Comparison of the Long-Term Outcomes of Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilation Alone versus Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Removal of Bile Duct Stones

Minimally Invasive Common Bile Duct Stone Management in Gastric Bypass Patients: Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration with Disposable Bronchoscope

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery patients may develop common bile duct stones, and the alterations in their anatomy present challenges in treating this condition. Methods such as laparoscopic bile duct exploration is impractical in many healthcare facilities, due to the absence of a choledochoscope. This study assesses the feasibility of laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct using a disposable bronchoscope in these individuals.

METHOD

The study involved 32 participants who had undergone gastric bypass surgery. These participants presented with both bile duct stones and bile ducts exceeding 8 mm in diameter, diagnosed through either MRCP or cholangiography conducted during the surgery. Stone extraction was carried out through either choledotomy or transcystic routes using a disposable bronchoscope and endoscopic baskets.

RESULTS

The patients' ages ranged from 27 to 66 years, with a mean bile duct diameter of 11.6 mm (SD 3.1 mm). A 100% stone clearance rate was achieved for all patients. None of the patients required conversion to open surgery. No T-tubes were placed. One patient developed biloma and intra-abdominal abscesses, which were successfully treated with a percutaneous drain over the course of a week. No mortalities were recorded during the course of this study.

CONCLUSION

Our study results demonstrate that laparoscopic bile duct exploration is both feasible and safe in patients who have undergone gastric bypass surgery. The utilization of a disposable bronchoscope emerges as a practical and cost-effective alternative to a choledochoscope in this procedure.

The efficacy and safety of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy for the treatment of difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones: a multicenter retrospective study

PURPOSE

To analyze the benefits of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE + LC) versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and/or endoscopic sphincterotomy following laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ERCP/EST + LC) for difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones in three hospitals from January 2016 to January 2021 was performed.

RESULTS

ERCP/EST + LC contributed to reducing postoperative drainage time. However, LCBDE + LC showed a higher rate of complete clearance, along with lower postoperative hospital stays, expenses and incidence of postoperative hyperamylasemia, pancreatitis, re-operation and recurrence. In addition, LCBDE + LC showed safe and feasible performance in the elderly and patients with previous upper abdominal surgery.

CONCLUSION

It is an effective and safe method for LCBDE + LC for difficult common bile duct stones combined with gallstones.

Comparison of Different Endoscopic Methods Used for Managing Choledocholithiasis in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease Undergoing Hemodialysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD), and endoscopic sphincterotomy plus balloon dilation (ESBD) are all techniques used to manage choledocholithiasis. We aim to analyze the efficacy and safety of these techniques for treating choledocholithiasis in patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of 80 patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on HD who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for choledocholithiasis management between August 1st, 2012, and December 31st, 2020, at a medical center in southern Taiwan. These patients were divided into three groups: EST (n = 21), EPBD (n = 28), and ESBD (n = 31). Post-ERCP complications, including pancreatitis, bleeding, cholangitis, and perforation, were reviewed for analysis.

RESULTS

There were no significant among-group differences in the rate of complete stone clearance and hospitalization day after ERCP. Patients in the EST group had a higher post-ERCP complication rate than was the case in the other groups (p = 0.016). ESBD significantly reduced post-ERCP bleeding, compared with that occurring with EST (OR 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.72, p = 0.026). There were no significant among-group differences in the rates of pancreatitis and cholangitis. There were no ERCP-related perforations or deaths in this study.

CONCLUSIONS

EST, EPBD, and ESBD are efficient methods for treating choledocholithiasis in ESRD patients. ESBD was found to lead to a lower risk of bleeding than EST, and the rate of pancreatitis or cholangitis was comparable for EST and EPBD. Our results suggest that ESBD is the best choice of treatment of choledocholithiasis in patients with ESRD undergoing HD.

Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy, safety and economy of ERCP and LTCBDE in the treatment of common bile duct stones

Objectives: This study further compared the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration (LTCBDE) approaches in the treatment of common bile duct stones (CBDS) from the perspective of efficacy, safety and economy.

Methods: The therapeutic efficacy and safety of ERCP and LTCBDE approaches were retrospectively compared. Cost-effectiveness analysis of clinical economics was performed to analyze and evaluate the two approaches.

Results: There was no significant difference in the success rate of surgery and bile stone residue between ERCP and LTCBDE group. The incidence of postoperative complications in ERCP group was significantly higher than that in the LTCBDE group; while the incidence of pancreatitis in the ERCP group was significantly higher than that in the LTCBDE group. There was no significant difference in biliary infection, bile leakage and sepsis between ERCP and LTCBDE groups. In terms of cost, the costs of surgery and nursing were significantly lower, the costs of treatment and sanitary materials were significantly higher in the ERCP group than that in the LTCBDE group. There was no significant difference in the costs of medical examination, laboratory test, medicine cost and total cost between ERCP group and LTCBDE group. The total length of hospital stay, length of hospital stay before surgery and duration of surgery in the ERCP group were significantly lower than that in the LTCBDE group; there was no significant difference in length of hospital stay after surgery between the ERCP and LTCBDE group. The cost-effectiveness ratio of ERCP group was 34171.25, and the cost-effectiveness of LTCBDE group was 34524.25. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the two groups was 51415.

Conclusion: ERCP and LTCBDE approaches had similar therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of CBDS. The safety of LTCBDE approach is superior to that of ERCP approach for the treatment of CBDS. ERCP approach is more economical in the treatment of CBDS than LTCBDE approach.

Single-stage intraoperative ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus preoperative ERCP Followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVES

The optimal treatment strategy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis is still controversial. We conducted an up-to-date meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of the intra- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) + LC procedure with the traditional pre-ERCP +  laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) procedure in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases up to September 2020. Published randomized controlled trials comparing intra-ERCP + LC and pre-ERCP + LC were considered. This meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager Version 5.3, and outcomes were documented by pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total of 977 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding CBD stone clearance (RR = 1.03, P = .27), postoperative papilla bleeding (RR = 0.41, P = .13), postoperative cholangitis (RR = 0.87, P = .79), and operation conversion rate (RR = 0.71, P = .26). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the intra-ERCP + LC group (MD = -2.75, P < .05), and intra-ERCP + LC was associated with lower overall morbidity (RR = 0.54, P < .05), postoperative pancreatitis (RR = 0.29, P < .05) and cannulation failure rate (RR = 0.22, P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-ERCP + LC was a safer approach for patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis. It could facilitate intubation, shorten hospital stay, and lower postoperative complications, especially postoperative pancreatitis, and reduce stone residue and reduce the possibility of reoperation for stone removal.

Paradoxical Stimulatory Response of Remanent Sphincter of Oddi to Buscapina After Endoscopic Sphincterotomy

Background/Aims

Endoscopic removal of bile duct stones has become the treatment of choice, which includes endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the majority of cases, destroying at least partially the Oddi sphincter (OS). Loss of sphincter function in variable grade has been described, but changes in innervation are not known.

Methods

Endoscopic manometry of OS was performed in 14 patients after EST with specialized perfused catheter. Pressure values were registered before and after 10 mg Buscapina injected intravenously.

Results

Choledocho-duodenal pressure gradient was absent in all of 14 patients. Basal OS pressure was zero in 7 and conserved in normal range in the remaining 7. Phasic motor activity was registered in 11 patients and was absent in 3 patients. After 10 mg Buscapina intravenous injection, instead of habitual inhibition, increase in basal OS pressure and in frequency of phasic contractions was observed in 9 patients. This response was not related to age of patients, neither with time elapsed between the EST and manometry, nor the estimated size of papillotomy orifice. Duodenal peristalsis was invariably inhibited in all patients.

Conclusions

EST destroys not only the smooth muscle of OS, also alters the innervation interrupting the duodeno-sphincteric nerve circuit. This finding questions the use of Buscapina or other anticholinergic agent as spasmolytic in patients after EST.

Long-term effects of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation in patients with challenging bile duct calculi: A retrospective observational study

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) can be used to treat challenging common bile duct stones. No previous studies have reported intractable cases treated either by EPLBD or mechanical lithotripter use. We aimed to evaluate and compare the long-term effects of EPLBD with mechanical lithotripter use.This retrospective cohort study reviewed data from 153 patients admitted to the Eastern Chiba Medical Center from April 2014 to March 2020, presenting with common bile duct calculi that could not be removed using a basket or balloon catheter. Patients were divided into groups depending on whether the treatment was performed using a mechanical lithotripter or EPLBD. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate of common bile duct calculi, and the secondary outcome was the rate of postoperative adverse events. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare the 2 groups. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.The median age of patients included in the lithotripter and EPLBD groups were 73 years and 83 years, respectively (P = .006), while the sex ratio (male:female) in the groups was 18:13 and 55:67, respectively. The EPLBD group showed a statistically larger median bile duct diameter (13 mm [range: 8-24 mm] vs 11 mm [range: 5-16 mm]; P < .001), larger maximal calculus diameter (median, 13.5 mm [range: 8-25 mm] vs 11 mm [range: 7-16 mm]; P < .001), and shorter median cumulative treatment time after reaching the duodenal papilla (35.5 minutes [range: 10-176 minutes] vs 47 minutes [range: 22-321 minutes]; P = .026) in comparison to the lithotripter group. There was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events between the EPLBD and the mechanical lithotripter groups. The recurrence rate was significantly lower (P = .014) in the EPLBD group.EPLBD increases therapeutic efficacy and reduces treatment duration for patients in whom calculus removal is difficult, without increasing the frequency of adverse events. No serious adverse events were observed. Additionally, EPLBD appears to reduce the risk of long-term recurrence. Future studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes in younger patients.

Outcomes of laparoscopic bile duct exploration for choledocholithiasis with small common bile duct

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration (LCBDE) is one of the main treatments for choledocholithiasis with CBD diameter of larger than 10 mm. However, for patients with small CBD (CBD diameter ≤ 8 mm), endoscopic sphincterotomy remains the preferred treatment at present, but it also has some drawbacks associated with a series of complications, such as pancreatitis, hemorrhage, cholangitis, and duodenal perforation. To date, few studies have been reported that support the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.

AIM

To investigate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE for choledocholithiasis with small CBD.

METHODS

A total of 257 patients without acute cholangitis who underwent LC + LCBDE for cholecystolithiasis from January 2013 to December 2018 in one institution were reviewed. The clinical data were retrospectively collected and analyzed. According to whether the diameter of CBD was larger than 8 mm, 257 patients were divided into large CBD group (n = 146) and small CBD group (n = 111). Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed to adjust for clinical differences. The demographics, intraoperative data, short-term outcomes, and long-term follow-up outcomes for the patients were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

In total, 257 patients who underwent successful LC + LCBDE were enrolled in the study, 146 had large CBD and 111 had small CBD. The median follow-up period was 39 (14-86) mo. For small CBD patients, the median CBD diameter was 0.6 cm (0.2-2.0 cm), the mean operating time was 107.2 ± 28.3 min, and the postoperative bile leak rate, rate of residual CBD stones (CBDS), CBDS recurrence rate, and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41% (6/111), 3.60% (4/111), 1.80% (2/111), and 0% (0/111), respectively; the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.4 ± 3.6 d. For large CBD patients, the median common bile duct diameter was 1.0 cm (0.3-3.0 cm), the mean operating time was 115.7 ± 32.0 min, and the postoperative bile leak rate, rate of residual CBDS, CBDS recurrence rate, and CBD stenosis rate were 5.41% (9/146), 1.37% (2/146), 6.85% (10/146), and 0% (0/146), respectively; the mean postoperative hospital stay was 7.7 ± 2.7 d. After propensity score matching, 184 patients remained, and all preoperative covariates except diameter of CBD stones were balanced. Postoperative bile leak occurred in 11 patients overall (5.98%), and no difference was found between the small CBD group (4.35%, 4/92) and the large CBD group (7.61%, 7/92). The incidence of CBDS recurrence did not differ significantly between the small CBD group (2.17%, 2/92) and the large CBD group (6.52%, 6/92).

CONCLUSION

LC + LCBDE is safe and feasible for choledocholithiasis patients with small CBD and did not increase the postoperative bile leak rate compared with chole-docholithiasis patients with large CBD.

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration for the patients with difficult biliary stones: 8 years of experiences at a single institution and literature review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has gained wide popularity for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. However, it remains unclear whether LCBDE is a better alternative option for the patients with difficult biliary stones. Thus, the aim of the present study was to explore the safety and efficacy of LCBDE for these patients by retrospectively analyzing our data and combing with literature review.

METHODS

Between September 2011 and February 2019, 1064 consecutive patients who underwent LCBDE at Shanghai Tenth People's Hospital were reviewed. The clinical data of patients with difficult biliary stones were selected and retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Of these patients, 334 cases were confirmed with difficult biliary stones, and the overall complete stone clearance rate was 98.8% (330/334). 34 cases (10.2%) were performed with laser lithotripsy. A total of 296 patients (88.6%) underwent primary closure of common bile duct, and T-tube drainage was indwelled in 38 patients (11.4%). No bile duct injury, bleeding, perforation and surgery-related deaths were observed. The overall morbidity rate was 6.6%. 16 cases (4.8%) occurred in bile leakage with primary closure procedure, and all of them were managed successfully with conservative therapy. The median follow-up period was 9 months with stone recurrence occurring in 9 patients (2.7%). There was no evidence of bile duct stricture in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study suggests that LCBED is a considerable safe and effective option for the patients with difficult biliary stones. A randomized clinical trial is needed to further evaluate the benefit of LCBDE in this subgroup.

Dilation assisted stone extraction for complex biliary lithiasis: Technical aspects and practical principles

Common bile duct stones are frequently diagnosed worldwide and are one of the main indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography. Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) has been used for the removal of bile duct stones for the past 40 years, providing a wide opening to allow extraction. Up to 15% of patients present with complicated choledocholithiasis. In this context, additional therapeutic approaches have been proposed such as endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy, intraductal or extracorporeal lithotripsy, or endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD). EPLBD combined with EST was introduced in 2003 to facilitate the passage of large or multiple bile duct stones using a balloon greater than 12 mm in diameter. EPLBD without EST was introduced as a simplified technique in 2009. Dilation-assisted stone extraction (DASE) is the combination of two techniques: EPLBD and sub-maximal EST. Several studies have reported this technique as safe and effective in patients with large bile duct stones, without any increased risk of adverse events such as pancreatitis, bleeding, or perforation. Nevertheless, it is difficult to analyze the outcomes of DASE because there are no standard techniques and definitions between studies. The purpose of this paper is to provide technical guidance and specific information about the main issues regarding DASE, based on current literature and daily clinical experience in biliary referral centers.

Advances in Risk Factors for Recurrence of Common Bile Duct Stones

Choledocholithiasis is a chronic common disease. The incidence of cholelithiasis is 5%-15%, of which 5%-30% are combined with Choledocholithiasis. Although endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) + endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is the most common treatment procedure, which clearance rate is up to 95%, the incidence of recurrent choledocholithiasis was 4%-25%. The risk factors of recurrence after choledocholithiasis clearance are the focuses of current researches, which are caused by multiple factors. We first systematically summarize the risk factors of common bile duct stones (CBDS) recurrence into five aspects: first-episode stone related factors, congenital factors, biological factors, behavioral intervention factors, and the numbers of stone recurrence.

Decision analysis of minimally invasive management options for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

The management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis is controversial with the risks and benefits of one versus two-stage approaches debated. This study aims to perform decision analysis of minimally invasive laparo-endoscopic approaches.

METHODS

An advanced decision tree was constructed to compare pre, intra and post-operative ERCP and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in terms of primary ductal clearance and significant complications for patients intended to undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Transition probabilities were calculated from randomised controlled trials following a comprehensive literature search. Model uncertainties were extensively tested through deterministic and probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis. Utility outcomes were 1 and 0.5 for successful primary clearance without and with complications, respectively, and 0 for failure of primary clearance of the duct.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies (n = 2697) were included in the analysis. At base case analysis, a laparo-endoscopic rendezvous approach had the highest utility output (0.90; no complication probability: 0.87/complication probability 0.06). Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration was ranked second with a utility output 0.87 (no complication probability: 0.82/complication probability 0.10). Pre-operative ERCP utility score was 0.84 (no complication probability: 0.78/ complication probability 0.11) and post-operative ERCP utility score was 0.78 (no complication probability: 0.71/complication probability 0.13). Monte Carlo analysis showed that laparo-endoscopic rendezvous and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration had an equal mean utility output of 0.57 (standard deviation 0.36; variance 0.13; 95% confidence interval 0.00-0.99 versus standard deviation 0.34; variance 0.12; 95% confidence interval 0.01-0.98). Laparo-endoscopic rendezvous had a superior treatment selection frequency of 39.93% followed by laparoscopic bile duct exploration (36.11%), pre-operative ERCP (20.67%) and post-operative ERCP (2.99%).

CONCLUSION

One-stage approach to the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis is superior to two-stage, in terms of primary clearance of the duct and risk of operative morbidity. Laparo-endoscopic rendezvous approach could offer marginal additional benefit but more high-quality randomised controlled trials are needed.

Long-term Outcomes of Endoscopic Papillary Large-balloon Dilation for Common Bile Duct Stones

Objective Endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation (EPLBD) for common bile duct (CBD) stone removal has been confirmed to be safe and effective in the short term. The long-term outcomes of EPLBD, which have not been sufficiently evaluated, were therefore investigated in this study. Methods For patients who had undergone endoscopic CBD stone removal with EPLBD between October 2011 and December 2015, follow-up surveys were conducted using a postal survey, telephone interview, or medical record review in August 2017. The main outcome measurement was the recurrence rate of CBD stones after complete stone removal with EPLBD in patients who received follow-up for more than one year. Risk factors for such recurrence were secondarily analyzed. Results Of the 98 patients treated using EPLBD, 93 (95%) were followed up after complete stone removal and analyzed for the long-term outcomes. During the mean follow-up period of 33.7±16.6 months, CBD stones recurred in 16 patients (17%) with a mean interval of 12.7±12.7 months. Univariate analyses showed that a large stone size, multiple stones, a large distal CBD diameter, and a history of cholecystectomy were significant risk factors for stone recurrence (p=0.022, 0.013, 0.001 and 0.035, respectively). The large distal CBD diameter was the only significant risk factor for stone recurrence in a multivariate analysis (hazard ratio, 1.227; p=0.031). Conclusion The long-term outcomes of EPLBD for CBD stones, including the rate of stone recurrence, were found to be acceptable. A large distal CBD diameter was an independent risk factor for stone recurrence.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus cholecystectomy versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic common bile duct exploration plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LCBDE+LC) with preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (pre-ERCP+LC) for cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov until 1 July 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LCBDE+LC versus pre-ERCP+LC were included. The common bile duct (CBD) stone clearance rate, postoperative bile leakage, postoperative pancreatitis, morbidity, mortality, and overall hospital stay were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs involving 1545 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Of the 12 RCTs, seven confirmed and five did not confirm CBD stones preoperatively. The meta-analysis showed a significantly higher CBD stone clearance rate for pre-ERCP+LC than LCBDE+LC. A similar result was found in the subgroup analysis of patients with confirmed CBD stones. A significantly lower postoperative bile leakage rate was found for pre-ERCP+LC than LCBDE+LC in all 12 RCTs and in the subgroup of patients with confirmed CBD stones. However, a significantly higher rate of pancreatitis was found in pre-ERCP+LC and in the subgroup of patients with confirmed CBD stones. LCBDE+LC was superior to pre-ERCP+LC in terms of the overall hospital stay. No significant differences were found in morbidity or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-ERCP+LC is associated with a higher CBD stone clearance rate, lower postoperative bile leakage rate, and higher rate of pancreatitis. LCBDE+LC might help to shorten the hospital stay. Further studies on this topic are recommended.