EUS versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for patients with intermediate probability of bile duct stones: a prospective randomized trial

The Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Endoscopic Ultrasound Connection: Unity Is Strength, or the Endoscopic Ultrasonography Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Concept

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are both crucial for the endoscopic management of biliopancreatic diseases: the combination of their diagnostic and therapeutic potential is useful in many clinical scenarios, such as indeterminate biliary stenosis, biliary stones, chronic pancreatitis and biliary and pancreatic malignancies. This natural and evident convergence between EUS and ERCP, which by 2006 we were calling the "Endoscopic ultrasonography retrograde colangiopancreatography (EURCP) concept", has become a hot topic in the last years, together with the implementation of the therapeutic possibilities of EUS (from EUS-guided necrosectomy to gastro-entero anastomoses) and with the return of ERCP to its original diagnostic purpose thanks to ancillary techniques (extraductal ultrasound (EDUS), intraductal ultrasound (IDUS), cholangiopancreatoscopy with biopsies and probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE)). In this literary review, we retraced the recent history of EUS and ERCP, reported examples of the clinical applicability of the EURCP concept and explored the option of performing the two procedures in only one endoscopic session, with its positive implications for the patient, the endoscopist and the health care system. In the last few years, we also evaluated the possibility of combining EUS and ERCP into a single endoscopic instrument in a single step, but certain obstacles surrounding this approach remain.

Suspected common bile duct stones: reduction of unnecessary ERCP by pre-procedural imaging and timing of ERCP

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the procedure of choice to remove sludge/stones from the common bile duct (CBD). In a small but clinically important proportion of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis ERCP is negative. This is undesirable because of ERCP associated morbidity. We aimed to map the diagnostic pathway leading up to ERCP and evaluate ERCP outcome.

METHODS

We established a prospective multicenter cohort of patients with suspected CBD stones. We assessed the determinants that were associated with CBD sludge or stone detection upon ERCP.

RESULTS

We established a cohort of 707 patients with suspected CBD sludge or stones (62% female, median age 59 years). ERCP was negative for CBD sludge or stones in 155 patients (22%). Patients with positive ERCPs frequently had pre-procedural endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) imaging (44% vs. 35%; P = 0.045). The likelihood of ERCP sludge and stones detection was higher when the time interval between EUS or MRCP and ERCP was less than 2 days (odds ratio 2.35; 95% CI 1.25-4.44; P = 0.008; number needed to harm 7.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Even in the current era of society guidelines and use of advanced imaging CBD sludge or stones are absent in one out of five ERCPs performed for suspected CBD stones. The proportion of unnecessary ERCPs is lower in case of pre-procedural EUS or MRCP. A shorter time interval between EUS or MRCP increases the yield of ERCP for suspected CBD stones and should, therefore, preferably be performed within 2 days before ERCP.

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.

The value of endoscopic ultrasonography for differential diagnosis in obstructive jaundice of the distal common bile duct

INTRODUCTION

Obstructive jaundice is a common clinical disease of great significance; however, diagnosing it according to etiology, especially in patients with distal obstructive jaundice is difficult. The development of endoscopic ultrasonography has improved diagnostic methods. Endoscopic ultrasonography not only improves the accuracy of conventional endoscopic ultrasound technology in etiological diagnosis, but also offers several special endoscopic ultrasound technologies for diagnosing distal obstructive jaundice of the common bile duct. What's more, endoscopic ultrasonography can be used to treat distal obstructive jaundice of common bile duct.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the diagnostic value and applications of endoscopic ultrasonography for obstructive jaundice of the distal common bile duct.

EXPERT OPINION

This article summarizes the value of endoscopic ultrasonography in the etiological diagnosis, relevant treatment applications of distal obstructive jaundice and the limitations of endoscopic ultrasonography in some etiologies due to the lack of clear comparison with other imaging methods. We also provide new data for the future research direction of endoscopic ultrasonography in distal obstructive jaundice.

[Temporal sequence of bile duct clearance with simultaneous cholecystolithiasis or choledocholithiasis-Preoperative, intraoperative or postoperative?]

Approximately 10% of patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis also have choledocholithiasis. The probability of this can be estimated on the basis of sonographic and laboratory chemistry parameters. If the probability is high, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) or cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) should be performed and if the probability is low, cholecystectomy can be performed without further diagnostics. If the findings are equivocal, further work-up should be performed to detect or exclude choledocholithiasis by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). If choledocholithiasis is detected, it can be treated by ERC preoperatively, intraoperatively or postoperatively or alternatively by laparoscopic cholangiography. Regarding the temporal sequence, there is no clear advantage of a specific time point; however, considering the high availability of ERCP in German-speaking countries, preoperative clearance of choledocholithiasis seems reasonable. With respect to the time interval between clearance of choledocholithiasis and cholecystectomy, a number of multicenter studies and a meta-analysis have shown that a short time interval or a procedure during the same period of hospitalization is advantageous.

Management of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis: Endoscopic and surgical approaches

Gallstone disease and complications from gallstones are a common clinical problem. The clinical presentation ranges between being asymptomatic and recurrent attacks of biliary pain requiring elective or emergency treatment. Bile duct stones are a frequent condition associated with cholelithiasis. Amidst the total cholecystectomies performed every year for cholelithiasis, the presence of bile duct stones is 5%-15%; another small percentage of these will develop common bile duct stones after intervention. To avoid serious complications that can occur in choledocholithiasis, these stones should be removed. Unfortunately, there is no consensus on the ideal management strategy to perform such. For a long time, a direct open surgical approach to the bile duct was the only unique approach. With the advent of advanced endoscopic, radiologic, and minimally invasive surgical techniques, however, therapeutic choices have increased in number, and the management of this pathological situation has become multidisciplinary. To date, there is agreement on preoperative management and the need to treat cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis, but a debate still exists on how to cure the two diseases at the same time. In the era of laparoscopy and mini-invasiveness, we can say that therapeutic approaches can be performed in two sessions or in one session. Comparison of these two approaches showed equivalent success rates, postoperative morbidity, stone clearance, mortality, conversion to other procedures, total surgery time, and failure rate, but the one-session treatment is characterized by a shorter hospital stay, and more cost benefits. The aim of this review article is to provide the reader with a general summary of gallbladder stone disease in association with the presence of common bile duct stones by discussing their epidemiology, clinical and diagnostic aspects, and possible treatments and their advantages and limitations.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Endoscopic Ultrasonography Versus the Gold Standard Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Detecting Common Bile Duct Stones

Background and objectives Stone in the biliary tract is one of the most common causes of hospitalization. However, it is difficult to determine the prevalence of gallstones in the general population because they are often asymptomatic. Thus, management lies in the proper clearance of the common bile duct (CBD) along with the removal of the gallbladder, for which it must be diagnosed on time with proper accuracy. Imaging modalities including magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) provide true visualization of choledocholithiasis with comparable sensitivities. The gold standard ERCP is an invasive procedure and may cause complications, such as pancreatitis, perforation, and bleeding. EUS is a minimally invasive procedure to assess the biliary tract using high-frequency sound waves. Until now the EUS has not been addressed much in our local tertiary care setups and this study was conducted to evaluate its accuracy in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. The objective of our study is to determine the diagnostic accuracy (specificity and sensitivity) of EUS versus ERCP for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. Materials and methods This retrospective study was conducted on patients suspected of having choledocholithiasis undergoing both EUS and ERCP based on their history, clinical symptoms, and laboratory test results including upper abdominal pain, deranged liver function enzymes, and a dilated CBD on radiology. EUS was initially performed for the diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary obstruction followed by one or more of the confirmatory criterion standard tests (including ERCP). In order to reduce the chances of passage of stone resulting in negative analysis, only those patients were included in which both procedures were conducted temporally close together (24-72 hours in most instances). The main outcome measures were diagnostic accuracy with the help of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) using a receiver operating characteristic curve. A total of 123 patients met the inclusion criteria via non-probability consecutive sampling methods. Results The mean age of our study population was 50.30 ± 13.91. We included 63 males (51.2%) and 60 females (48.8%). The most frequent indication for undergoing diagnostic procedures was deranged liver function tests (67.47%). The frequent comorbidities reported were hypertension (29.26%), diabetes (21.95%), chronic liver disease (16.26%), and ischemic heart disease (4.87%). Mean alkaline phosphatase and gamma-glutamyl transferase levels were markedly raised from the baseline in the study population. Post-ERCP complications were also reported in some of the study participants. About 85 patients (69.10%) were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis among the study participants. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS was compared with ERCP revealed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.930, standard error of 0.031, 95% confidence interval of 0.868-0.991, the sensitivity of 89.5%, specificity of 96.5%, positive predictive value of 91.9%, and negative predictive value of 95.3%. Conclusion It is recommended that ERCP can be selectively conducted or excluded in patients with biliary obstruction in case of EUS negative, thus minimizing the complications and morbidity associated with an invasive procedure, with our results showing a comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS.

Dilatation Therapy and Demographic Characteristics Significantly Influence the Amount of Propofol for Therapeutic Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiography

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Patients undergoing therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) may require different amounts of sedative agents depending on demographic characteristics, indication of ERC, and/or endoscopic intervention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients undergoing therapeutic ERC from 2008 - 2014 who received deep sedation with propofol ± midazolam.

RESULTS

A total of 2448 ERC procedures were performed in 781 patients. The cumulative per procedure propofol dose in the different groups was as follows: PSC 479 mg (±256), bile duct stones 356 mg (±187), benign stenosis/cholestasis 395 mg (±228), malignant stenosis 401 mg (±283), and postliver transplant complications 391 mg (±223) (p < 0.05). Multivariable analysis showed that dilatation therapy (p = 0.001), age (p = 0.001), duration of the intervention (p = 0.001), BMI (p = 0.001), gender (p = 0.001), platelet count (p = 0.003), and bilirubin (p = 0.043) influence independently the propofol consumption.

CONCLUSIONS

Demographic characteristics and endoscopic interventions have a distinct influence on the amount of sedation required for therapeutic ERC. Although the sedation-associated complication rate is low optimization of sedative regimens is a prime goal to further reduce adverse events of therapeutic ERC.

Efficacy of the Endoscopic Ultrasound-first Approach in Patients with Suspected Common Bile Duct Stone to Avoid Unnecessary Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography

Objective Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a safe and accurate examination for evaluating the presence of common bile duct stones (CBDSs). The EUS-first approach, where EUS is performed before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for patients suspected of having CBDSs, may help reduce the risk of ERCP-related adverse events and save manpower by avoiding unnecessary ERCP. To evaluate the efficacy of the EUS-first approach in patients with suspected CBDSs. Methods Between April 2012 and March 2016, 104 patients who underwent the EUS-first approach for suspected CBDSs were retrospectively evaluated. The relevant outcomes were the short- and long-term adverse event rates and the ERCP avoidance rate. Results EUS findings were positive for CBDSs in 52 patients, showed sludge formation or possible CBDSs in 4 patients, and were negative for CBDSs in 42 patients (but positive for other diseases in 6). Sixty-two patients (62/104, 59.6%) underwent ERCP, and proper treatments were successfully performed in all but 1 who underwent only cholangiography. In the remaining 42 patients (42/104, 40.4%), ERCP was omitted based on the EUS findings. Early adverse events were recognized in 0% of the EUS-only group and 8 patients (12.9%) in the EUS+ERCP group (p=0.02). Regarding late adverse events, recurrent CBDSs occurred in 1 patient (2.3%) in the EUS-only group and 2 (3.2%) in the EUS+ERCP group (p=1.0). Conclusion The EUS-first approach in patients with suspected CBDSs was useful for reducing early adverse events associated with ERCP without increasing the late adverse event rate, as EUS enabled the avoidance of unnecessary ERCP.

ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis

Each year choledocholithiasis results in biliary obstruction, cholangitis, and pancreatitis in a significant number of patients. The primary treatment, ERCP, is minimally invasive but associated with adverse events in 6% to 15%. This American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standard of Practice (SOP) Guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the endoscopic evaluation and treatment of choledocholithiasis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used to rigorously review and synthesize the contemporary literature regarding the following topics: EUS versus MRCP for diagnosis, the role of early ERCP in gallstone pancreatitis, endoscopic papillary dilation after sphincterotomy versus sphincterotomy alone for large bile duct stones, and impact of ERCP-guided intraductal therapy for large and difficult choledocholithiasis. Comprehensive systematic reviews were also performed to assess the following: same-admission cholecystectomy for gallstone pancreatitis, clinical predictors of choledocholithiasis, optimal timing of ERCP vis-à-vis cholecystectomy, management of Mirizzi syndrome and hepatolithiasis, and biliary stent therapy for choledocholithiasis. Core clinical questions were derived using an iterative process by the ASGE SOP Committee. This body developed all recommendations founded on the certainty of the evidence, balance of risks and harms, consideration of stakeholder preferences, resource utilization, and cost-effectiveness.

Long term outcome of EUS-based strategy for suspected choledocholithiasis but negative CT finding

OBJECTIVES

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines offered the risk-stratified approach in suspected choledocholithiasis. Previous studies have raised concern about the insufficient accuracy of the guideline, especially in high probability group. The purposes of this study were to authenticate the stratification and clinical predictors of the guidelines for suspected choledocholithiasis with no visible choledocholithiasis on computed tomography (CT) and to make clear the clinical strategy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out the retrospective single-center study of 156 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis but negative findings on CT who underwent EUS for about 8 years at Samsung Medical Center. We assessed the clinical predictors of the ASGE guidelines in predicting the presence of choledocholithiasis and the outcome of the EUS.

RESULTS

Fifty-three of the 156 patients had positive findings on EUS that included choledocholithiasis (n = 43, 27.6%) or obstructive papillitis (n = 10, 6.4%). Among the 53 patients, 51 (96.2%) had choledocholithiasis or obstructive papillitis on ERCP. The 101 patients of 103 patients with negative finding on EUS did not show biliary events during follow-up period. EUS accuracy was 98.7% (sensitivity 100%; specificity 98.1%). Among the 49 patients with high probability, 21 (42.9%) had choledocholithiasis on ERCP. In 107 patients who were classified as intermediate probability, 30 (27.3%) had choledocholithiasis. There were no complications related to EUS.

CONCLUSIONS

Not only intermediate probability group but also high probability group without definite acute cholangitis may require EUS. Application of EUS for suspected choledocholithiasis is highly accurate, safe and reduces unnecessary invasive ERCP in 57.1% of patients with high probability group.

The southwestern surgical congress multi-center trial on suspected common duct stones

BACKGROUND

Choledocholithiasis is present in up to 15% of cholecystectomy patients. Treatment can be surgical, endoscopic, or via interventional radiology. We hypothesized significant heterogeneity between hospitals exists in the approach to suspected common duct stones.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients that had a preoperative MRCP, endoscopic ultrasound, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram (ERCP), or intra-operative cholangiogram was performed. Comparisons were by Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests with significance of p < 0.05 for paired variables and p < 0.017 for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

Twelve participating institutions identified 1263 patients (409 men and 854 women) with a median age of 49 years (IQR: 31-94). Liver function tests (LFT's) were elevated in 939 patients (75%), median bilirubin level 1.75 mg/dl (IQ: 0.8-3.7 mg/dl) and median common duct size 7 mm (IQR 5-10 mm). The most common initial procedure was cholecystectomy with IOC at seven institutions, endoscopy at four and MRCP at one.

CONCLUSION

Significant variation exists within the surgical community regarding suspected common duct stones. These results underscore the need for a protocol for common duct stones to minimize multiple, redundant interventions.

Current clinical algorithms for predicting common bile duct stones have only moderate accuracy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A risk-stratified approach for selecting patients likely to harbor common bile duct (CBD) stones to proceed directly to endoscopic or surgical stone clearance, rather than undergo less invasive testing, has been proposed. We assessed the performance of three clinical algorithms used to predict CBD stones.

METHODS

All patients undergoing first-time endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in 2011-2012 as a result of suspected CBD stones were enrolled prospectively in a clinical database. Data such as imaging test findings and liver function tests (LFTs) were collected 48 h prior to and on the day of ERCP. Patients were stratified into different risk groups for harboring CBD stones according to three clinical algorithms using imaging and laboratory data. Findings on ERCP were used as gold standard. Performance characteristics of each algorithm were separately calculated for each time point of LFT assessment.

RESULTS

Overall, 186 patients were analyzed, 75% of whom presented CBD stones on ERCP. Proportion of patients categorized as high-risk for harboring CBD stones varied among the three algorithms (67% vs 73% vs 56%). Also, the algorithms showed only moderate, albeit comparable, accuracy for predicting the presence of CBD stones (0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.68 vs 0.68, 95% CI 0.63-0.67 vs 0.59, 95% CI 0.57-0.61). Similar results were obtained when performance characteristics were recalculated using LFT from 48 h prior to ERCP (data not shown).

CONCLUSION

Three diagnostic algorithms commonly used for predicting CBD stones have comparable but only moderate accuracy. Further research is warranted to improve risk stratification of patients with suspected CBD stones.

The role of endoscopic ultrasound in children with Pancreatobiliary and gastrointestinal disorders: a single center series and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the management of pancreatobiliary and digestive diseases is well established in adults, but it remains limited in children. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and clinical impact of EUS use in children.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively acquired database of consecutive pediatric (< 18 years) patients presenting an indication for EUS for pancreatobiliary and gastrointestinal disorders.

RESULTS

Between January 2010 and January 2016, 47 procedures were performed in 40 children (mean age of 15.1 ± 4.7 years; range 3-18). The majority of EUS (n = 32; 68.1%) were performed for pancreatobiliary and upper gastrointestinal pathologies, including suspected common bile duct stones (CBDs), acute biliary pancreatitis, recurrent/chronic pancreatitis, cystic pancreatic mass, recurrent hypoglycemia, duodenal polyp, gastric submucosal lesion, and perigastric abscess. In only 2 out of 18 children with suspected CBDs or acute biliary pancreatitis, EUS confirmed CBDs. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration was performed in 3 (6.4%) patients. Fifteen (31.9%) procedures were performed for lower gastrointestinal tract disorders, including suspected anal Crohn's disease, fecal incontinence, and encopresis. Overall, EUS had a significant impact on the subsequent clinical management in 87.2% of patients.

CONCLUSION

The present findings were consistent with results observed in the current relevant literature and support EUS as a safe and feasible diagnostic and therapeutic tool, which yields a significant clinical impact in children with pancreatobiliary and gastrointestinal disorders.

Diagnostic accuracy of EUS compared with MRCP in detecting choledocholithiasis: a meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy in head-to-head studies

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is a wide range of reported sensitivity and specificity for EUS and MRCP in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, with lack of a proper meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy by using head-to-head comparison. Here, we aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of EUS and MRCP in detecting choledocholithiasis by using appropriate methodology recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration.

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic literature search up to January 2017 was done by 2 reviewers for prospective cohort studies comparing EUS and MRCP to a reference standard for detecting choledocholithiasis. The acceptable reference standards were considered ERCP, intraoperative cholangiography, or clinical follow-up >3 months for negative cases. Quality of the included studies was measured by using the QUADAS-2 tool. A bivariate hierarchical model was used to perform the meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy. Summary receiver operating characteristics were developed and the area under the curve was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 5 of 32 studies were included. No study presented a high risk of bias. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.97 (range, 0.91-0.99) and 0.90 (range, 0.83-0.94) for EUS and 0.87 (range, 0.80-0.93) and 0.92 (range, 0.87-0.96) for MRCP. The overall diagnostic odds ratio of EUS was significantly higher than the one with MRCP (162.5 vs 79.0, respectively; P = .008). Further analysis showed that this was mainly due to the significantly higher sensitivity of EUS as compared with that of MRCP (P = .006). The specificity was not significantly different between 2 modalities (P = .42).

CONCLUSION

Both EUS and MRCP provide good diagnostic accuracy, with EUS providing statically better diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity, with comparable specificity. EUS should be incorporated in the diagnostic algorithm in patients suspected of choledocholithiasis whenever appropriate.

Diagnostic Value of Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Symptomatic Patients with High and Intermediate Probabilities of Common Bile Duct Stones and a Negative Computed Tomography Scan

Background/Aims

When computed tomography (CT) does not indicate choledocholithiasis in highly suspicious patients, there is no definite consensus on the subsequent modality. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) indicates fewer procedure-related complications than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and has a lower cost than magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of EUS in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis and negative CT findings.

Methods

Between March 2008 and November 2014, we retrospectively evaluated 200 patients with negative CT findings and high or intermediate probabilities of choledocholithiasis. All patients initially underwent EUS followed by ERCP as a confirmatory criterion standard. The primary outcome in these patients was the accuracy of EUS in the detection of choledocholithiasis. The secondary outcome was the clinical prediction of common bile duct (CBD) stones in this group.

Results

EUS indicated choledocholithiasis in 165 of the 200 patients, and ERCP confirmed choledocholithiasis in 161 patients (80.5%). The accuracy of EUS in the detection of choledocholithiasis was 94.0% (sensitivity, 97.5%; specificity, 79.5%; positive predictive value, 95.2%; negative predictive value, 88.6%). A multivariate analysis demonstrated that choledocholithiasis was strongly predicted by EUS detection of choledocholithiasis, an age >55 years and a clinical diagnosis of cholangitis.

Conclusions

An EUS-first approach is recommended for patients with suspected CBD stones and negative CT findings.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography Can Prevent Unnecessary Diagnostic Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Even in Patients with High Likelihood of Choledocholithiasis and Inconclusive Ultrasonography: Results of a Prospective Study

Background/Aims

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the initial therapy recommended for patients with high likelihood of choledocholithiasis. To determine whether endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) can prevent diagnostic ERCPs in patients with high probability of choledocholithiasis and inconclusive ultrasonography (US).

Methods

All patients with high likelihood of choledocholithiasis and negative US underwent EUS. ERCP was performed for the patients who showed a definite stone/sludge on EUS. Patients without choledocholithiasis were followed up for 3 months. The primary outcome was avoidance of diagnostic ERCP.

Results

We included 78 patients (51 women; 27 men). Of these, 25 and 7 (total 41%) were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis and sludge, respectively; stone/sludge was removed in 96.9% of the patients. EUS ruled out choledocholithiasis in 38 patients (48.7%). Two of them were found to have choledocholithiasis on follow-up. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value of EUS for detecting choledocholithiasis were 93.9%, 97.3%, 96.9%, and 94.7%, respectively. Unnecessary ERCP was avoided in 57.7% of the patients by using the EUS-first approach.

Conclusions

EUS is a highly accurate and safe procedure. EUS can replace ERCP as the initial investigation in patients with a high probability of choledocholithiasis. It avoids unnecessary ERCP; hence, decreasing related costs and complications.

Comparing cost-effectiveness between endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in diagnosis of common bile duct stone in patients with predefined risks: A study from a developing country

Background and Objectives:

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) achieves results comparable to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the diagnosis of common bile duct (CBD) stone, but studies from the western have shown EUS to be less expensive in patients with intermediate risk for CBD stones. The aim of this study was to compare the costs of EUS and ERCP in the diagnosis of CBD stones in a developing country.

Materials and Methods:

A prospective study was done with 141 patients with suspected CBD stones, categorized as having high or intermediate risk for CBD stone. All underwent EUS, and the high-risk patients had ERCP after the EUS. For intermediate-risk patients, an ERCP was done at the discretion of the attending physician. The CBD stone was confirmed by ERCP in patients who underwent both EUS and ERCP. Patients who received EUS only were followed up every 3 months for 1 year. The false negative rate in patients with EUS and ERCP was estimated in the clinical follow-up.

Result:

One hundred and forty-one patients (141: 83 females, 58 males) with a mean age ± standard deviation (SD) of 55.71 ±18.68 years were recruited. Ninety-four (94) patients underwent both EUS and ERCP. ERCP confirmed the diagnosis in 83 of 85 patients (97.6%) with CBD stone detected by EUS. Forty-seven (47) patients with a negative EUS and no ERCP done were symptom-free during the follow-up. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of EUS were 97.6%, 80%, 97.6%, and 80% respectively. An EUS-based strategy for high-risk patients was 15% more expensive than an ERCP-based strategy, but the EUS-based strategy reduced the cost to 37.78% less than the ERCP-based strategy in intermediate-risk patients. The EUS-based strategy was cost-saving when the CBD stone prevalence was less than 52.5%.

Conclusion:

EUS is safer and less costly than ERCP for CBD stone diagnosis in patients with intermediate risk.

Endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: Can they be successfully combined?

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have much in common, including their main indications (biliopancreatic disorders), powerful therapeutic capacities and a steep learning curve. Over the years they have evolved from novel diagnostic procedures to interventional therapeutic techniques, but along different paths (different scopes or devices and endoscopists specializing exclusively in one or the other technique). However, EUS has gradually developed into a therapeutic technique that requires skills in the use of ERCP devices and stents, leading some ERCP specialists to explore the therapeutic potential of EUS. The corresponding literature, which has grown exponentially, includes recent experiments on combining the two techniques, which have gradually come to be used in routine care in a number of centers, with positive technical, clinical and financial outcomes. We review EUS and ERCP as individual or combined procedures for managing biliopancreatic disorders.

Comparison Costs of ERCP and MRCP in Patients with Suspected Biliary Obstruction Based on a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of patients with suspected biliary obstruction remains unclear, and includes the possible performance of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

OBJECTIVES

To complete a cost analysis based on a medical effectiveness randomized trial comparing an ERCP-first approach with an MRCP-first approach in patients with suspected bile duct obstruction.

METHODS

The management strategies were based on a medical effectiveness trial of 257 patients over a 12-month follow-up period. Direct and indirect costs were included, adopting a societal perspective. The cost values are expressed in 2012 Canadian dollars.

RESULTS

Total per-patient direct costs were Can$3547 for ERCP-first patients and Can$4013 for MRCP-first patients. Corresponding indirect costs were Can$732 and Can$694, respectively. Causes for differences in direct costs included a more frequent second procedure and a greater mean number of hospital days over the year in patients of the MRCP-first group. In contrast, it is the ERCP-first patients whose indirect costs were greater, principally due to more time away from activities of daily living. Choosing an ERCP-first strategy rather than an MRCP-first strategy saved on average Can$428 per patient over the 12-month follow-up duration; however, there existed a large amount of overlap when varying total cost estimates across a sensitivity analysis range based on observed resources utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

This cost analysis suggests only a small difference in total costs, favoring the ERCP-first group, and is principally attributable to procedures and hospitalizations with little impact from indirect cost measurements.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Roles of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Pediatric Pancreaticobiliary Disorders

OBJECTIVES

The diagnostic role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in children has only recently been demonstrated, and that also to a lesser extent than in adults. Data on the technique's therapeutic indications remain scarce. We therefore sought to evaluate diagnostic and interventional EUS indications, safety, and impact in children with pancreaticobiliary disorders.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our single pediatric center records, covering a 14-year period.

RESULTS

From January 2000 to January 2014, 52 EUS procedures were performed in 48 children (mean age: 12 years; range: 2-17 years) with pancreaticobiliary disorders for the following indications: suspected biliary obstruction (n = 20/52), acute/chronic pancreatitis (n = 20), pancreatic mass (n = 3), pancreatic trauma (n = 7), and ampullary adenoma (n = 2). EUS was found to have a positive impact in 51 of 52 procedures, enabling us to avoid endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (n = 13 biliary; n = 6 pancreatic), focusing instead on endotherapy (n = 7 biliary; n = 14 pancreatic) or reorienting therapy toward surgery (n = 7). EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration was carried out on 12 patients for pancreatic tumor (n = 4), pancreatic cyst fluid analysis (n = 4), autoimmune pancreatitis (n = 2), and suspicion of biliary tumor (n = 2). A total of 13 therapeutic EUS procedures (11 children) were conducted, including 9 combined EUS-ERCP procedures (7 children, mean age: 8 years, range: 4-11 years), 3 EUS-guided pseudocyst drainage (2 children), and 1 EUS-guided transgastric biliary drainage.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study reports on a large pediatric EUS series for diagnostic and therapeutic pancreaticobiliary disorders, demonstrating the impact of diagnostic EUS and affording insights into novel EUS and combined EUS-ERCP therapeutic applications. We suggest considering EUS as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of pediatric pancreaticobiliary diseases.

Routine endoscopic ultrasound in moderate and indeterminate risk patients of suspected choledocholithiasis to avoid unwarranted ERCP: A prospective randomized blinded study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is the most sensitive test for diagnosis of common bile duct stones and it may avoid unnecessary endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

AIM

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether EUS done initially would avoid unnecessary ERCP in patients with moderate or indeterminate risk for occurrence of choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

Patients with biliary colic or acute biliary pancreatitis, who were referred for suspected choledocholithiasis on the basis of alterations in liver function tests were prospectively included over 12 months period in blinded randomized fashion. Endoscopic ultrasonography was performed for all patients. Patients were randomized to two groups. ERCP was done in all patients in group A irrespective of the EUS findings, while in the group B, ERCP was done only in those patients in whom EUS was suggested the presence of common bile duct stone or sludge.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients were randomized into each group. EUS diagnosed common bile duct stones in 24 out of 50 patients (48 %) in group A, and ERCP identified common bile duct stones in 23 of those 24 patients. Twenty-eight out of 50 patients had common bile duct stones/sludge in group B, which were removed by subsequent ERCP. However, ERCP could be avoided in 22 cases (44 %) of group B and none of these patients had biliary symptoms up to 6 months of follow up.

CONCLUSION

In patients with moderate or indeterminate risk for choledocholithiasis, prior EUS done for confirmation of choledocholithiasis avoids unnecessary ERCP in almost half of the cases.

Clinical usefulness of intraductal ultrasonography for the management of acute biliary pancreatitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Identifying a bile duct (BD) stone in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) is important for the management and prevention of recurrent attack of pancreatitis. However, small BD stones may not be detected on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the usefulness of intraductal ultrasonography (IDUS) in patients suspected to have ABP but with no evidence of choledocholithiasis on ERCP.

METHODS

A total 92 patients suspected with ABP without evidence of BD stones on imaging studies including ERCP were enrolled. Wire-guided IDUS was performed during ERCP in all patients. Stones or sludge detected by IDUS were confirmed after endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and extraction. If IDUS finding was negative, then we swept the BD with a balloon catheter and/or basket without EST. After endoscopic management, comparison between IDUS and endoscopic finding was carried out to determine the diagnostic accuracy of IDUS.

RESULTS

Among the 92 patients, IDUS revealed BD stones in 33 (35.9%). All 33 patients' stones were confirmed by endoscopic visualization after EST and BD exploration. During the mean follow up of 24 months, recurrent pancreatitis did not occur in 90 of 92 patients (97.9%) with ABP after endoscopic treatment according to the IDUS findings.

CONCLUSIONS

IDUS improves diagnostic accuracy for the detection of clinically occult BD stones in patients suspicious ABP. IDUS-guided endoscopic management for patients with ABP can avoid unnecessary EST and help prevent recurrent pancreatitis.

Endoscopic ultrasound versus magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) are tests used in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones in patients suspected of having common bile duct stones prior to undergoing invasive treatment. There has been no systematic review of the accuracy of EUS and MRCP in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones using appropriate reference standards.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the accuracy of EUS and MRCP for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS, and Clinicaltrials.gov until September 2012. We searched the references of included studies to identify further studies and of systematic reviews identified from various databases (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), Medion, and ARIF (Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility)). We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for EUS or MRCP. We only accepted studies that confirmed the presence of common bile duct stones by extraction of the stones (irrespective of whether this was done by surgical or endoscopic methods) for a positive test, and absence of common bile duct stones by surgical or endoscopic negative exploration of the common bile duct or symptom free follow-up for at least six months for a negative test, as the reference standard in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. We included participants with or without prior diagnosis of cholelithiasis; with or without symptoms and complications of common bile duct stones, with or without prior treatment for common bile duct stones; and before or after cholecystectomy. At least two authors independently screened abstracts and selected studies for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected the data from each study. We used the bivariate model to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 18 studies involving 2366 participants (976 participants with common bile duct stones and 1390 participants without common bile duct stones). Eleven studies evaluated EUS alone, and five studies evaluated MRCP alone. Two studies evaluated both tests. Most studies included patients who were suspected of having common bile duct stones based on abnormal liver function tests; abnormal transabdominal ultrasound; symptoms such as obstructive jaundice, cholangitis, or pancreatitis; or a combination of the above. The proportion of participants who had undergone cholecystectomy varied across studies. Not one of the studies was of high methodological quality. For EUS, the sensitivities ranged between 0.75 and 1.00 and the specificities ranged between 0.85 and 1.00. The summary sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) and specificity (95% CI) of the 13 studies that evaluated EUS (1537 participants; 686 cases and 851 participants without common bile duct stones) were 0.95 (95% CI 0.91 to 0.97) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.99). For MRCP, the sensitivities ranged between 0.77 and 1.00 and the specificities ranged between 0.73 and 0.99. The summary sensitivity and specificity of the seven studies that evaluated MRCP (996 participants; 361 cases and 635 participants without common bile duct stones) were 0.93 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.96) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.90 to 0.98). There was no evidence of a difference in sensitivity or specificity between EUS and MRCP (P value = 0.5). From the included studies, at the median pre-test probability of common bile duct stones of 41% the post-test probabilities (with 95% CI) associated with positive and negative EUS test results were 0.96 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.98) and 0.03 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.06). At the same pre-test probability, the post-test probabilities associated with positive and negative MRCP test results were 0.94 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.97) and 0.05 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.09).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both EUS and MRCP have high diagnostic accuracy for detection of common bile duct stones. People with positive EUS or MRCP should undergo endoscopic or surgical extraction of common bile duct stones and those with negative EUS or MRCP do not need further invasive tests. However, if the symptoms persist, further investigations will be indicated. The two tests are similar in terms of diagnostic accuracy and the choice of which test to use will be informed by availability and contra-indications to each test. However, it should be noted that the results are based on studies of poor methodological quality and so the results should be interpreted with caution. Further studies that are of high methodological quality are necessary to determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS and MRCP for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus intraoperative cholangiography for diagnosis of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) are tests used in the diagnosis of common bile duct stones in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. There has been no systematic review of the diagnostic accuracy of ERCP and IOC.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare the accuracy of ERCP and IOC for the diagnosis of common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS, and Clinicaltrials.gov to September 2012. To identify additional studies, we searched the references of included studies and systematic reviews identified from various databases (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE)), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), Medion, and ARIF (Aggressive Research Intelligence Facility)). We did not restrict studies based on language or publication status, or whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that provided the number of true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives for ERCP or IOC. We only accepted studies that confirmed the presence of common bile duct stones by extraction of the stones (irrespective of whether this was done by surgical or endoscopic methods) for a positive test, and absence of common bile duct stones by surgical or endoscopic negative exploration of the common bile duct, or symptom-free follow-up for at least six months for a negative test as the reference standard in people suspected of having common bile duct stones. We included participants with or without prior diagnosis of cholelithiasis; with or without symptoms and complications of common bile duct stones; with or without prior treatment for common bile duct stones; and before or after cholecystectomy. At least two authors screened abstracts and selected studies for inclusion independently.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently collected data from each study. We used the bivariate model to summarise the sensitivity and specificity of the tests.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five studies including 318 participants (180 participants with and 138 participants without common bile duct stones) that reported the diagnostic accuracy of ERCP and five studies including 654 participants (125 participants with and 529 participants without common bile duct stones) that reported the diagnostic accuracy of IOC. Most studies included people with symptoms (participants with jaundice or pancreatitis) suspected of having common bile duct stones based on blood tests, ultrasound, or both, prior to the performance of ERCP or IOC. Most studies included participants who had not previously undergone removal of the gallbladder (cholecystectomy). None of the included studies was of high methodological quality as evaluated by the QUADAS-2 tool (quality assessment tool for diagnostic accuracy studies). The sensitivities of ERCP ranged between 0.67 and 0.94 and the specificities ranged between 0.92 and 1.00. For ERCP, the summary sensitivity was 0.83 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.90) and specificity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.94 to 1.00). The sensitivities of IOC ranged between 0.75 and 1.00 and the specificities ranged between 0.96 and 1.00. For IOC, the summary sensitivity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.00) and specificity was 0.99 (95% CI 0.95 to 1.00). For ERCP, at the median pre-test probability of common bile duct stones of 0.35 estimated from the included studies (i.e., 35% of people suspected of having common bile duct stones were confirmed to have gallstones by the reference standard), the post-test probabilities associated with positive test results was 0.97 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.99) and negative test results was 0.09 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.14). For IOC, at the median pre-test probability of common bile duct stones of 0.35, the post-test probabilities associated with positive test results was 0.98 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.00) and negative test results was 0.01 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.10). There was weak evidence of a difference in sensitivity (P value = 0.05) with IOC showing higher sensitivity than ERCP. There was no evidence of a difference in specificity (P value = 0.7) with both tests having similar specificity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although the sensitivity of IOC appeared to be better than that of ERCP, this finding may be unreliable because none of the studies compared both tests in the same study populations and most of the studies were methodologically flawed. It appears that both tests were fairly accurate in guiding further invasive treatment as most people diagnosed with common bile duct stones by these tests had common bile duct stones. Some people may have common bile duct stones in spite of having a negative ERCP or IOC result. Such people may have to be re-tested if the clinical suspicion of common bile duct stones is very high because of their symptoms or persistently abnormal liver function tests. However, the results should be interpreted with caution given the limited quantity and quality of the evidence.

Diagnosis and management of choledocholithiasis in the golden age of imaging, endoscopy and laparoscopy

Biliary lithiasis is an endemic condition in both Western and Eastern countries, in some studies affecting 20% of the general population. In up to 20% of cases, gallbladder stones are associated with common bile duct stones (CBDS), which are asymptomatic in up to one half of cases. Despite the wide variety of examinations and techniques available nowadays, two main open issues remain without a clear answer: how to cost-effectively diagnose CBDS and, when they are finally found, how to deal with them. CBDS diagnosis and management has radically changed over the last 30 years, following the dramatic diffusion of imaging, including endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiography (MRC), endoscopy and laparoscopy. Since accuracy, invasiveness, potential therapeutic use and cost-effectiveness of imaging techniques used to identify CBDS increase together in a parallel way, the concept of “risk of carrying CBDS” has become pivotal to identifying the most appropriate management of a specific patient in order to avoid the risk of “under-studying” by poor diagnostic work up or “over-studying” by excessively invasive examinations. The risk of carrying CBDS is deduced by symptoms, liver/pancreas serology and ultrasound. “Low risk” patients do not require further examination before laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Two main “philosophical approaches” face each other for patients with an “intermediate to high risk” of carrying CBDS: on one hand, the “laparoscopy-first” approach, which mainly relies on intraoperative cholangiography for diagnosis and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for treatment, and, on the other hand, the “endoscopy-first” attitude, variously referring to MRC, EUS and/or endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for diagnosis and endoscopic sphincterotomy for management. Concerning CBDS diagnosis, intraoperative cholangiography, EUS and MRC are reported to have similar results. Regarding management, the recent literature seems to show better short and long term outcome of surgery in terms of retained stones and need for further procedures. Nevertheless, open surgery is invasive, whereas the laparoscopic common bile duct clearance is time consuming, technically demanding and involves dedicated instruments. Thus, although no consensus has been achieved and CBDS management seems more conditioned by the availability of instrumentation, personnel and skills than cost-effectiveness, endoscopic treatment is largely preferred worldwide.

Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography in patients with intermediate or high likelihood of choledocholithiasis: a retrospective study from one university-based endoscopy center

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of choledocholithiasis requires clinical manifestations and imaging examination findings suggesting a stone in the common bile duct (CBD), but these factors are not highly sensitive or specific. The choledocholithiasis management algorithm proposed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) may not be appropriate for patients who fulfill the clinical criteria for a high likelihood of choledocholithiasis. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) may replace endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for the detection of CBD stones in all patients. The aims of this study were to determine the diagnostic yield and optimal timing of EUS in patients with an intermediate or high likelihood of choledocholithiasis requiring therapeutic ERCP.

METHODS

Patients with suspected choledocholithiasis who underwent EUS between June 2009 and January 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups based on the likelihood of choledocholithiasis according to the clinical predictors described by the ASGE guidelines: an intermediate likelihood group and a high likelihood group. The demographic data, clinical manifestations at presentation, blood test results, EUS and ERCP findings, and clinical manifestations during the follow-up period were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients were enrolled in the study (52.7% in the intermediate likelihood group and 47.3% in the high likelihood group). CBD stones were detected in 22.44% of patients in the intermediate likelihood group and 38.63% of patients in the high likelihood group. EUS had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 80% for detection of CBD stones. An alkaline phosphatase level of > 133 mg/dL (area under the curve, 0.576) was the only factor that was significantly associated with detection of CBD stones in patients who underwent EUS > 7 days after the initial clinical presentation (odds ratio 4.87, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS is an accurate diagnostic tool for the detection of CBD stones, and can prevent the unnecessary use of ERCP. This study found that use of clinical criteria alone might not provide a good prediction of the presence of CBD stones, even in patients who fulfill the criteria for a high likelihood of choledocholithiasis.

Randomised clinical trial: MRCP-first vs. ERCP-first approach in patients with suspected biliary obstruction due to bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

The preferred initial investigation with either magnetic resonance (MRCP) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with suspected biliary obstruction remains controversial in many clinical settings.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of an initial MRCP vs. ERCP in the work-up of patients at moderate likelihood of a suspected biliary obstruction.

METHODS

Patients with an unconfirmed benign biliary obstruction, based on laboratory and ultrasound findings, were randomised to an ERCP-first or MRCP-first strategy, stratified by level of obstruction. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a disease or procedure-related bilio-pancreatic adverse events within the next 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the number of subsequent bilio-pancreatic procedures, duration of hospitalisation, days away from activities of daily living (ADL), quality of life (SF-36) and mortality.

RESULTS

We randomised 126 patients to ERCP-first and 131 to MRCP-first (age 54 ± 18 years, 62% female, 39% post-cholecystectomy). In follow-up, 18/126 (14.3%) ERCP-first and 25/131 (19.1%) MRCP-first patients experienced a procedure- or disease-related complication (P = 0.30) (disease-related in 13 and 18 patients, and procedure-related in 5 and 7 patients respectively). A cause of biliary obstruction was found in 39.7% vs. 49.6% of patients (P = 0.11). Sixty-six (50%) patients in the MRCP-first group ended up avoiding an ERCP in follow-up. ERCP-first and MRCP-first patients were away from usual activities for 3.4 ± 7.7 days and 2.0 ± 4.8 days respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

A strategy of MRCP-first decreased the need for subsequent MRCPs, but not complications. Further study is required to define factors influencing the eventual use of MRCP vs. ERCP in appropriately selected patients (ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01424657).

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis: testing the current guidelines

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines include an algorithm for predicting choledocholithiasis. Presence of any very strong predictor or both strong predictors confers a high (>50%) probability of choledocholithiasis. Absence of predictors confers low risk (<10%) of choledocholithiasis. Other combinations have an intermediate risk of choledocholithiasis.

AIM

Determine accuracy of the proposed algorithm in predicting choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of all endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies performed for suspected choledocholithiasis in 3 years in a Tertiary care hospital and a community hospital serviced by The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston Division of Gastroenterology. Application of the guidelines, and comparing results to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography findings.

RESULTS

A total of 1080 endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies were performed; 521 for choledocholithiasis. Most patients were Hispanic and female. Univariate analysis: presence of any very strong predictor and both strong predictors had an OR for choledocholithiasis of 3.30 and 2.36 respectively. Multivariate analysis: odds of choledocholithiasis with any very strong predictor was 2.87, and both strong predictors 3.24. Choledocholithiasis was present in 71.5%, and 41% of patients with high, and intermediate risk respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms the utility of clinical predictors for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. All of the very strong predictors and one of the strong predictors increased the odds of choledocholithiasis. Patients with high risk for choledocholithiasis had a probability of 79% of choledocholithiasis. Sensitivity and specificity of current predictors are too low to obviate the possible need of non-invasive tests to confirm or exclude choledocholithiasis in all risk groups.

The diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound in suspected biliary obstruction and its impact on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography burden in real clinical practice: a consecutive analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Performing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has been described to be useful in cases of suspected biliary obstruction where EUS can triage patients for ERCP. We aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS and its impact on ERCP burden in real clinical practice. We also evaluated the safety and efficacy of EUS+ERCP in a single endoscopic session.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Four hundred and eighteen consecutive patients with suspected but unexplained biliary obstruction referred for EUS before possible ERCP were evaluated. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS and its value in predicting the need for ERCP were determined. EUS established whether pancreaticobiliary disorder (PBD) was present and whether therapeutic ERCP was required. These decisions were matched with ERCP findings, histology, clinical course, and follow-up. Where ERCP was indicated, it was performed in the same endoscopic session.

RESULTS

EUS was performed in 412/418 patients (feasibility 98.5%), and ERCP was considered necessary in 64% (ERCP avoided in 36%). The single-session EUS and ERCP was safe and effective (264 patients). The diagnostic accuracy of EUS was as follows: choledocholithiasis 99%, malignant strictures 90%, and benign strictures 92%. EUS showed pathology in 42% of patients who had a nondilated biliary system at initial investigations. When EUS indicated a normal common bile duct (n=119), this had a 100% positive predictive value for non-necessity for ERCP. The median overall follow-up period was 12 months (range 6-34 months).

CONCLUSION

EUS demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy in this mixed group of PBD. This accurately guided ERCP need and avoided unnecessary ERCP in 36%. EUS and ERCP in the same endoscopic session for the evaluation and management of PBD is technically feasible, with safety and efficacy profiles equivalent to that of each procedure performed independently in different sessions.

Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in patients with intermediate probability of choledocholithiasis but a negative CT scan

BACKGROUND/GOALS

Despite the increased role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in diagnosis, few studies have evaluated its impact on the management of choledocholithiasis in a clinical setting for patients for whom computed tomography (CT) was conducted initially. Our aim in this study was to evaluate the role of EUS in patients with a diagnosis of intermediate probability of choledocholithiasis with a negative CT scan result.

STUDY

A total of 98 patients who were diagnosed with symptomatic cholelithiasis with intermediate probability of choledocholithiasis were evaluated prospectively. Twenty-six of the 98 patients (26.5%) were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis by CT scans. The remaining 72 patients underwent EUS.

RESULTS

Twenty-five of the 72 patients were shown to have choledocholithiasis (n=20/72, 27.8%) or papillitis with biliary outflow obstruction (n=5/72, 6.9%) on EUS. These 25 patients with positive EUS findings underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy, and choledocholithiasis was endoscopically confirmed in 23 of the 25 patients (92.0%). Postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis occurred in 3 patients (12.0% of the 25 patients who received ERCP, 4.2% of all 72 patients). Forty-seven patients with no evidence of choledocholithiasis on EUS were followed-up for a median period of 340 days (range, 185 to 755 d), and no recurrent biliary events occurred in these patients during this period. The sensitivity and specificity of EUS for choledocholithiasis was 87.0% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

An EUS-first strategy in patients with intermediate probability of choledocholithiasis but a negative CT scan is very useful and can reduce the need to perform invasive ERCP.

Pre-ERCP imaging of the bile duct and gallbladder

Advances in biliary imaging have improved making accurate diagnoses of the presence and causes of biliary obstruction. Abdominal ultrasound is a useful screening tool because it is highly specific for choledocholithiasis. New developments in CT and MRI have also been useful in the diagnosis of biliary disease. Although diagnosis of biliary disease can be achieved in a noninvasive manner, there are limitations to modern MRI and CT cholangiographic techniques; their use may not be necessary or cost effective. MRI and CT imaging of the biliary tract provides opportunities for less-invasive diagnostic techniques but should be used judiciously before interventional endoscopy.

Modern management of common bile duct stones

It is imperative for gastroenterologists to understand the different formations of bile duct stones and the various medical treatments available. To minimize the complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), it is critical to appropriately assess the risk of bile duct stones before intervention. Biliary endoscopists should be comfortable with the basic techniques of stone removal, including sphincterotomy, mechanical lithotripsy, and stent placement. It is important to be aware of advanced options, including laser and electrohydraulic stone fragmentation, and papillary dilatation for problematic cases. The timing and need for ERCP in those who require a cholecystectomy is also a consideration.

Endoscopic ultrasonography in tandem with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the management of suspected distal obstructive jaundice

GOALS

To examine the benefits and feasibility of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in tandem for distal obstructive jaundice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From September 2007 to August 2012, patients with suspected distal obstructive jaundice were randomized to single-session EUS-ERCP (group A), EUS, and ERCP in different sessions (group B), and an ERCP-only procedure (group C). Data were prospectively collected on the following parameters: ERCP-avoided, duration of procedure, the dose of propofol, complications, and diagnostic yield.

RESULTS

A total of 180 patients were divided randomly into 60 patients in group A, 60 in group B, and 60 in group C. A total of four therapeutic ERCP were canceled after EUS. The ERCP procedural time in group A was shorter, although not significantly different from that in group B (group A vs. group B: 41.24±7.57 vs. 43.38±6.57 min; P>0.05), but both were significantly less than that in group C (group C: 49.12±7.46 min; P<0.05). The total procedural time did not differ significantly between group A and group B (70.05±15.35 vs. 73.70±15.12 min; P>0.05), nor were there significant differences in the dose of propofol between them (group A vs. group B: 357.11±115.86 vs. 369.55±133.86 mg; P>0.05). In all, 22 anesthetic complications and 21 endoscopic complications occurred without significant differences among the three groups (P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

As a triaging or a screening tool, diagnostic EUS gives added benefit to therapeutic ERCP. EUS and ERCP in a tandem approach are safe and feasible in patients with suspected distal obstructive jaundice.

Linear echoendoscope-guided ERCP for the diagnosis of occult common bile duct stones

Background

Less than 67% of patients with intermediate risk for common bile duct (CBD) stones require therapeutic intervention. It is important to have an accurate, safe, and reliable method for the definitive diagnosis of CBD stones before initiating therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Few publications detail the diagnostic efficacy of linear echoendoscopy (EUS) for CBD stones.

Methods

30 patients with biliary colic, pancreatitis, unexplained derangement of liver function tests, and/or dilated CBD without an identifiable cause were enrolled in the study. When a CBD stone was disclosed by linear EUS, ERCP with stone extraction was performed. Patients who failed ERCP were referred for surgical intervention. If no stone was found by EUS, ERCP would not be performed and patients were followed-up for possible biliary symptoms for up to three months.

Results

The major reason for enrollment was acute pancreatitis. The mean predicted risk for CBD stones was 47% (28–61). Of the 12 patients who were positive for CBD stones by EUS, nine had successful ERCP, one failed ERCP (later treated successfully by surgical intervention) and two were false-positive cases. No procedure-related adverse events were noted. For those 18 patients without evidence of CBD stones by EUS, no false-negative case was noted during the three-month follow-up period. Linear EUS had sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predicted values for the detection of CBD stones of 1, 0.9, 0.8 and 1, respectively.

Conclusion

Linear EUS is safe and efficacious for the diagnosis of occult CBD stones in patients with intermediate risk for the disease.

Is endoscopic ultrasound needed as an add-on test for gallstone diseases without choledocholithiasis on multidetector computed tomography?

BACKGROUND

Choledocholithiasis commonly occurs in patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis. Although the recently developed multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scan enhances the ability to diagnose choledocholithiasis, this technique is considered to have some limitations for evaluating the common bile duct (CBD).

AIM

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the necessity for performing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) as an add-on test to detect choledocholithiasis in patients who were diagnosed with gallstone disease without choledocholithiasis based on MDCT.

METHODS

Three hundred twenty patients with gallstone disease and no evidence of CBD stones according to MDCT underwent EUS between March 2006 and April 2011. If CBD stones were suspected based on the EUS results or clinical symptoms, a final diagnosis was obtained by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The patients' medical records were retrospectively analyzed based on clinical symptoms, biochemical findings, and results of the imaging studies.

RESULTS

CBD stones were not detected with MDCT in 41 (12.8 %) out of 320 patients with gallstone disease. The causes for these discrepancies could be attributed to small stone size (n = 19, 46.3 %), isodensity (n = 18, 43.9 %), impacted stones (n = 1, 2.4 %), and misdiagnosis (n = 3, 7.3 %). If EUS were used as a triage tool, unnecessary diagnostic ERCP and its complications could be avoided for 245 (76.6 %) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

MDCT may not be a primary technique for detecting CBD stones. EUS should be performed instead as an add-on test to evaluate the CBD for patients with gallstone-related disease. In particular, EUS should be routinely recommended for patients with abnormal liver enzyme levels, pancreatitis, and dilated CBD.

Pancreatico-biliary endoscopic ultrasound: A systematic review of the levels of evidence, performance and outcomes

Our aim was to record pancreaticobiliary endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) literature of the past 3 decades and evaluate its role based on a critical appraisal of published studies according to levels of evidence (LE). Original research articles (randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies), meta-analyses, reviews and surveys pertinent to gastrointestinal EUS were included. All articles published until September 2011 were retrieved from PubMed and classified according to specific disease entities, anatomical subdivisions and therapeutic applications of EUS. The North of England evidence-based guidelines were used to determine LE. A total of 1089 pertinent articles were reviewed. Published research focused primarily on solid pancreatic neoplasms, followed by disorders of the extrahepatic biliary tree, pancreatic cystic lesions, therapeutic-interventional EUS, chronic and acute pancreatitis. A uniform observation in all six categories of articles was the predominance of LE III studies followed by LE IV, IIb, IIa, Ib and Ia, in descending order. EUS remains the most accurate method for detecting small (< 3 cm) pancreatic tumors, ampullary neoplasms and small (< 4 mm) bile duct stones, and the best test to define vascular invasion in pancreatic and peri-ampullary neoplasms. Detailed EUS imaging, along with biochemical and molecular cyst fluid analysis, improve the differentiation of pancreatic cysts and help predict their malignant potential. Early diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis appears feasible and reliable. Novel imaging techniques (contrast-enhanced EUS, elastography) seem promising for the evaluation of pancreatic cancer and autoimmune pancreatitis. Therapeutic applications currently involve pancreaticobiliary drainage and targeted fine needle injection-guided antitumor therapy. Despite the ongoing development of extra-corporeal imaging modalities, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography, EUS still holds a leading role in the investigation of the pancreaticobiliary area. The major challenge of EUS evolution is its expanding therapeutic potential towards an effective and minimally invasive management of complex pancreaticobiliary disorders.

[Diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography in the gastrointestinal tract]

Endoscopic ultrasonography is a relatively new technology that combines the use of flexible fiberoptic endoscopes with high-resolution ultrasound technology. It proved to be highly accurate and useful in the staging of gastrointestinal malignancies, as well as in characterizing the nature of subepithelial lesions and disorders of the pancreaticobiliary system. In this overview the variety of current evidence based diagnostic options of endoscopic ultrasonography are discussed.

Endoscopic ultrasound for non-gastroenterologists: what you need to know

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) combines the use of flexible fiberoptic endoscopes with high-resolution ultrasound technology. It is increasingly used for the evaluation, staging, and diagnosis of many luminal and extraluminal gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, as well as non-GI tract ailments, including the staging of lung cancer. In the past decade, EUS has become available on a wide scale, with an increasing number of indications. The technology has been shown to be comparable with and often more sensitive than computed tomography scan and magnetic resonance imaging in staging many malignancies. The use of fine-needle aspiration and ultrasound-guided injection also allows for accurate tissue diagnosis and therapy of GI ailments. Despite increasing availability and indications for EUS over the past decade, general internists may not be aware of EUS technology, when to order an EUS, and how to integrate the results of an EUS into their management decisions. This article will review the general indications for EUS referral, limitations, and role of EUS in the practice of general medicine.

What should be done with a dilated bile duct?

Current methods for imaging the biliary tree include ultrasound, CT, MRI, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). Bile duct abnormalities may be identified during evaluation of patient symptoms or laboratory abnormalities, or incidentally during imaging for another problem. Biliary dilatation, when identified, may be separated into obstructive or nonobstructive causes. Clinical presentation should guide decisions on which, if any, additional investigations are necessary. Choledocholithiasis is the most common cause of obstructive dilatation and frequently requires decompression. Nonobstructive causes include cystic dilatation, aging, and possibly post-cholecystectomy state. Data are limited regarding the yield of further investigations in patients with incidentally identified modest ductal dilatation without symptoms or laboratory abnormalities. Additional investigations are more likely to identify clinically relevant findings in patients with more pronounced dilatation. EUS is highly accurate, low-invasive, and useful in this setting, whereas ERC should be reserved for cases likely to require therapeutic intervention.

BILIARY AND PANCREATIC DISEASE IN PREGNANCY

Pregnancy is a physiological condition that affects all organs. Diseases unrelated to pregnancy may present coincidentally during pregnancy or may be exacerbated by pregnancy, and may increase maternal and/or fetal morbidity or mortality. Compared with many other systems, the changes within the biliary tree and pancreas are relatively minimal. However, pregnancy is associated with an increased likelihood of cholelithiasis, which can have significant implications for the parturient.

Advances in pancreatobiliary endoscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The role of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) continues to mature. We will review the progress of pancreatobiliary endoscopy in the evaluation and treatment of benign and malignant pancreatobiliary diseases.

RECENT FINDINGS

First, minimizing contrast injection of the pancreas, wire-guided cannulation and prophylactic pancreatic stenting have been re-emphasized in recent studies as the most important endoscopic interventions that can lower the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. The role of preoperative ERCP in patients with jaundice secondary to pancreatic cancer was raised in a randomized trial; the widespread use of preoperative biliary drainage is now up for debate. The use of ERCP, intraoperative cholangiography, endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the evaluation of suspected common bile duct stones is discussed. We conclude by evaluating studies of fully covered, self-expandable metallic stents, with an emphasis on their potential use in benign biliary disease.

SUMMARY

Given the risk of complications and development of alternative imaging modalities, diagnostic ERCP is rarely indicated. However, therapeutic ERCP has been bolstered by advances such as fully covered metallic stents and cholangioscopy.