Large balloon dilation post endoscopic sphincterotomy in removal of difficult common bile duct stones: A literature review

Current Gallstone Treatment Methods, State of the Art

This study aims to provide valuable references for clinicians in selecting appropriate surgical methods for biliary tract stones based on patient conditions. In this paper, the advantages and disadvantages of various minimally invasive cholelithiasis surgical techniques are systematically summarized and innovative surgical approaches and intelligent stone removal technologies are introduced. The goal is to evaluate and predict future research priorities and development trends in the field of gallstone surgery. In recent years, the incidence of gallstone-related diseases, including cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis, has significantly increased. This surge in cases has prompted the development of several innovative methods for gallstone extraction, with minimally invasive procedures gaining the most popularity. Among these techniques, PTCS, ERCP, and LCBDE have garnered considerable attention, leading to new surgical techniques; however, it must be acknowledged that each surgical method has its unique indications and potential complications. The primary challenge for clinicians is selecting a surgical approach that minimizes patient trauma while reducing the incidence of complications such as pancreatitis and gallbladder cancer and preventing the recurrence of gallstones. The integration of artificial intelligence with stone extraction surgeries offers new opportunities to address this issue. Regarding the need for preoperative preparation for PTCS surgery, we recommend a combined approach of PTBD and PTOBF. For ERCP-based stone extraction, we recommend a small incision of the Oddi sphincter followed by 30 s of balloon dilation as the optimal procedure. If conditions permit, a biliary stent can be placed post-extraction. For the surgical approach of LCBDE, we recommend the transduodenal (TD) approach. Artificial intelligence is involved throughout the entire process of gallstone detection, treatment, and prognosis, and more AI-integrated medical technologies are expected to be applied in the future.

PREDICTORS OF FAILURE OF ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY IN CLEARING BILE DUCT STONES DURING INDEX PROCEDURE - A PROSPECTIVE STUDY

BACKGROUND

Common bile duct (CBD) stones are known to complicate 10-15% of gallstone diseases. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the therapeutic modality of choice for bile duct clearance in CBD stones but may fail to achieve stone clearance. This prospective study was done to identify the predictors of failure of CBD clearance with ERCP.

OBJECTIVE

This prospective study was done to identify the predictors of failure of CBD clearance with ERCP.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with bile duct stones undergoing ERCP at a tertiary care center were prospectively included from October 2020 to October 2021. The study's primary outcome was to identify and analyze factors that could predict the failure of complete CBD clearance.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients (50.8% males, median age: 53.5 years) were included in the final analysis. Successful clearance of CBD stones during the index procedure was achieved in 70% of patients. At a cut-off stone diameter of >10.5 mm and CBD diameter of >12.5 mm, the AUC was 0.890 and 0.884, respectively, to predict failed clearance of CBD. On multivariate analysis, stone diameter ≥15 mm [odds ratio (OR) 16.97, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.629-176.785], location of stones in hepatic ducts (OR 7.74, 95%CI: 2.041-29.332), presence of stricture distal to stone (OR 6.99, 95%CI: 1.402-34.726) and impacted stone (OR 21.61, 95%CI: 1.84-253.058) were independent predictors of failed bile duct clearance.

CONCLUSION

Stone size and location are independent predictors of failed bile duct clearance. The endoscopist should consider these factors while subjecting a patient to biliary ductal clearance to plan additional intervention.

BACKGROUND

• Failure to clear bile duct stones in the index ERCP can be seen in 15-20% of cases, and identifying the factors associated with failure is important.

BACKGROUND

• A prospective analysis was conducted to identify and analyze the factors that could predict the failure of complete CBD clearance.

BACKGROUND

• The present study reported a successful clearance of CBD stones during the index procedure in only 70% of patients.

BACKGROUND

• A stone diameter ≥15 mm, location of stones in hepatic ducts, presence of stricture distal to stone, and impacted stone were independent predictors of failed bile duct clearance.

Choledocholithiasis characteristics with periampullary diverticulum and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures: Comparison between two centers from Lanzhou and Kyoto

BACKGROUND

Most of study regarding periampullary diverticulum (PAD) impact on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) therapy for choledocholithiasis based on data from one endoscopy center and lacked to compare the clinical characteristic of choledocholithiasis with PAD from different geographical patients.

AIM

To compare the choledocholithiasis clinical characteristics between two regional endoscopy centers and analyze impacts of clinical characteristics on ERCP methods for choledocholithiasis patients with PAD.

METHODS

Patients seen in two endoscopy centers (The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu Province, China, and Kyoto Second Red Cross Hospital, Kyoto, Japan) underwent ERCP treatment for the first time between January 2012 and December 2017. The characteristics of choledocholithiasis with PAD were compared between the two centers, and their ERCP procedures and therapeutic outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 829 out of 3608 patients in the Lanzhou center and 241 out of 1198 in the Kyoto center had choledocholithiasis with PAD. Lots of clinical characteristics were significantly different between the two centers. The common bile duct (CBD) diameter was wider, choledocholithiasis size was lager and multiple CBD stones were more in the Lanzhou center patients than those in the Kyoto center patients (14.8 ± 5.2 mm vs 11.6 ± 4.2 mm, 12.2 ± 6.5 mm vs 8.2 ± 5.3 mm, 45.3% vs 20.3%, P < 0.001 for all). In addition, concomitant diseases, such as acute cholangitis, gallbladder stones, obstructive jaundice, cholecystectomy, and acute pancreatitis, were significantly different between the two centers (P = 0.03 to < 0.001). In the Lanzhou center, CBD diameter and choledocholithiasis size were lower, and multiple CBD stones and acute cholangitis were less in non-PAD patients than those in PAD patients (13.4 ± 5.1 mm vs 14.8 ± 5.2 mm, 10.3 ± 5.4 mm vs 12.2 ± 6.5, 39% vs 45.3%, 13.9% vs 18.5%, P = 0.002 to < 0.001). But all these characteristics were not significantly different in the Kyoto center. The proportions of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), endoscopic balloon dilatation (EPBD), and EST+EPBD were 50.5%, 1.7%, and 42.5% in the Lanzhou center and 90.0%, 0.0%, and 0.4% in the Kyoto center, respectively. However, the overall post-ERCP complication rate was not significantly different between the two centers (8.9% in the Lanzhou and 5.8% in the Kyoto. P = 0.12). In the Lanzhou center, the difficulty rate in removing CBD stones in PAD was higher than in non-PAD group (35.3% vs 26.0%, P < 0.001). But the rate was no significant difference between the two groups in Kyoto center. The residual rates of choledocholithiasis were not significantly different between the two groups in both centers. Post-ERCP complications occurred in 8.9% of the PAD patients and 8.1% of the non-PAD patients in the Lanzhou Center, and it occurred in 5.8% in PAD patients and 10.0% in non-PAD patients in the Kyoto center, all P > 0.05.

CONCLUSION

Many clinical characteristics of choledocholithiasis patients with PAD were significantly different between the Lanzhou and Kyoto centers. The patients had larger and multiple stones, wider CBD diameter, and more possibility of acute cholangitis and obstructive jaundice in the Lanzhou center than those in the Kyoto center. The ERCP procedures to manage native duodenal papilla were different depending on the different clinical characteristics while the overall post-ERCP complications were not significantly different between the two centers. The stone residual rate and post-ERCP complications were not significantly different between choledocholithiasis patients with PAD and without PAD in each center.

Controversies in ERCP: Technical aspects

The aim of the series of papers on controversies of biliopancreatic drainage procedures is to discuss pros and cons of the varying clinical practices and techniques in ERCP and EUS for drainage of biliary and pancreatic ducts. While the first part focuses on indications, clinical and imaging prerequisites prior to ERCP, sedation options, post-ERCP pancreatitis prophylaxis, and other related technical topics, the second part discusses specific procedural ERCP techniques including precut techniques and their timing as well as management algorithms. In addition, reviews on controversies in EUS-guided bile duct and pancreatic drainage procedures are under preparation.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

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

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

Comparison of endoscopic balloon dilatation potency using balloons size more or less than 15 mm in the treatment of large bile duct stones: a clinical trial study

AIM

The present study was performed on patients with large bile duct stones to compare clinical outcomes and complications of balloon dilatation treatment between two sizes of balloons, < 15 mm and ≥ 15 mm.

BACKGROUND

in 1982, the endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) method was presented by Staritz to reduce bleeding and perforation risk of large bile duct stones.

METHODS

Patients with large bile duct stones admitted to Taleghani hospital from December 2018 to December 2019 who were the candidates for balloon dilation with limited sphincterotomy. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. In group B, a ≥ 15 mm balloon was used, and in group A, a balloon <15 mm was used. The clinical results of balloon dilation and its complications were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

Most patients had 1 or 2 large bile duct stones, and there was no significant difference in the number of stones. Extraction was successful in 92.8% of group B and 85.7% of group A without significant differences (P = 0.8). Pancreatitis, hemorrhage, cholangitis, and perfusion occurred in 8%, 4.2%, 1.4%, and 2.8% of group B subjects and also in 10%, 2.8%, 0%, and 1.4% of group A subjects, respectively, and the difference between the two groups was not significant.

CONCLUSION

Generally, this study results showed that balloon size did not have a significant effect on the success rate of bile duct stones. Moreover, considering the lack of significant association between balloon dilatation size and the occurrence of post-endoscopic complications such as pancreatitis, it seems that large-size dilatation has no serious clinical risk.

Successful removal of multiple bile duct stones using a papillary large balloon dilation in a very elderly woman with situs inversus totalis

Situs inversus totalis (SIT) is a rare congenital anomaly in which all viscera are transposed to the opposite side of the body. This uncommon anatomy causes technical difficulties in endoscopic treatment. A 98-year-old woman with SIT was admitted to our hospital complaining of upper abdominal pain and fever. Blood examinations and findings of abdominal computed tomography imaging confirmed the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis and cholangitis associated with biliary stones. After recovering from pancreatitis and cholangitis with conservative treatment, she underwent therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) to remove the common bile duct (CBD) stones. The patient and the endoscopist were positioned in the usual ERCP position, and the scope was inserted into the duodenum with an approach in the direction opposite to the routine practice. Biliary cannulation was performed in the direction of 1 o'clock, and the cholangiography showed remarkably dilated CBD filled with numerous stones. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation was performed, and the CBD stones were successfully removed. There were no complications, such as bleeding, pancreatitis, or perforation. Over 3 years of follow-up, she had no recurrence of cholangitis or pancreatitis.

The influence of periampullary diverticula on ERCP for treatment of common bile duct stones

In order to evaluate the effectiveness of various methods we applied to decrease the influence of periampullary diverticula (PAD) on the success rate and complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the treatment of common bile duct (CBD) stones, we enrolled patients with CBD stones who had been treated by ERCP in our hospital between January 2015 and December 2018. According to the presence of PAD, the patients were divided into a PAD group and a non-PAD group. The rate of complete stone removal in the first session, the rate of overall stone removal, the frequency of application of mechanical lithotripsy, and procedure-related complications, including bleeding, hyperamylasemia, pancreatitis, perforation, and infection of biliary tract were recorded. A total of 183 cases, including 72 cases in the PAD group and 111 cases in the non-PAD group were enrolled. There was no statistical difference between the two groups regarding gender (P = 0.354). However, regarding age, there was a statistical difference (P = 0.002), and the incidence of PAD increased with age. There were 5 (6.9%) cases in the PAD group and 14 (12.6%) cases in the non-PAD group where mechanical lithotripsy was applied. There were 59 (81.9%) cases in the PAD group and 102 (91.9%) cases in the non-PAD group where there was complete removal of CBD stones in the first session, and there were 68 (94.4%) cases in the PAD group and 107 (96.4%) cases in the non-PAD group where there was complete removal of all stones. In the PAD group, there were 0 cases (0%) with gastrointestinal bleeding, 0 cases (0%) with gastrointestinal perforation, 13 cases (18.1%) with post-ERCP hyperamylasemia, 3 cases (4.2%) with post-ERCP pancreatitis, and 4 cases (5.6%) with biliary tract infection. In the non-PAD group, 1 case (0.9%) had gastrointestinal bleeding, 0 cases had gastrointestinal perforation, 18 cases (16.2%) had post-ERCP hyperamylasemia, 5 cases (4.5%) had post-ERCP pancreatitis, and 11 cases (9.9%) had biliary tract infection. This retrospective study showed that there was a statistical difference between the two groups regarding complete removal of CBD stones in the first session and application of mechanical lithotripsy (both P < 0.05), but no statistical difference according to the rates of overall stone removal and the complications (P > 0.05), which means that we can reduce the influence of PAD on ERCP for treatment of common bile duct stones.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation in patients with large biliary stones and periampullary diverticula: Results of a multicentric series

INTRODUCTION

Stone extraction represents the most frequent indication for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) is a recent introduced approach consisting of an endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation following limited endoscopic sphyncterotomy (ES), which has been proven to be safe and effective for extraction of large common bile duct (CBD) stones. Peri-ampullary diverticula (PAD) are described in 10-20% of patients undergoing ERCP. Aim of our study is to evaluate efficacy and safety of EPLBD for the extraction of large biliary stones in patients with PAD.

METHODS

The prospectively collected endoscopy databases of 4 Italian ERCP high-volume centers were reviewed retrospectively, and all consecutive patients with an instrumental diagnosis of large biliary stones and PAD, between September 2014 and October 2016, were included in this study.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients (36 males, median age 75 years) were treated between September 2014 and October 2016. Deep biliary cannulation was reached in 78/80 patients. Successful extraction was achieved in 74/78 patients at the first attempt. AEs occurred in 8 patients (1 severe). Younger age, stone size and incomplete stone extraction were significantly associated with AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

EPLBD is an effective and safe technique in patients with PAD and large biliary stones, which avoids the need of other techniques, thereby reducing the risks of adverse events.

Endoscopic Management of Difficult Bile Duct Stones

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In 10-15% of the cases, conventional methods for removing bile duct stones by ERCP/balloon-basket extraction fail. The purpose of this review is to describe endoscopic techniques in managing these "difficult bile duct stones."

RECENT FINDINGS

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation with balloon extraction ± mechanical lithotripsy is the initial approach used to retrieve large bile duct stones. With advent of digital cholangioscopy, electrohydraulic and laser lithotripsy are gaining popularity. Enteroscopy-assisted or laparoscopic-assisted approaches can be used for those with gastric bypass anatomy. Difficulties in removing bile duct stones can be related to stone-related factors such as the size and location of the stone or to altered anatomy such as stricture in the bile duct or Roux-en-Y anatomy. Several endoscopy approaches and techniques have described in the recent past that have greatly enhanced our ability to remove these "difficult" bile duct stones.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation with sphincterotomy is safe and effective for biliary stone removal independent of timing and size of sphincterotomy

AIM

To describe the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) in the management of bile duct stones in a Western population.

METHODS

Data was collected from the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and Radiology electronic database along with a review of case notes over a period of six years from 1^st August 2009 to 31^st July 2015 and incorporated into Microsoft excel. Statistical analyses were performed using MedCalc for Windows, version 12.5 (MedCalc Software, Ostend, Belgium). Simple statistical applications were applied in order to determine whether significant differences exist in comparison groups. We initially used simple proportions to describe the study populations. Furthermore, we used chi-square test to compare proportions and categorical variables. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test was applied in order to compare continuous variables. All comparisons were deemed to be statistically significant if P values were less than 0.05.

RESULTS

EPLBD was performed in 229 patients (46 females) with mean age of 68 ± 14.3 years. 115/229 (50%) patients had failed duct clearance at previous ERCP referred from elsewhere with standard techniques. Duct clearance at the Index* ERCP (1^st ERCP at our centre) was 72.5%. Final duct clearance rate was 98%. EPLBD after fresh sphincterotomy was performed in 81 (35.4%). Median balloon size was 13.5 mm (10 - 18). In addition to EPLBD, per-oral cholangioscopy (POC) and electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) was performed in 35 (15%) patients at index* ERCP. 63 (27.5%) required repeat ERCP for stone clearance. 28 (44.5%) required POC and EHL and 11 (17.4%) had repeat EPLBD for complete duct clearance. Larger stone size (12.4 mm vs 17.4 mm, P < 0.000001), multiple stones (2, range (1-13) vs 3, range (1-12), P < 0.006) and dilated common bile duct (CBD) (12.4 mm vs 18.3 mm, P < 0.001) were significant predictors of failed duct clearance at index ERCP. 47 patients (20%) had ampullary or peri-ampullary diverticula. Procedure related adverse events included 2 cases of bleeding and pancreatitis (0.87%) each.

CONCLUSION

EPLBD is a safe and effective technique for CBDS removal. There is no difference in outcomes whether it is performed at the time of sphincterotomy or at a later procedure or whether there is a full or limited sphincterotomy.

Ductal stones recurrence after extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for difficult common bile duct stones: Predictive factors

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE

Extra-corporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) can be considered in difficult common bile duct stones (DCBDS), with a success rate greater than 90% but data on stone recurrence after ESWL are limited. We performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate long-term outcomes in patients who underwent ESWL for DCBDS.

METHODS

From May 1992 to October 2012, patients who underwent ESWL treatment for DCBDS, not amenable to endoscopic extraction, were included. Data on long-term outcome were collected through phone interviews and medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 201 patients with a successful clearance of DCBDS after ESWL were included. During a median follow-up period of 4.64 years, 40 patients (20%) developed a recurrence of bile duct stones. Logistic regression analysis showed that the common bile duct diameter, gallstones presence and the maximum stone size were significantly associated with recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a recurrence rate of 20% over a median follow-up of 4 years. Gallbladder stones, stone size and a dilated common bile duct diameter are risk factors for recurrent stone formation, while ursodeoxycholic acid treatment did not influence recurrence in our population.

Protocol-Driven Management of Suspected Common Duct Stones

BACKGROUND

Common duct stones can be diagnosed by magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)/ERCP, and intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC). In 2015, our group adopted a standard approach of preoperative EUS/ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with an admission bilirubin >4.0 mg/dL. For bilirubin <4.0 mg/dL, laparoscopic cholecystectomy with IOC was the initial procedure. Postoperative EUS/ERCP with endoscopic sphincterotomy was pursued for positive IOC. Exclusions included clinical suspicion of malignancy and surgically altered anatomy making endoscopic management impractical.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective comparison of protocol and pre-protocol (baseline) patients was performed, looking at patient demographics, presence of pancreatitis, common duct stone risk factors, comorbidities, length of hospitalization, and postoperative morbidity. Statistical analysis was performed with t-test, chi-square, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test with significance at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

There were 56 patients in each group, with a mean ± SD age of 50.5 ± 20.88 years and 49.3 ± 20.92 years, respectively (p = NS). There were no significant differences between baseline and protocol patients with respect to individual and cumulative preoperative comorbidities, pancreatitis, elevation of liver function tests, bilirubin, common duct size, and postoperative morbidity. There were fewer endoscopies (22 vs 35; p = 0.014), and shorter length of stay in protocol patients (2.8 days vs 3.8 days; p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Protocol-driven management of patients with suspected common duct stones reduced the number of endoscopies and length of hospitalization, with no change in postoperative morbidity. This approach has the potential to decrease endoscopy-related morbidity and overall cost without affecting quality of care.

Endoscopic Management of the Difficult Bile Duct Stones: A Single Tertiary Center Experience

Background. Most common bile duct (CBD) stones can be removed with standard techniques using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but in some cases additional methods are needed. In this study we aimed to investigate the management of patients with difficult stones and the factors that affect the outcome of patients that have undergone periodic endobiliary stenting. Materials and Methods. Data of 1529 patients with naive papilla who had undergone ERCP with an indication of CBD stones was evaluated retrospectively. Stones that could not be removed with standard techniques were defined as “difficult stones.” Cholangiograms of patients who had difficult stones were revised prospectively. Results. Two hundred and eight patients (13.6%) had difficult stones; 150 of these patients were followed up with periodic endobiliary stenting and successful biliary clearance was achieved in 85.3% of them. Both CBD (p < 0.001) and largest stone size (p < 0.001) were observed to be significantly reduced between the first and the last procedure. This difference was even more significant in successfully treated patients. Conclusions. Periodic endobiliary stenting can be used as an effective treatment for patients with difficult stones. Sizes of the CBD and of the largest stone are independent risk factors that affect the success rate.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy, including direct oral anticoagulants: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines

The risk of endoscopy in patients on antithrombotics depends on the risks of procedural haemorrhage versus thrombosis due to discontinuation of therapy. P2Y12 RECEPTOR ANTAGONISTS CLOPIDOGREL, PRASUGREL, TICAGRELOR: For low-risk endoscopic procedures we recommend continuing P2Y12 receptor antagonists as single or dual antiplatelet therapy (low quality evidence, strong recommendation); For high-risk endoscopic procedures in patients at low thrombotic risk, we recommend discontinuing P2Y12 receptor antagonists five days before the procedure (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). In patients on dual antiplatelet therapy, we suggest continuing aspirin (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). For high-risk endoscopic procedures in patients at high thrombotic risk, we recommend continuing aspirin and liaising with a cardiologist about the risk/benefit of discontinuation of P2Y12 receptor antagonists (high quality evidence, strong recommendation).

WARFARIN

The advice for warfarin is fundamentally unchanged from British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) 2008 guidance.

DIRECT ORAL ANTICOAGULANTS DOAC

For low-risk endoscopic procedures we suggest omitting the morning dose of DOAC on the day of the procedure (very low quality evidence, weak recommendation); For high-risk endoscopic procedures, we recommend that the last dose of DOAC be taken ≥48 h before the procedure (very low quality evidence, strong recommendation). For patients on dabigatran with CrCl (or estimated glomerular filtration rate, eGFR) of 30-50 mL/min we recommend that the last dose of DOAC be taken 72 h before the procedure (very low quality evidence, strong recommendation). In any patient with rapidly deteriorating renal function a haematologist should be consulted (low quality evidence, strong recommendation).