Biliary stenting for management of common bile duct stones

Choledocholithiasis-a new clinical pathway

The incidence of cholecystectomy in children has increased considerably since the early 1990s. Management of gallbladder disease in children must include an awareness of choledocholithiasis treatment strategies. Both endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and common bile duct exploration (open or laparoscopic) are accepted management techniques for choledocholithiasis. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with preoperative or postoperative ERCP is at least a two-procedure process while cholecystectomy with laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) can provide definitive treatment in a single procedure under one anesthetic. Despite this, the trend over the last decade continues towards less LCBDE utilization in favor of ERCP. This trend has resulted in decreased familiarity with LCBDE by adult and pediatric surgeons and their trainees. Access to the necessary tools and education on the technical aspects can allow for successful single-stage treatment of choledocholithiasis by surgeons during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This may include a pre-defined stepwise algorithm and understanding of all the equipment and resources necessary to perform a LCBDE. Ultimately, increased understanding of the equipment and procedural steps necessary for LCBDE will result in widened adoption of the technique and thus confer advantages to the patient such as decreased length of stay and fewer required anesthetics.

Association of long-term endoscopic biliary stent placement with choledocholithiasis: a literature review

Endoscopic stone removal is currently the first-line procedure for the treatment of common bile duct stones. Advances in equipment and treatment techniques have expanded the scope of application of endoscopic treatment to include stones that have previously been difficult to remove endoscopically, such as stacked stones and large stones. For the treatment of common bile duct stones in elderly patients in particular, long-term placement of a biliary stent is increasingly being selected. Although periodic stent replacement is required, some reports have stated that biliary stenting is useful in terms of treatment-associated invasiveness and the incidence of accidental complications. To date, various opinions have been presented on whether the treatment of bile duct stones should aim for complete removal of stones or adopt the biliary stenting approach. Findings in previous reports suggest that both the approach for complete stone removal and the long-term stenting approach are associated with advantages and disadvantages. In this study, we reviewed previous reports on the significance of placing a stent and implementing careful monitoring rather than stone removal in patients with bile duct stones.

Endoscopic biliary stenting in irretrievable common bile duct stones: stent exchange or expectant management-tertiary-centre experience and systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Conventional endoscopic duct clearance may not be possible in up to 10%-15% of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Sphincterotomy and biliary drainage by endoprosthesis have for many years been the mainstay of management in irretrievable stones. Recent years have seen the advent of sphincteroplasty or cholangioscopically-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) permitting duct clearance in majority of cases. However, when bile duct clearance is not possible, options include long-term stenting followed by elective stent exchange (ESE) 6-12 monthly or permanent stent insertion (PSI) in selected cases, but it is not clear which management strategy among ESE and PSI is preferable.

METHODS AND AIMS

A retrospective review of all patients in Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust who underwent plastic stent insertion for biliary access for difficult CBDS from January 2006 to December 2011 was undertaken. Adult patients with irretrievable CBDS who had plastic stent insertions throughout the follow-up period were included. Patients who underwent PSI and ESE annually were retrospectively reviewed to determine the long-term outcomes. A detailed systematic review was also performed, examining the outcomes of CBDS managed with stents.

RESULTS

During the study period, 674 patients underwent 1769 biliary-stent-related procedures; of which, 246 patients met our inclusion criteria. 201 patients had subsequent duct clearance. 45 patients were, therefore, included in the final analysis, 28 of whom underwent annual ESEs and 17 PSIs. Patients in the PSI group had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores compared with the ESE group. In the PSI group, 9/17 patients presented acutely with blocked stents, 5 of whom presented within 12 months. 2/9 patients were severely ill and died within a fortnight following the repeat endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). In the ESE group, 4/28 patients had duct clearance in subsequent ERCPs, 1/28 patient presented with a blocked stent, and no biliary-related deaths were observed. The mean numbers of ERCPs performed were 0.52 and 1.95 in the PSI and ESE groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 50% of patients treated with long-term stenting re-presented acutely with stent blockage, though many of these were before 12 months, meaning planned stent exchange would not have affected the outcome. Duct clearance using all possible modalities is the preferred option, but where not possible, management with biliary stenting either with elective exchange or permanent stenting remains a possibility for carefully selected patients, though maybe best suited to those with limited life expectancy.

One-stage versus Two-stage Management for Concomitant Gallbladder Stones and Common Bile Duct Stones in Patients with Obstructive Jaundice

No consensus exists regarding the optimal management of concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones (CBDS). Previous studies showed a significant association between the presence of obstructive jaundice and increased risk of postoperative complications and conversion to open surgery. This retrospective study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of one-stage (laparoscopic cholecystectomy [LC] plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration) management versus two-stage (preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography/endoscopic sphincterotomy 1 LC) management for patients with obstructive jaundice, concomitant gallbladder stones, and CBDS. One-stage management (n = 88) or two-stage management (n = 122) was used for 210 eligible patients between January 2009 and March 2011. Both types of management proved to be effective and safe. No significant difference was observed in terms of stone clearance from the common bile duct (CBD), postoperative morbidity, mortality, or conversion to open surgery. However, one-stage management was more cost-effective and decreased the number of procedures. In addition, postoperative hospital stay and operative time were shorter for patients who received one-stage management. Especially for patients with CBD greater than 1 cm in diameter, one-stage management is a better choice.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus endoprostheses in the treatment of large or multiple common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Little information is available on the outcomes of endoscopic sphincterotomy plus biliary stent placement without stone extraction as primary therapy at initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the treatment of large or multiple common bile duct (CBD) stones. The aim of the present study was to study the effect of biliary stents and sphincterotomy as primary therapy for patients with choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

Patients with large (≥20 mm) or multiple (≥3) CBD stones were retrospectively studied. The patients underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy and placement of plastic stents in the bile duct without stone extraction at the initial ERCP. Three or more months later, a second ERCP was carried out and stone removal was attempted. Differences in stone size and the largest CBD diameter before and after stenting were compared. Stone clearance and complications were also evaluated.

RESULTS

52 patients were enrolled. After a median of 124 days of biliary plastic stent placement the mean maximal stone diameter decreased from 16.6 mm to 10.0 mm (P < 0.01). The mean CBD diameter also decreased from 15.3 mm to 11.5 mm (P < 0.01). The total stone clearance at second ERCP was 94.2%, only 5.7% of which needed mechanical lithotripsy.

COMPLICATIONS

pancreatitis in one (1.9%) at initial ERCP, cholangitis in two (3.8%) after 52 days and 84 days of placement of stent. No complications were recorded at second ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Biliary plastic stents plus endoscopic sphincterotomy without stone extraction as primary therapy at initial ERCP is a safe and effective method in the management of large or multiple CBD stones.

Preoperative versus intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy for management of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

ERCP remains the prevailing method of treating CBDS; however, its ideal timing in respect to laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is not defined. LC combined with intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOES) was compared with preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (PES) followed by LC for management of preoperatively known cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHODS

Between June 2006 and September 2009, 198 patients diagnosed preoperatively by clinical assessment, liver chemistry, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) to have combined choledochocystolithiasis were eligible. They were randomly divided into two groups: PES/LC group (n = 100) and LC/IOES group (n = 98). The surgical times, surgical success rates, number of stone extractions, postoperative complications, retained common bile duct stones, and postoperative lengths of stay were compared prospectively.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in surgical time, surgical success rate, CBD diameter, stone size, or stone number between the two groups. The success rate was 95.3% and 97.8% for PES/LC and LC/IOES, respectively. There were no significant difference in postoperative retained stones, surgical time, and complications, but the total hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LC/IOES group.

CONCLUSIONS

PES/LC and LC/IOES are both good options for dealing with preoperatively diagnosed CBDS, but when there is enough experience and facilities, LC/IOES, as a single-stage treatment, would be preferable.

An audit of the outcome of long-term biliary stenting in the treatment of common bile duct stones in a general hospital

BACKGROUND

This study audited the clinical outcome of a cohort of patients with choledocholithiasis treated with long-term biliary stenting in order to determine the feasibility of this practice.

METHODS

Over 2 years, 83 patients with symptomatic choledocholithiasis were treated with long-term stenting because they either refused further treatments or were medically unfit for further procedures after the initial endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Recurrence of clinical events, need for stent change, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed. As a secondary analysis, published data on long-term biliary stenting were reviewed.

RESULTS

ERCP and biliary stenting were successful in all cases with no complications. The mean follow-up was 19 months (1-103 months). The median number of ERCPs performed was 1 (1-4). The mean duration of stent patency was 12.4 months (1-54.8 months). A total of 28 clinical events (cholangitis, 71%) occurred in 24 patients during follow-up, for a late complication rate of 33.7%. ERCP was repeated and the stents changed on 15 occasions in 11 asymptomatic patients with abnormal liver function tests detected on routine follow-up. No biliary-related mortality occurred. Review of published data revealed a mean late complication rate of 22.4% (0%-64%), a biliary-related mortality rate of 3.5% (0%-21.1%), and a nonbiliary-related mortality rate of 20.8% (0%-60.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term biliary stenting is a feasible option for patients who decline or are medically unfit for further elective endoscopic or surgical procedures. Close follow-up is mandatory to detect and treat late complications.

Prospective randomized study of T-tube versus biliary stent for common bile duct decompression after open choledocotomy

The T-tube has been the alternative of choice for decompression following common bile duct (CBD) exploration. The development of laparoscopic surgery has suggested using a biliary stent as an alternative to the T-tube following choledochotomy. The purpose of this prospective randomized study was to compare clinical results obtained from patients who underwent open CBD exploration using a biliary stent versus those from patients with a T-tube for decompression. Between September 2000 and June 2002 a total of 81 patients were randomly assigned to a biliary stent or a T-tube as the decompression method following choledochotomy. An open CBD exploration was performed when CBD stones were suspected, in both elective and emergency settings. The length of the postoperative hospital stay was 6.8 +/- 4.7 days for patients with the T-tube and of 5.2 +/- 3.3 days for, patients with the biliary stent (p = 0.19). Postoperative complications were observed in 13 patients (30%) with the T-tube and in 4 patients (11%) with the biliary stent (p = 0.03). One patient with a biliary stent was reoperated because of an intraabdominal abscess, and another patient was reoperated because of biliary peritonitis following T-tube removal. Three patients (7%) with a biliary stent and one patient (3%) with a T-tube were rehospitalized. There were no deaths. The T-tube and biliary stent were removed 27.1 +/- 10.8 days and 34.9 +/- 12.9 days after surgery, respectively (p = 0.24). The biliary stent is a safe alternative to the T-tube as a biliary decompression method following an open CBD exploration.

Endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography imaging for pancreaticobiliary pathology: the gastroenterologist's perspective

With advances in noninvasive radiologic technology, additional adjunctive techniques are developing, and the roles for ERCP and EUS are continuously changing. In a diagnostic setting, ERCP is currently best reserved for patients with a high likelihood of needing endoscopic therapy, and EUS is especially useful for cases in which other imaging techniques have been inconclusive or are of inferior diagnostic capability. In a therapeutic setting, ERCP and EUS retain important roles in the management of both benign and malignant pancreatic and biliary disease. Certainly, technological advances also directly affect these modalities and expanded applications for ERCP and EUS for the pancreas and biliary tract are anticipated.

Endoscopic management of biliary tract disease

New investigations, evaluation of controversial issues, and advances in technology continue to shape the endoscopic management of biliary disorders. This article discusses recent literature related to the diagnosis and therapy of biliary tract disease. Specifically, the diagnosis and management of choledocholithiasis, complications of biliary endoscopy and potential preventive measures, roles for endosonography in the evaluation of biliary disease, and endoscopic therapy of postoperative liver transplantation complications are reviewed. Recent advances in biliary stents and the use of cholangioscopy in biliary disorders are also assessed.

Endoscopic management of biliary tract disease

Endoscopic management of biliary tract disease continues to be influenced by new advances in technology and shaped by further examination of old controversies. This review covers and highlights recent world literature concerning biliary endoscopy and its effect on the management of biliary disorders. In particular, we examine the role and consequence of the endoscopic management of choledocholithiasis and the continuing controversy over endoscopic treatment of pancreatic disease. The increasing impact of endoscopic ultrasound in the biliary tree is explored, as well as the latest developments in biliary stent technology.