Echo-endoscopy versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: the influence of the size of the stone and diameter of the common bile duct

Role of endoscopic ultrasound in evaluation of patients with missed common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Choledocholithiasis develops in up to 20% of patients with gall bladder stones. The challenge in diagnosis usually occurs with small stones that may be missed by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is accurate in detecting common bile duct (CBD) stones missed by MRCP, especially the small ones or those impacted at the distal CBD or the papillary region.

AIM

To evaluate the accuracy of EUS in detecting CBD stones missed by MRCP.

METHODS

Patients with an intermediate likelihood of choledocholithiasis according to ESGE guidelines and those with acute pancreatitis of undetermined cause were included. The presence of choledocholithiasis was evaluated by MRCP and EUS, and then results were confirmed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). The sensitivity and specificity of EUS and MRCP were compared regarding the presence of stones, the size, and the number of detected stones.

RESULTS

Ninety out of 100 involved patients had choledocholithiasis, while ten patients were excluded as they had pancreatic or gall bladder masses during EUS examination. In choledocholithiasis patients, the mean age was 52.37 ± 14.64 years, and 52.2% were males. Most patients had biliary obstruction (74.4%), while only 23 (25.6%) patients had unexplained pancreatitis. The overall prevalence of choledocholithiasis was 83.3% by EUS, 41.1% by MRCP, and 74.4% by ERCP. Also, the number and size of CBD stones could be detected accurately in 78.2% and 75.6% by EUS and 41.1% and 70.3% by MRCP, respectively. The sensitivity of EUS was higher than that of MRCP (98.51% vs 55.22%), and their predictive value was statistically different (P < 0.001). Combination of both tools raised the sensitivity to 97.22% and specificity to 100%.

CONCLUSION

EUS could be a useful tool in assessing patients with suspected choledocholithiasis especially if combined with MRCP. However, its usefulness depends on its availability and the experience of the local centers.

Transcystic Choledochoscopy Utilizing a Disposable Choledochoscope: How We Do It

BACKGROUND

Biliary disease is common occurrence and can make up a large portion of the practice of a general surgeon. Choledocholithasis is a common entity amongst those with biliary disease. Although modern trends favor endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and other imaging modalities for the diagnosis and management of choledocholithiasis, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is likely underutilized.

METHODS

A literature summary utilizing a PUBMED search was performed to provide an up-to-date account regarding the latest data on LCBDE. A video identifying and explaining the critical components of a LBCDE procedure is provided.

RESULTS

LCBDE is an underutilized procedure which offers equivalent clinical outcomes compared with ERCP along with a shorter length of stay and reduced costs. LCBDE is also noted to be an effective option for common bile duct stones in the setting of altered anatomy, such as a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

CONCLUSION

Although modern trends favor ERCP and other imaging modalities for the diagnosis and management of choledocholithiasis, LCBDE is likely underutilized by surgeons. LCBDE can provide many benefits to patients including avoidance of additional procedures, shorter length of stay, higher success rates, and less costs. Out video should act is a guide for those surgeons interested in implementation LCBDE in their practice.

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound in evaluation of patients with obstructive jaundice: single-center experience

Background/aims

We prospectively evaluated the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in detecting the cause of common bile duct (CBD) dilatation in patients in whom trans-abdominal ultrasound (TUS) could not demonstrate the cause of dilation as a proper second step in the diagnostic workup of patients with obstructive jaundice compared to magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP).

Methods

This study was conducted on patients with obstructive jaundice admitted to the inpatient ward or the outpatient endoscopy unit of Theodor Bilharz Research Institute (TBRI) during the period between January 2019 and August 2019. A patient with obstructive jaundice and TUS showed CBD dilatation with internal diameter ≥ 7 mm and biliary stricture.

Results

During the period between January 2019 and August 2019, 136 were recruited; 8 patients who were pregnant and 3 patients who had gastric bypass surgery were excluded. Sixty-five patients were diagnosed confidently by TUS as biliary stones and were excluded from the analysis. Sixty patients with obstructive jaundice and indefinite etiology on TUS were included in the final analysis. The final diagnosis of patients was 38 patients (63.33%) of malignant etiology [26 pancreatic cancer (43.33%), 4 cholangiocarcinoma (6.66%), and 8 with ampullary cancer (13.33%)] and 22 patients (36.67%) of benign etiology [10 calcular obstruction (16.66%), 8 benign stricture (13.33%), and 4 pancreatitis (6.66%)]. The sensitivity and specificity values for malignant stricture detected by EUS were 100% and 86.36%, respectively, with positive predictive value of 92.68%, negative predictive value of 100%, and accuracy of 95%, while MRI showed 82.14% sensitivity and 25% specificity with positive predictive value of 79.31 and accuracy of 69.4%. EUS supported correct diagnosis in 57 patients (95%: CI 86.08 to 98.96%) while MRI did it in 36 patients (69.44%: CI 51.89% to 83.65%).Only 43 (71.7%) patients needed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for management of obstructive jaundice, sparing 17 patients (28.3%) unnecessary invasive procedures.

Conclusions

EUS is a minimally invasive method with low incidence of complications with high diagnostic accuracy in patients with dilated CBD and normal MRCP.

Artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal radiology: A review with special focus on recent development of magnetic resonance and computed tomography

Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly the deep learning technology, have been proven influential to radiology in the recent decade. Its ability in image classification, segmentation, detection and reconstruction tasks have substantially assisted diagnostic radiology, and has even been viewed as having the potential to perform better than radiologists in some tasks. Gastrointestinal radiology, an important subspecialty dealing with complex anatomy and various modalities including endoscopy, have especially attracted the attention of AI researchers and engineers worldwide. Consequently, recently many tools have been developed for lesion detection and image construction in gastrointestinal radiology, particularly in the fields for which public databases are available, such as diagnostic abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT). This review will provide a framework for understanding recent advancements of AI in gastrointestinal radiology, with a special focus on hepatic and pancreatobiliary diagnostic radiology with MRI and CT. For fields where AI is less developed, this review will also explain the difficulty in AI model training and possible strategies to overcome the technical issues. The authors’ insights of possible future development will be addressed in the last section.

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.

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound after removal of common bile duct stone

Objective: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a standard procedure for choledocholithiasis. Nonetheless, the recurrence rate remains quite high. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and related factors of remnant biliary stone or sludge using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) after the removal of common bile duct (CBD) stone and to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes. Methods: A prospective study enrolling a consecutive series of patients who underwent ERCP for CBD stone removal was performed between June 2014 and November 2015. Following confirmation of complete CBD stone removal by the operator, EUS was performed to determine whether biliary stone or sludge remained. Patients underwent cholecystectomy if a gallstone was identified and were subsequently followed up at a regular interval of 3-6 months. We investigated whether symptomatic recurrence would occur. Results: A total of 130 patients were enrolled. The presence of remnant biliary stone or sludge after ERCP was confirmed in 36.9% (48/130) of patients. Acute angulation of the distal CBD was the sole factor associated with remnant biliary stone or sludge (p < .01). During the follow-up period, the overall recurrence rate was 17.7% (23/130). Recurrent symptomatic choledocholithiasis was predicted by remnant biliary sludge and large CBD diameter in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: Acute angulation of the distal CBD was associated with remnant biliary stone or sludge after ERCP. Remnant biliary sludge on EUS and large CBD diameter were strong predictors of symptomatic recurrence. EUS evaluation following CBD stone removal could be an effective strategy in the treatment of choledocholithiasis.

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.

Clinical Observation of the Efficacy of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography on Elder Choledocholithiasis and Its Effects on the Levels of TNF-α, IL-1, and IL-6

OBJECTIVE

We conducted this study to investigate the clinical efficacy of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) on elder choledocholithiasis and its effects on the levels of TNF-α, IL-1, and IL-6.

METHODS

Elder patients with choledocholithiasis were enrolled in this study, and according to the surgical methods, they were divided into the ERCP group and the surgical group. After treatment, we compared the efficacy of these two methods on patients, inflammatory responses indicated by the levels of TNF-α, IL-1, and IL-6, and the complications.

RESULTS

No statistical significance was identified in the difference of the success rate in removal between the two groups (98% vs. 94%), but indicators of the ERCP group, including the surgical duration (28.5±12.8) min, remission duration of abdominal pain (1.2±0.2) d, recession time of jaundice (2.0±0.3) d, postoperative bedridden time (1.4±0.2) d, treatment time of the anti-infection (1.5±0.2) d, length of stay in hospital (6.5±0.3) d, levels of TNF-α (2.1±0.2) μg/L, IL-1 (6.3±0.8) μg/L, IL-6 (2.8±0.3) μg/L, and the incidence rate of complications (1.8%), were all significantly lower than those in the surgical group (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of choledocholithiasis, ERCP is excellent in controlling the trauma, accelerating the recovery duration, reducing the occurrence of complications and ameliorating the inflammatory responses. Thus, it is an ideal choice for choledocholithiasis.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasonography and Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography in Patients With Acute Pancreatitis After Negative Computed Tomography Findings of the Etiology

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate the roles of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in detecting the causes of acute pancreatitis after negative computed tomography (CT) findings.

METHODS

Demographic characteristics, blood test results, the severity of pancreatitis, and definite or possible etiology of pancreatitis by EUS and MRCP were evaluated prospectively in 65 consecutively admitted patients after negative CT findings.

RESULTS

Endoscopic ultrasonography and/or MRCP confirmed the definite causes of pancreatitis in 47.7% (31/65) (choledocholithiasis, 25; pancreatic divisum, 3; pancreatic cancer, 1; and pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, 1). The possible causes were cholelithiasis in 75.4%, pancreaticobiliary common channel (PBCC) in 70.8%, and both in 89.2%. The diagnostic values of EUS were higher than MRCP for choledocholithiasis (35.4% vs 12.3%, P < 0.05). Cholelithiasis and the common bile duct diameter were independent factors for the definite etiology of acute pancreatitis. Choledocholithiasis was inversely associated with PBCC, and the common bile duct diameter was the only independent factor associated with PBCC.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasonography is a useful imaging modality for detecting definite or possible causes of acute pancreatitis. A PBCC as well as biliary lithiasis could be not uncommon causes of acute pancreatitis after negative CT findings.

The added value of tomosynthesis in endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with radiography for the detection of choledocholithiasis

OBJECTIVE

The diagnostic performance of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) with radiography is imperfect. We assessed the value of adding tomosynthesis to ERC with radiography for the detection of choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

This study included 102 consecutive patients (choledocholithiasis/non-choledocholithiasis, n = 57/45), who underwent both radiography and tomosynthesis for ERC in the same examination and were not diagnosed with malignancy. The reference standard for the existence of choledocholithiasis was confirmed by endoscopic stone extraction during ERC, intraoperative cholangiography, or follow up with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (n = 78, 11, and 13, respectively). A gastroenterologist and a radiologist independently evaluated the radiographs and the combination of tomosynthesis and radiographic images in a blinded and randomised manner. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for combined tomosynthesis and radiography were significantly higher than those for radiography alone for both readers: Reader 1/Reader 2, 0.929/0.956 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.861-0.965/0.890-0.983) vs 0.803/0.769 (95% confidence interval, 0.707-0.873/0.668-0.846), respectively (p = 0.0047/< 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Adding tomosynthesis to radiography improved the diagnostic performance of ERC for detection of choledocholithiasis. Advances in knowledge: Adding tomosynthesis to radiography improves detection of choledocholithiasis and tomosynthesis images can be obtained easily after radiographs and repeated immediately.

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.

Capability of Radial- and Convex-Arrayed Echoendoscopes for Visualization of the Pancreatobiliary Junction

Background/Aims

Although both radial- and convex-arrayed endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) scopes are widely used for observational EUS examinations, there have been few comparative studies on their power of visualization. The aim of this study was to evaluate the capability of these EUS scopes for observation of the pancreatobiliary junction.

METHODS

The rate of successful visualization of the pancreatobiliary junction was retrospectively compared between a radial-arrayed and a convex-arrayed echoendoscope, from a prospectively maintained database. Study periods were defined as January 2010 to December 2012 for the radial group, and February 2015 to October 2016 for the convex group because the respective scope was mainly used during those periods.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1,660 cases with radial EUS and 1,984 cases with convex EUS were recruited. The success rates of observation of the pancreatobiliary junction were 80.0% and 89.5%, respectively (p&lt;0.0001).

Conclusions

The capability of visualization of the pancreatobiliary junction in observational EUS was found to be better with a convex-arrayed than with a radial-arrayed echoendoscope.

Clinical effects of intravenous anesthesia with etomidate plus propofol for subpyloric endoscopic ultrasonography

AIM

To investigate the clinical effects of intravenous anesthesia with etomidate plus propofol for deep sedation during subpyloric endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS).

METHODS

We recruited 60 patients who would undergo subpyloric EUS examination. They were randomly allocated into three groups to receive intravenous etomidate alone (group E, n = 20), intravenous propofol alone (group P, n = 20) and etomidate combined with propofol (group EP, n = 20), respectively. The change of patients' vital signs, examination duration, time to awakening, and adverse effects were observed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the onset time of anesthesia, examination duration or time to awakening among all groups (P > 0.05). There was a significant circulatory fluctuation in group E and group P. In group E, 7 cases had myoclonus and a total of 15 cases developed adverse effects, and the rates of myoclonus and overall adverse effects were significantly higher than those in the other two groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous anesthesia with etomidate plus propofol can be safely and effectively applied to ubpyloric EUS with few adverse effects.

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

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

The Usefulness of Early Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Acute Biliary Pancreatitis with Undetectable Choledocholithiasis on Multidetector Computed Tomography

Background/Aims

EUS can detect bile duct stones (BDS) that are undetectable on multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). BDS associated with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) are small and tend to be excreted spontaneously. This study evaluated the usefulness of early EUS in patients with ABP and undetectable BDS on MDCT.

Methods

Forty-one patients with ABP and undetectable BDS on MDCT underwent EUS within 24 hours of admission and were diagnosed with BDS, sludge, dilated common bile duct (CBD), or normal CBD. ERCP was performed in patients with BDS, sludge, or clinical deterioration. The diagnostic yield and the effects of early EUS on morbidity, mortality, and the length of hospitalization were evaluated.

Results

EUS detected BDS or sludge in 48.8% of patients examined. BDS was the diagnosis in 13 patients, sludge in seven, and neither for 21 patients. ERCP was performed in 20 patients with BDS or sludge, in two patients with coexisting cholangitis, and in one patient with worsening liver function tests. ERCP identified BDS in 12 patients and sludge in seven. No lesions were diagnosed in four patients by ERCP. All patients improved, and the length of hospitalization in patients with ERCP was 9.0 days, without ERCP 7.1 days. Two patients with major complications by ERCP were hospitalized for a prolonged time.

Conclusions

Early EUS may be useful to select patients for therapeutic ERCP in cases of suspected ABP with undetectable BDS on MDCT.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has become the standard procedure for most choledocholithiasis patients, the application of this procedure to liver cirrhosis is still in debate. The aim of current study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE in choledocholithiasis patients with compensated liver cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2006 to December 2012, 346 LCBDE performed in our hospital. According to previous defined liver condition, the patients were divided into group A (liver cirrhosis, n=132) and group B (without cirrhosis, n=214). The perioperative data for the 2 groups were retrospectively reviewed and compared.

RESULTS

LCBDE was successfully completed in 326 patients. Conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery was necessary for 20 patients (5.7%) mainly because of hemorrhage (5, 25%) and severe adhesions (8, 40%); a T-tube was placed in 211 patients (64.7%), and primary closure was done in 115 (35.3%). There was significant difference for groups A and B in term of intraoperative blood loss (85 vs. 35 mL; P<0.01). However, the 2 groups showed no significant differences with respect to mean operation time (2.1 vs. 1.9 h; P=0.07), complication rates (10.6% vs. 8.8%; P=0.6), and mean hospital stay (4.2 vs. 4.0 d; P=0.6), conversion rate (5.3% vs. 6.1%; P=0.77), and retained choledocholithiasis rate (8.3% vs. 7.1%; P=0.65). There was no mortality in both the groups.

CONCLUSION

LCBDE is a feasible, effective, and safe surgical procedure for choledocholithiasis patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of endoscopic ultrasound versus magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with suspected common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Patients with suspected common bile duct (CBD) stones are often diagnosed using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), an invasive procedure with risk of significant complications. Using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or Magnetic Resonance CholangioPancreatography (MRCP) first to detect CBD stones can reduce the risk of unnecessary procedures, cut complications and may save costs.

AIM

This study sought to compare the cost-effectiveness of initial EUS or MRCP in patients with suspected CBD stones.

METHODS

This study is a model based cost-utility analysis estimating mean costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) over a 1 year time horizon. A decision tree model was constructed and populated with probabilities, outcomes and cost data from published sources, including one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Using MRCP to select patients for ERCP was less costly than using EUS to select patients or proceeding directly to ERCP ($1299 versus $1753 and $1781, respectively), with similar QALYs accruing to each option (0.998, 0.998 and 0.997 for EUS, MRCP and direct ERCP, respectively). Initial MRCP was the most cost-effective option with the highest monetary net benefit, and this result was not sensitive to model parameters. MRCP had a 61% probability of being cost-effective at $29,000, the maximum willingness to pay for a QALY commonly used in the UK.

CONCLUSION

From the perspective of the UK NHS, MRCP was the most cost-effective test in the diagnosis of CBD stones.

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.

Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) has become the standard procedure for most choledocholithiasis patients, the application of this procedure to liver cirrhosis is still in debate. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of LCBDE in choledocholithiasis patients with compensated liver cirrhosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2006 to December 2012, 346 LCBDEs were performed in our hospital. According to the previously defined liver condition, the patients were divided into group A (liver cirrhosis, n=132) and group B (without cirrhosis, n=214). The perioperative data for the 2 groups were retrospectively reviewed and compared.

RESULTS

LCBDE was successfully completed in 326 patients. Conversion from laparoscopic to open surgery was necessary for 20 patients (5.7%) mainly because of hemorrhage (5, 25%) and severe adhesions (8, 40%). A T-tube was placed in 211 patients (64.7%), and primary closure was performed in 115 (35.3%) patients. There was a significant difference for groups A and B in terms of intraoperative blood loss (85 vs. 35 mL; P<0.01). However, the 2 groups showed no significant differences with respect to the mean operation time (2.1 vs. 1.9 h; P=0.07), complication rates (10.6% vs. 8.8%; P=0.6), mean hospital stay (4.2 vs. 4.0 d; P=0.6), conversion rate (5.3% vs. 6.1%; P=0.77), and retained choledocholithiasis rate (8.3% vs. 7.1%; P=0.65). There was no mortality in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

LCBDE is a feasible, effective, and safe surgical procedure for choledocholithiasis patients with compensated cirrhosis.

Role of sonography in assessing complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which was introduced to the arsenal of surgical procedures in the middle of the 1980s, is a common alternative for conventional cholecystectomy. Its primary advantage is less invasive character which entails shorter hospitalization and faster recovery. Nevertheless, the complications of both procedures are comparable and encompass multiple organs and tissues. The paper presents ultrasound presentation of the surgical bed after laparoscopic cholecystectomy and of complications associated with this procedure. In the first week following the surgery, the presence of up to 60 ml of fluid in the removed gallbladder bed should be considered normal in certain patients. The fluid will gradually absorb. In single cases, slight amounts of fluid are detected in the peritoneal cavity, which also should not be alarming. Carbon dioxide absorbs from the peritoneal cavity within two days. Ultrasound assessment of the surgical bed after cholecystectomy is inhibited by hemostatic material left during the surgery. Its presentation may mimic an abscess. In such cases, the decisive examination is magnetic resonance imaging but not computed tomography. On the other hand, rapidly accumulating fluid around the liver is an alarming symptom, particularly when there is inadequate blood supply or when peritoneum irritation symptoms develop. Depending on the suspected cause of the patient's deteriorating condition, it is essential to perform urgent computed tomography angiography, celiac angiography or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. The character of the fluid collection may be determined by its ultrasound-guided puncture. This procedure allows for aspiration of fluid and placement of a drain. Moreover, transabdominal ultrasound examination after laparoscopic cholecystectomy may contribute to the identification of: dropped stones in the right hypochondriac region, residual fragment of the gallbladder with possible concretions, undiagnosed choledocholithiasis, existing cholestasis, pseudoaneurysm of the hepatic artery, portal vein thrombosis and hematoma as well as hernias of the abdominal walls. Moreover, ultrasound examination helps to identify optimal sites in the abdominal integuments, which enables collision-free access to the peritoneal cavity.

Endoscopic ultrasonography in diseases of the gallbladder

In recent years, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has emerged as an important tool for the diagnosis and management of pancreaticobiliary disease. The close proximity of the echoendoscope to the biliary system allows detailed imaging of the gallbladder and adjacent structures. EUS is useful for the detection of occult cholelithiasis and biliary sludge and in the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis. It can be used to classify and predict neoplasia in polypoid lesions of the gallbladder and also to diagnose and stage gallbladder carcinoma. This article reviews the use of EUS in these diseases of the gallbladder.

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

BACKGROUND

Factors affecting diagnostic accuracy and comparison of patients in the follow-up period for negative outcomes are not thoroughly investigated in a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to compare diagnostic accuracy, complications, and number of interventions.

DESIGN

Prospective, unicentric, single-blind, randomized study.

SETTING

Single tertiary referral university hospital.

PATIENTS

One hundred twenty patients with intermediate risk for common bile duct (CBD) stones were randomized to either an EUS-first, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC)-second (n = 60) versus an ERC-only (n = 60) procedure.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS, ERC, sphincterotomy, and balloon sweeping of CBD when needed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Sensitivity of EUS versus ERC, factors affecting diagnostic capability, complications, total number of endoscopic procedures.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity of ERC were 75% (95% CI, 42%-93%) and 100% (95% CI, 95%-100%), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of EUS were 91% (95% CI, 59%-99%) and 100% (95% CI, 95%-100%), respectively. EUS is more sensitive than ERC in detecting stones smaller than 4 mm (90% vs 23%, P < .01). Although not significant, there was a trend for an increased number of endoscopic procedures in the ERC group compared with the EUS group (98 vs 83). The post-ERC pancreatitis rate was 6 in 120 (5%) in all study patients, and the post-ERC pancreatitis rate in patients with an undilated CBD was 5 of 53 (9.43%). The independent factors for post-ERC pancreatitis are undilated CBD (risk ratio [RR] 6.320; 95% CI, 1.703-11.524, P = .009), allocation into the ERC group (RR 2.107; 95% CI, 1.330-3.339, P = .02), female sex (RR 1.803; 95% CI, 1.155-2.813, P = .03), and age less than 40 years (RR 1.888; 95% CI, 1.245-2.863, P = .01). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed higher rate of negative outcome in the ERC group than in the EUS group (P = .049, log-rank test).

CONCLUSION

The EUS-first approach is not associated with further risk for subsequent endoscopic procedures. Patients with an undilated CBD should be investigated by the EUS-first approach to prevent post-ERC pancreatitis.

[I Brazilian consensus of endoscopic ultrasonography]

BACKGROUND

In the last 20 years, several papers have focused on demonstrating the impact of endoscopic ultrasonography findings on the management of different clinical scenarios in digestive disease. This fact is an indirect evidence of the difficulty of popularization of the method. On other hand, the limited availability of endoscopic ultrasonography in Brazil is a direct evidence of this limitation. This was the rationale for the organization of a consensus meeting on endoscopic ultrasonography. It was aimed to identify the best evidence that support the use of endoscopic ultrasonography in gastroenterology.

METHODS

A panel of experts on endoscopic ultrasonography was selected based on the files of the Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Societies and on the registries of endoscope manufacturers. Two members of the meeting selected the relevant topics that were transformed into questions. The topics and the questions were debated among the experts five months before the consensus meeting. The experts were asked to perform systematic reviews in order to answer the questions so it could be possible to grade the answers based on the strength of the evidence. During the two days of the meeting the answers were presented, debated and voted. Consensus was reached when a minimum of 70% of the voters were in agreement. The final consensus report was submitted to the experts' evaluation and approval.

RESULTS

Seventy nine questions were debated by the experts at the pre-Consensus meeting. As the result of this debate 85 questions came out and were assigned to the members of the panel. During the Consensus meeting 22 experts debated and voted 85 answers. Consensus was reached for several clinical scenarios for which the impact of endoscopic ultrasonography findings were supported by level 1 evidences: differential diagnosis of subepithelial lesions and thickening of gastric folds, staging and diagnosis of unresectable esophageal cancer, indirect signs of peritoneal involvement of gastric cancer, MALT gastric lymphoma and rectal cancer staging, diagnosis of common bile duct and gallbladder stones, diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis and differential diagnosis of a solid mass in chronic pancreatitis, differential diagnosis of the pancreatic cyst, prediction of the results of the endoscopic treatment of esophageal varices and diagnosis and staging of non-small cell lung cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

There are the highest levels of evidences that support the indication of endoscopic ultrasonography for several digestive diseases and even for non-small cell lung cancer.

[Common bile duct stones. Diagnostic and therapeutic management]

The best predictors for the presence of common bile duct stones (CBDS) are cholangitis, jaundice, and direct visualization of stones with ultrasound. In the setting of high suspicion of choledocholithiasis, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) is indicated because when CBDS are identified, it allows immediate therapy in the same sitting. If there is a moderate probability of choledocholithiasis, endosonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography are the first-line options. In patients with gallbladder stones and CBDS, preoperative ERC with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is widely recommended as a standard approach. The interval between that and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) should be at least 24 h (<6 weeks) to exclude possible complications due to the ERC/ES. In the setting of open cholecystectomy, open bile duct surgery is significantly superior to ERC with sphincterotomy in achieving common bile duct clearance and is the method of choice. Only in centres with advanced laparoscopic expertise is the laparoscopic removal of CBDS an equivalent treatment option.

Triple non-invasive diagnostic test for exclusion of common bile ducts stones before laparoscopic cholecystectomy

AIM: To evaluate the impact of a preoperative “triple non-invasive diagnostic test” for diagnosis and/or exclusion of common bile duct stones.

METHODS: All patients with symptomatic gallstone disease, operated on by laparoscopic cholecystectomy from March 2004 to March 2006 were studied retrospectively. Two hundred patients were included and reviewed by using a triple diagnostic test including: patient’s medical history, routine liver function tests and routine ultrasonography. All patients were followed up 2-24 mo after surgery to evaluate the impact of triple diagnostic test.

RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were identified to have common bile duct stones. Lack of history of stones, negative laboratory tests and normal ultrasonography alone was proven to exclude common bile duct stones in some patients. However, a combination of these three components (triple diagnostic), was proven to be the most statistically significant test to exclude common bile duct stones in patients with gallstone disease.

CONCLUSION: Using a combination of routinely used diagnostic components as triple diagnostic modality would increase the diagnostic accuracy of common bile duct stones preoperatively. This triple non-invasive test is recommended for excluding common bile duct stones and to identify patients in need for other investigations.

Endoscopic ultrasound: a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected biliary obstruction

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) achieves high-resolution images of the bile duct and pancreas, while avoiding the risks of ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography). It appears comparable to MRCP (magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography), although its use is less widely disseminated. We aimed to summarize EUS test performance in suspected biliary disease with meta-analysis.

METHODS

MEDLINE search (January 1987-September 2006), selected reference lists, external experts, and manual search of abstracts were used. Studies permitting (re)construction of 2 x 2 tables for EUS versus a gold standard were used. Random-effects models were used to estimate pooled sensitivity and specificity after adjusting for a number of potential confounders. Summary receiver operating characteristic analysis, with the sensitivity corresponding to the point on the receiver operating characteristic curve where sensitivity equals specificity (Q*) and area under the curve, was performed. The effects of sample size, quality, disease prevalence and spectrum, pancreatitis, echoendoscope type, and EUS era on diagnostic performance were assessed. Performance regarding presence of obstruction, choledocholithiasis, and malignancy was analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-six eligible, non-overlapping studies met inclusion criteria (3532 subjects). EUS had a high overall pooled sensitivity (88%; 95% confidence interval, 85%-91%) and specificity (90%; 87%-93%) for biliary obstruction (area under the curve = 0.97; Q* = 0.92). EUS had higher sensitivity (89%; 87%-91%) and specificity (94%; 91%-96%) for choledocholithiasis than for malignancy (sensitivity, 78%; 69%-85%; specificity, 84%; 78%-91%). Smaller studies and ones mainly studying patients with suspected strictures were associated with lower test performance.

CONCLUSIONS

There is excellent overall accuracy for EUS in diagnosing choledocholithiasis, with less impressive results for malignancy (when fine-needle aspiration is not used).