Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones leaving the gallbladder in situ. A cohort study with long-term follow-up

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis 2021

The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology first published evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis in 2010, followed by a revision in 2016. Currently, the revised third edition was published to reflect recent evidence on the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of cholelithiasis conforming to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Following this revision, the present English version of the guidelines was updated and published herein. The clinical questions (CQ) in the previous version were reviewed and rearranged into three newly divided categories: background questions (BQ) dealing with basic background knowledge, CQ, and future research questions (FRQ), which refer to issues that require further accumulation of evidence. Finally, 52 questions (29 BQs, 19 CQs, and 4 FRQs) were adopted to cover the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, complications, and prognosis. Based on a literature search using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases for the period between 1983 and August 2019, along with a manual search of new information reported over the past 5 years, the level of evidence was evaluated for each CQ. The strengths of recommendations were determined using the Delphi method by the committee members considering the body of evidence, including benefits and harms, patient preference, and cost-benefit balance. A comprehensive flowchart was prepared for the diagnosis and treatment of gallbladder stones, common bile duct stones, and intrahepatic stones, respectively. The current revised guidelines are expected to be of great assistance to gastroenterologists and general physicians in making decisions on contemporary clinical management for cholelithiasis patients.

Management of choledocholithiasis in the elderly: Same-admission cholecystectomy remains the standard of care

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend that patients with choledocholithiasis undergo same-admission cholecystectomy. The compliance with this guideline is poor in elderly patients. We hypothesized that elderly patients treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) alone would have higher complication and readmission rates than the patients treated with cholecystectomy.

METHODS

The Nationwide Readmissions Database was queried for all patients aged ≥65 years with admission for choledocholithiasis January to June 2016. The patients were divided based on index treatment received: (1) no intervention; (2) ERCP alone; or (3) cholecystectomy. Multivariate analyses identified predictors of cholecystectomy during index admission and of readmissions.

RESULTS

A total of 16,121 patients with choledocholithiasis were admitted; 38.4% underwent cholecystectomy, 37.6% endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography alone, and 24.0% no intervention. The patients not receiving a cholecystectomy were more likely to be older, female, have a higher Elixhauser score, do-not-resuscitate status, and at a teaching hospital (all P < .001). Emergency readmissions for recurrent biliary disease were lowest in patients undoing a cholecystectomy (2.2% vs 9.2% endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and 12.4% no intervention, P < .001), as were readmissions for complications (3.6% vs 5.5% and 7.8%, P < .001). Cholecystectomy reduced rates of readmissions for recurrent disease (odds ratio 0.168, P < .001), for complications (odds ratio 0.540, P < .001), and death during readmission (odds ratio 0.503, P = .007); endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography alone reduced only rates of readmissions. Age was not a predictor of readmission or death.

CONCLUSION

Index admission cholecystectomy is associated with a lower risk of readmission for biliary disease or complications, as well as death during readmission, in elderly patients. Age alone is not predictive of outcomes; surgical intervention should be guided by clinical condition, comorbidities, and patient preference.

Cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy in elderly: A dilemma

Background/Aim: Although cholecystectomy is recommended by many guidelines after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for gallstones, the necessity of cholecystectomy in geriatric patients is a matter of debate. Here we compare the outcomes of new biliary events in cholecystectomized and non-cholecystectomized patients of geriatric age after ERCP for suspected choledocholithiasis. Methods: Non-cholecystectomized patients who underwent ERCP for choledocholithiasis from 2015 to 2017 were included in this retrospective cohort study. Patients with other biliary pathologies, incomplete clearance of common bile duct stones, and those who could not be reached at follow-up were excluded from the study. Biliary events (cholecystitis, cholangitis, pancreatitis, re-ERCP) were evaluated by considering age groups in patients with and without cholecystectomy in their follow-up after sphincterotomy. Results: A total of 284 patients were followed for an average of 69.77 (0.2) months. The cumulative incidence of biliary events in cholecystectomized patients was lower (16% vs. 21.5%; P < 0.001), and cholecystectomized patients had a longer time to the occurrence of events (mean 74.49 [0.27] months vs. 73.50 [0.33] months; P = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the frequency of biliary events between elderly patients with and without cholecystectomy (P = 0.81), and the cumulative incidence of biliary events in the in situ group was significantly lower than that in the geriatric group (17.5% vs 32.6%; P = 0.03) Conclusion: Although cholecystectomy significantly reduces subsequent biliary complications in young patients, it does not provide a statistically significant benefit in geriatric patients. We believe that there may be no need for routine prophylactic cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy in geriatric patients.

Long-Term Outcomes of Elderly Patients Managed Without Early Cholecystectomy After Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Sphincterotomy for Choledocholithiasis

Background

Prophylactic cholecystectomy following endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy (ERCP-S) remains the gold standard management of choledocholithiasis. Some clinicians propose ERCP-S alone as the definitive management in the elderly, given perioperative complication risks. This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of non-operative management of choledocholithiasis in adults aged ≥70.

Methodology

A total of 252 patients aged ≥70 underwent ERCP from 2004 to 2014 at a single institution. The rates of cholecystectomy, ERCP, complications, and mortality were gathered. Data were linked to a provincial health database to capture follow-up visits to alternate hospitals. Predictors of operation, recurrence, and mortality were analyzed using multivariable regression.

Results

Following ERCP, of the 252 patients, 33 (13.1%) underwent prophylactic cholecystectomy within three months, while 219 (86.9%) were initially managed conservatively. Of the 219 patients, 147 (67.1%) experienced no further choledocholithiasis after conservative management, while 23 (10.5%) patients underwent cholecystectomy. The mean follow-up was 2.9 years. Delayed operative patients were younger (mean age: 77.56 vs. 82.90; p < 0.001) and had lower Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (1.04 vs. 1.84; p = 0.030). When adjusted for age, CCI score, and sex, cholecystectomy was associated with increased survival, with an odds ratio of 0.48 (95% confidence interval = 0.26-0.90; p = 0.021). Perioperative complications occurred in 7/56 (12.5%) patients.

Conclusions

Recurrent choledocholithiasis is common in elderly patients. Despite recurrent symptoms, these patients are unlikely to undergo cholecystectomy. Surgeons operate on patients with greater life expectancy and fewer comorbidities with high success despite advanced patient age. Future prospective studies should examine objective criteria for prophylactic cholecystectomy in this population, given purported safety and benefits.

Role of Prophylactic Cholecystectomy After Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Biliary Stone Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and complication rate of cholecystectomy deferral versus prophylactic cholecystectomy among patients post-endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones.

BACKGROUND

Although previous reports suggest a decreased risk of biliary complications with prophylactic cholecystectomy, biliary endoscopic cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy may provide a role for deferring cholecystectomy with the gallbladder left in situ.

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were performed through August 2019 in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Measured outcomes included: mortality, recurrent biliary pain or cholecystitis, pancreatitis, cholangitis, and eventual need for cholecystectomy. Random effects models were used to determine pooled effect size and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Nine studies (n = 1605) were included. A total of 53.8% (n = 864) patients had deferred cholecystectomy post-sphincterotomy. Deferral cholecystectomy as compared to prophylactic cholecystectomy resulted in a significant increased risk of mortality [odds raio (OR) 2.56 (95% confidence interval, CI 1.54-4.23); P < 0.0001; I2 = 18.49]. Patients who did not undergo prophylactic cholecystectomy developed more recurrent biliary pain or cholecystitis [OR 5.10 (95% CI 3.39-7.67); P < 0.0001; I2 = 0.00]. Rate of pancreatitis [OR 3.11 (95% CI 0.99-9.83); P = 0.053; I2 = 0.00] and cholangitis [OR 1.49 (95% CI 0.74-2.98); P = 0.264; I2 = 0.00] was unaffected. Overall, 26.00% (95% CI 14.00-40.00) of patients with deferred prophylactic cholecystectomy required eventual cholecystectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic cholecystectomy remains the preferred strategy compared to a deferral approach with gallbladder in situ post-sphincterotomy for patients with bile duct stones. Future studies may highlight a subset of patients (ie, those with large balloon biliary dilation) that may not require cholecystectomy.

Could cholecystectomy be abandoned after removal of bile duct stones by endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreaticography?

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The current treatment for choledocholithiasis is endoscopic common bile duct clearance followed by cholecystectomy. However, few studies have investigated whether cholecystectomy is necessary after the endoscopic removal of bile duct stones. This study aimed to determine the rate of patients without symptoms during the follow-up period after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with choledocholithiasis who underwent ERCP from a single centre.The patients were invited to the hospital for evaluation of symptoms during the follow-up period after ERCP. The primary outcome of this study was to determine the rate of patients with symptoms during the follow-up period after ERCP.

RESULTS

A total of 286 patients with a median age of 57 (18-95) years old were included in the study. Of these, 195patients (68%) remained asymptomatic during the follow-up period of 18 months (1-70) after endoscopic sphincterotomy without cholecystectomy. A total of 75(50%) out of 151 patients who underwent cholecystectomy reported having symptoms after ERCP. In contrast, 119 (88%) out of 135 patients did not undergo cholecystectomy after the ERCP, remained asymptomatic during a median follow-up period of 43 months (11-70). The estimated 5-year asymptomatic rates of the patients after ERCP were 51% for the whole cohort (n = 286) according to Kaplan-Meier analysis.

CONCLUSION

Majority of patients with choledocholithiasis who did not undergo cholecystectomy after ERCP were asymptomatic during the follow-up period. Thus, cholecystectomy may be unnecessary after endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones within a midterm period.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

TG13 current terminology, etiology, and epidemiology of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis

While referring to the evidence adopted in the Tokyo Guidelines 2007 (TG07) as well as subsequently obtained evidence, further discussion took place on terminology, etiology, and epidemiological data. In particular, new findings have accumulated on the occurrence of symptoms in patients with gallstones, frequency of severe cholecystitis and cholangitis, onset of cholecystitis and cholangitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and medications, mortality rate, and recurrence rate. The primary etiology of acute cholangitis/cholecystitis is the presence of stones. Next to stones, the most significant etiology of acute cholangitis is benign/malignant stenosis of the biliary tract. On the other hand, there is another type of acute cholecystitis, acute acalculous cholecystitis, in which stones are not involved as causative factors. Risk factors for acute acalculous cholecystitis include surgery, trauma, burn, and parenteral nutrition. After 2000, the mortality rate of acute cholangitis has been about 10 %, while that of acute cholecystitis has generally been less than 1 %. After the publication of TG07, diagnostic criteria and severity assessment criteria were standardized, and the distribution of cases according to severity and comparison of clinical data among target populations have become more subjective. The concept of healthcare-associated infections is important in the current treatment of infection. The treatment of acute cholangitis and cholecystitis substantially differs from that of community-acquired infections. Cholangitis and cholecystitis as healthcare-associated infections are clearly described in the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13). Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

Recurrent cholangitis after endoscopic lithotripsy of common bile duct stones with gallstones in situ: predictive factors with and without subsequent cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct stones are a frequent complication of gallstones. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphincterotomy are often performed to evaluate the etiology of obstructive jaundice and for concomitant therapeutic removal of common bile duct stones. We aimed to evaluate the recurrence rate of cholangitis or cholecystitis after endoscopic lithotripsy with gallstones in situ and to identify associated predictive factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 183 patients who had received endoscopic lithotripsy between July 2007 and June 2010. We divided patients into two groups: One group who had received subsequent cholecystectomy (n=66) and one observational group (n=117). Patients with previous cholecystectomy or without gallstones were excluded. All included patients were followed up at our outpatient department. Our end point was the presence of symptoms of recurrent cholangitis or cholecystitis.

RESULTS

Subjects included 86 males and 97 females with a mean age of 62.5±16.3 years (range, 43-81 years). Cholangitis or cholecystitis recurred in 6 patients in the cholecystectomy group and 30 patients in the observational group. Findings revealed a lower recurrence rate and longer recurrence-free period in patients who received subsequent cholecystectomy. The recurrence rate of the observational group was significantly higher than that of the cholecystectomy group (25.6% versus 9.1%, P=.007). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses revealed that common bile duct dilatation was an independent predictive factor for recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Cholecystectomy is recommended after endoscopic lithotripsy. Common bile duct dilatation is associated with the rate of recurrent cholangitis or cholecystitis.

Is cholecystectomy necessary after endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones in patients older than 80 years of age?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis are generally referred to cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) and common bile duct clearance, we often have a conflict whether cholecystectomy is necessary in very elderly patients with comorbid diseases. The aim of this study is to assess whether cholecystectomy in very elderly patients is justified after ES.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis who underwent ES and stone extraction and were followed-up for more than 10 years were retrospectively reviewed. We divided these patients into two groups: the elderly group (equal to or more than 80 years old) and young group (less than 80 years old) and compared late biliary complications and mortality.

RESULTS

The 10-year cumulative incidence of overall biliary complications was significantly lower in cholecystectomized patients than in patients with gallbladder in situ in the young group (7.5 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.0037), but not different in the elderly group (8.3 vs. 7.4%, p = 0.92). When each complication was evaluated separately, the rate of recurrent common bile duct stones (CBDS) was not different, but that of acute cholecystitis was significantly lower in the elderly group than in the young group (4.1 vs. 22.6%, p = 0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

In very elderly patients the incidence of acute cholecystitis is low even when the gallbladder is preserved after endoscopic treatment of CBDS, with a similar risk of CBDS recurrence. Thus, it may not be necessary to recommend cholecystectomy after ES for CBDS in very elderly patients.

Mortality associated with the treatment of gallstone disease: a 10-year contemporary national experience

BACKGROUND

Gallstones remain a common clinical problem requiring skilled operative and nonoperative management. The aim of the present population-based study was to investigate causes of gallstone-related mortality in Scotland.

METHODS

Surgical deaths were peer reviewed between 1997 and 2006 through the Scottish Audit of Surgical Mortality (SASM); data were analyzed for patients in whom the principal diagnosis on admission was gallstone disease.

RESULTS

Gallstone disease was responsible for 790/43,271 (1.83%) of the surgical deaths recorded, with an overall mortality for cholecystectomy of 0.307% (176/57,352), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) of 0.313% (117/37,345), and cholecystostomy of 2.1% (12/578) across the decade. However, the majority of patients who died were elderly (47.6% ≥ 80 years or older) and were managed conservatively. Deaths following cholecystectomy usually followed emergency admission (76%) and were more likely to have been associated with postoperative medical complications (n = 189) than surgical complications (n = 36).

DISCUSSION

Although cholecystectomy is a relatively safe procedure, patients who die as a result of gallstone disease tend to be elderly, to have been admitted as emergency cases, and to have had co-morbidities. Future combined medical and surgical perioperative management may reduce the mortality rate associated with gallstones.

Modern surgical treatment of cholecystolithiasis with choledocholithiasis

Nowadays, minimally invasive surgery has been widely accepted, and a variety of endoscopic devices have been devised. The use of various endoscopic devices has resulted in a more rapid convalescence and a shorter hospital stay for many patients. Treatments for choledocholithiasis have been changed greatly from traditional exploratory choledochotomy and T- tube drainage to laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and primary duct closure, transcystic laparoscopic common bile duct exploration, or endoscopic extraction of common bile duct stones before and after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Combined use of laparoscopy, duodenoscopy and choledochoscopy will be the trend of choledocholithiasis treatment in the future.

Various techniques for the surgical treatment of common bile duct stones: a meta review

Common bile duct stones (CBDSs) may occur in up to 3%–14.7% of all patients for whom cholecystectomy is preformed. Patients presenting with CBDS have symptoms including: biliary colic, jaundice, cholangitis, pancreatitis or may be asymptomatic. It is important to distinguish between primary and secondary stones, because the treatment approach varies. Stones found before, during, and after cholecystectomy had also differing treatments. Different methods have been used for the treatment of CBDS but the suitable therapy depends on conditions such as patient' satisfaction, number and size of stones, and the surgeons experience in laparoscopy. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with or without endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy, laparoscopic CBD exploration (transcystic or transcholedochal), or laparotomy with CBD exploration (by T-tube, C-tube insertion, or primary closure) are the most commonly used methods managing CBDS. We will review the pathophysiology of CBDS, diagnosis, and different techniques of treatment with especial focus on the various surgical modalities.

Risk factors for cholecystectomy in patients with gallbladder stones after endoscopic clearance of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Cholecystectomy usually is recommended for patients with gallbladder (GB) stones who previously underwent endoscopic removal of common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, in practice, many patients still have GB stones after improvement of their biliary symptoms. This study aimed to evaluate risk factors for cholecystectomy in patients with GB stones after complete endoscopic clearance of CBD stones.

METHODS

From August 2003 to April 2006, the medical data of 61 patients with concomitant GB stones who underwent complete endoscopic clearance of CBD stones were reviewed retrospectively. The risk factors for subsequent cholecystectomy were evaluated during a 24-month of follow-up period.

RESULTS

Among the 61 patients, 12 (19.7%) subsequently required cholecystectomy for recurrence of biliary symptoms, and 11 of these 12 patients (91.7%) needed cholecystectomy within 12 months. Gallbladder stones 10 mm or larger (p = 0.037) and the acute pancreatitis (p = 0.049) were the independent risk factors for subsequent cholecystectomy. The actuarial probability of remaining free of subsequent cholecystectomy during the follow-up period was higher for the patients with GB stones smaller than 10 mm than for the patients with GB stones 10 mm or larger (86.7% vs. 62.5%; p = 0.037). In addition, the patients with acute pancreatitis had a higher tendency for subsequent cholecystectomy than the patients without acute pancreatitis (50% vs. 16.4%; p = 0.078).

CONCLUSIONS

Only a small number of patients subsequently needed to undergo cholecystectomy for recurrence of biliary symptoms, and most events developed within 12 months. For the patients with GB stones 10 mm or larger or acute pancreatitis, prophylactic cholecystectomy is strongly recommended after complete clearance of CBD stones.

Endoscopic management strategies in relation to the severity of acute cholangitis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Acute cholangitis (AC) and especially suppurative cholangitis due to biliary lithiasis is an emergency situation that requires urgent biliary decompression. The aim of the study is to present our policy for the treatment of AC due to choledocholithiasis, endoscopically.

METHODS

In a 4-year period, 71 patients presenting AC, due to lithiasis, underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES). All patients had fever, jaundice, abdominal pain, and in case of suppurative cholangitis hemodynamic instability. Most of them seemed to be high-risk candidates for surgery.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients had AC and 22 patients had acute obstructive suppurative cholangitis (AOSC). ES (conventional or needle-knife biliary fistulotomy) was successful in 69 out of 71 (97%) patients. Two patients were eventually operated and were excluded from statistical analysis. Fifty of the 69 patients (72%) had a complete bile duct clearance in 1 session. Conventional ES, complete bile duct clearance, and other endoscopic maneuvers (balloon, basket, lithotripsy) were significantly more frequent in the AC group (P<0.001). Needle-knife biliary fistulotomy, and stent insertion were significantly more frequent in the AOSC group (P<0.001). Endoscopical treatment had low morbidity and total hospital stay time.

CONCLUSIONS

ES is the procedure of choice for the treatment of AC offering definite treatment with low morbidity and short hospitalization. Urgent biliary decompression with minimal endoscopic maneuvers is crucial for the outcome of patients having AOSC.

Selective MRCP in the management of suspected common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

It is controversial whether selective endoscopic sphincterotomy or routine laparoscopic bile duct exploration is the optimal treatment for choledocholithiasis. Magnetic resonance cholangio-pancreatography (MRCP) is a safe and accurate imaging modality; this study evaluated its use in a clinical algorithm for the management of suspected choledocholithiasis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients presenting with suspected common bile duct (CBD) stones were managed according to an algorithm involving the selective use of MRCP to identify patients who required endoscopic sphincterotomy and bile duct clearance. Following radiological demonstration of a clear CBD, all patients were considered for cholecystectomy.

RESULTS

From 157 consecutive patients, 68 proceeded straight to endoscopic sphincterotomy, which was therapeutic in 59. Of 89 who underwent MRCP, choledocholithiasis was demonstrated in 29; subsequent endoscopic sphincterotomy was therapeutic in 22. MRCP demonstrated a clear CBD in the remaining 60 patients. Seventy-four patients subsequently underwent cholecystectomy, with a conversion rate of 9% and a median postoperative stay of 1 day. There were no instances of post-sphincterotomy pancreatitis or haemorrhage requiring transfusion.

CONCLUSION

An algorithm involving selective MRCP with endoscopic sphincterotomy is a safe, effective means of managing suspected choledocholithiasis, particularly where the expertise, equipment or theatre time for laparoscopic bile duct exploration is not routinely available.

Routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis in octogenarians: is it worth the risk?

BACKGROUND

No unanimous consensus has been reached as to the need for routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) for choledocholithiasis in very elderly patients, who are considered as high-risk subjects for surgery.

METHODS

From 1991 through 1997, 170 patients were referred to undergo preoperative ES and routine LC for common bile duct (CBD) stones. The results for 27 patients (age 80 years or older) were compared with those achieved for younger patients. Successively, in a retrospective case-control study, the results for the selected patients were compared with those for 27 very elderly patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but did not receive LC. The mean follow-up period was 126 months.

RESULTS

Octogenarians showed longer surgery time (79 vs 51 min) and postoperative hospital stay (2.8 vs 1.2 days), as well as more early low-grade complications (15% vs 3%), whereas there were no differences in conversion rate or serious complications. Recurrent symptoms or complications developed in 48% of octogenarians not undergoing routine LC, and 30% finally needed surgery. One patient in the control group died after emergency cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. The results of surgery were significantly poorer for the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a "wait-and-see" policy allowed two-thirds of LCs to be avoided in octogenarians, biliary-related events developed for every second patient, often requiring delayed surgery, with poorer results. Sequential treatment (ES followed by elective LC) is a safe procedure for octogenarians, and should be considered as a standard, definitive treatment for cholecystocholedocholithiasis even after the age of 80 years.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy with or without cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis in high-risk surgical patients: a decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) is recommended for patients with choledocholithiasis after ERCP with sphincterotomy (ES) and stone extraction.

AIM

We designed a decision model to address whether ES alone versus ES followed by LC (ES + LC) is the optimal treatment in high-risk patients with choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

Our cohort were patients with obstructive jaundice who have undergone an ES with biliary clearance. Recurrent biliary complications over a 2-year period stratified by gallbladder status (in/out) and age-stratified surgical complication rates were obtained from the literature. Failure of therapy was defined as either recurrent symptoms or death attributed to biliary complications.

RESULTS

For age 70-79 years, ES failed in 15% whereas ES + LC failed in 17% of cases. Mortality in the EC + LC group was 3.4 times that of the ES alone cohort. For age 80+ years, ES was dominant with an incremental success rate of 8%. Mortality in the ES + LC was 7.6 times that of ES. For age <70, ES + LC was the dominant strategy with an incremental success rate 5%. Sensitivity analysis in the groups confirmed our conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of choledocholithiasis by ES and stone clearance, but without cholecystectomy, should be considered for patients aged 70+. For low-risk patients, ES + LC should be performed to prevent recurrent biliary complications.

Economical and clinical outcomes of alternative treatment strategies in the management of common bile duct stones in the elderly: wait and see or surgery?

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct stones (CBDS) are especially prevalent in the elderly population. Although the standard of care for stone removal is endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with sphincterotomy (ERC-S), the clinician's decision to refer a patient for cholecystectomy after ERC-S depends on several factors including potential for future biliary symptoms and complications, morbidity and mortality related to cholecystectomy, and costs associated with referral for cholecystectomy versus conservative approach. Using decision analysis, we explored the economic implications of cholecystectomy versus expectant management following ERC-S in elderly patients with CBDS.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

A decision tree was constructed with DATA 3.5 (Williamstown, MA) to estimate the costs and outcomes associated with two treatment strategies following ERC-S for CBDS in patients age 60 yr and older: (1) elective cholecystectomy, and (2) expectant management. Probabilities for potential complications and outcomes were derived from the medical literature and cost reflected Medicare reimbursement rates at our institution. The time horizon of the analysis was 2 yr.

RESULTS

Elective cholecystectomy was associated with total costs of 5,259 dollars with 94.3% of the cohort alive (1.886 life-years) at 2 yr, whereas expectant management was associated with total costs of 1,173 dollars with 94.7% of the cohort alive (1.894 life-years). The results were sensitive to the probability of recurrent biliary symptoms in patients treated conservatively. Compared to elective cholecystectomy, expectant management became less effective and more expensive at a yearly probability of recurrent symptoms greater than 40% and 90%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients aged 60 and older, expectant management after ERC-S for CBDS is a reasonable approach, but the economic attractiveness of this strategy is highly dependent on the probability of recurrent symptoms.

Risk factors of acute cholecystitis after endoscopic common bile duct stone removal

AIM: To evaluate the risk factors of acute cholecystitis after endoscopic common bile duct (CBD) stone removal.

METHODS: A total 100 of patients who underwent endoscopic CBD stone removal with gallbladder (GB) in situ without subsequent cholecystectomy from January 2000 to July 2004 were evaluated retrospectively. The following factors were considered while evaluating risk factors for the development of acute cholecystitis: age, gender, serum bilirubin level, GB wall thickening, cystic duct patency, presence of a GB stone, CBD diameter, residual stone, lithotripsy, juxtapapillary diverticulum, presence of liver cirrhosis or diabetes mellitus, a presenting illness of cholangitis or pancreatitis, and procedure-related complications.

RESULTS: During a mean 18-mo follow-up, 28 (28%) patients developed biliary symptoms; 17 (17%) acute cholecystitis and 13 (13%) CBD stone recurrence. Of patients with acute cholecystitis, 15 (88.2%) received laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 2 (11.8%) open cholecystectomy. All recurrent CBD stones were successfully removed endoscopically. The mean time elapse to acute cholecystitis was 10.2 mo (1-37 mo) and that to recurrent CBD stone was 18.4 mo. Of the 17 patients who received cholecystectomy, 2 (11.8%) developed recurrent CBD stones after cholecystectomy. By multivariate analysis, a serum total bilirubin level of

<1.3 mg/dL and a CBD diameter of <11 mm at the time of stone removal were found to predict the development of acute cholecystitis.

CONCLUSION: After CBD stone removal, there is no need for routine prophylactic cholecystectomy. However, patients without a dilated bile duct (<11 mm) and jaundice (<1.3 mg/dL) at the time of CBD stone removal have a higher risk of acute cholecystitis and are possible candidates for prophylactic cholecystectomy.

Evidence-based treatment of acute pancreatitis: a look at established paradigms

BACKGROUND

The management of acute pancreatitis (AP) is still based on speculative and unproven paradigms in many centers. Therefore, we performed an evidence-based analysis to assess the best available treatment.

METHODS

A comprehensive Medline and Cochrane Library search was performed evaluating the indication and timing of interventional and surgical approaches, and the value of aprotinin, lexipafant, gabexate mesylate, and octreotide treatment. Each study was ranked according to the evidence-based methodology of Sackett; whenever feasible, we performed new meta-analyses using the random-effects model. Recommendations were based on the available level of evidence (A=large randomized; B=small randomized; C=prospective trial).

RESULTS

None of the evaluated medical treatments is recommended (level A). Patients with AP should receive early enteral nutrition (level B). While mild biliary AP is best treated by primary cholecystectomy (level B), patients with severe biliary AP require emergency endoscopic papillotomy followed by interval cholecystectomy (level A). Patients with necrotizing AP should receive imipenem or meropenem prophylaxis to decrease the risk of infected necrosis and mortality (level A). Sterile necrosis per se is not an indication for surgery (level C), and not all patients with infected necrosis require immediate surgery (level B). In general, early necrosectomy should be avoided (level B), and single necrosectomy with postoperative lavage should be preferred over "open-packing" because of fewer complications with comparable mortality rates (level C).

CONCLUSIONS

While providing new insights into key aspects of AP management, this evidence-based analysis highlights the need for further clinical trials, particularly regarding the indications for antibiotic prophylaxis and surgery.

Outcomes of cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for treatment of symptomatic common bile duct stones (CBDS) after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is associated with increased conversion and complications compared with other indications. We examined factors associated with conversion and complications of LC after ES. A retrospective study of 32 patients undergoing ES for CBDS followed by cholecystectomy was undertaken. Surgical outcomes for this group were compared with a control population of 499 LCs for all other indications. Factors associated with open cholecystectomy and complications in the ES group were analyzed. Patients undergoing LC preceded by ES had a significantly higher complication (odds ratio [OR] = 7.97; 95% CI, 2.84-22.5) and conversion rate (OR = 3.45; 95% CI, 1.56-7.66) compared with LC for all other indications. Pre-ES serum bilirubin greater than 5 mg/dL was predictive of conversion (positive predictive value = 63%, P < 0.005). Patients with symptomatic CBDS that undergo LC after ES have higher complication and conversion rates than patients undergoing LC without ES. Pre-ES serum bilirubin is useful in identifying patients who may not have a successful laparoscopic approach at cholecystectomy.