CBDS who had been treated by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS

Patients with an intact gallbladder and CBDS after endoscopic clearance of bile duct were enrolled. Patients received a fatty meal sonography after liver function returned to normal. The fasting volume, residual volume, and gallbladder ejection fraction (GBEF) in FMS were measured. Relationships of patients' characteristics, gallbladder function and recurrent biliary complication were analyzed.

RESULTS

From 2011 to 2014, 118 patients were enrolled; 86 patients had calculus gallbladders, and 32 patients had acalculous gallbladders. After a mean follow- up of 33 months, 23 patients had recurrent biliary complications. Among 86 patients with calculus gallbladder, 15 patients had spontaneous clearance of gallbladder stones; 14 patients received cholecystectomy due to acute cholecystitis or recurrent colic pain with smooth postoperative courses. In the follow up period, six patients died of non-biliary causes. The GBEF is significant reduced in most patients with a calculus gallbladder in spite of stone color. Calculus gallbladder, alcohol drinking and more than one sessions of initial endoscopic treatment were found to be the risk factors of recurrent biliary complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Gallbladder motility function was poorer in patients with a calculus gallbladder, but it cannot predict the recurrent biliary complication. Since spontaneous clearance of gallbladder stone may occur, wait and see policy of gallbladder management after endoscopic treatment of CBDS is appropriate, but regular follow- up in those patients with risk factors for recurrence is necessary.

Updated guideline on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS)

Common bile duct stones (CBDS) are estimated to be present in 10-20% of individuals with symptomatic gallstones. They can result in a number of health problems, including pain, jaundice, infection and acute pancreatitis. A variety of imaging modalities can be employed to identify the condition, while management of confirmed cases of CBDS may involve endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, surgery and radiological methods of stone extraction. Clinicians are therefore confronted with a number of potentially valid options to diagnose and treat individuals with suspected CBDS. The British Society of Gastroenterology first published a guideline on the management of CBDS in 2008. Since then a number of developments in management have occurred along with further systematic reviews of the available evidence. The following recommendations reflect these changes and provide updated guidance to healthcare professionals who are involved in the care of adult patients with suspected or proven CBDS. It is not a protocol and the recommendations contained within should not replace individual clinical judgement.

Outcomes of early versus delayed cholecystectomy in patients with mild to moderate acute biliary pancreatitis: A randomized prospective study

BACKGROUND

In patients with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP), cholecystectomy is mandatory to prevent further biliary events, but the precise timing of cholecystectomy for mild to moderate disease remain a subject of ongoing debate. The aim of this study is to assess the outcomes of early versus delayed cholecystectomy. We hypothesize that early cholecystectomy as compared to delayed cholecystectomy reduces recurrent biliary events without a higher peri-operative complication rate.

METHODS

Patients with mild to moderate ABP were prospectively randomized to either an early cholecystectomy versus a delayed cholecystectomy group. Recurrent biliary events, peri-operative complications, conversion rate, length of surgery and total hospital length of stay between the two groups were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients were enrolled at a single public hospital. Of them, 38 were randomized to the early group and 34 patients to the delayed group. There were no differences regarding peri-operative complications (7.78% vs 11.76%; p = 0.700), conversion rate to open surgery (10.53% vs 11.76%; p = 1.000) and duration of surgery performed (80 vs 85 minutes, p = 0.752). Nevertheless, a greater rate of recurrent biliary events was found in the delayed group (44.12% vs 0%; p ≤ 0.0001) and the hospital length of stay was longer in the delayed group (9 vs 8 days, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

In mild to moderate ABP, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy reduces the risk of recurrent biliary events without an increase in operative difficulty or perioperative morbidity.