Literature DB >> 17427065

Endoscopic ultrasound versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for patients with intermediate probability of bile duct stones: a randomized trial comparing two management strategies.

M Polkowski1, J Regula, A Tilszer, E Butruk.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) is being replaced by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in patients with suspected bile duct stones. The assumption that such an approach is advantageous, however, has never been tested in a randomized trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 100 patients with intermediate probability of bile duct stones were randomly allocated to EUS or ERC. Two patients in the ERC group were excluded; the remaining 98 patients received the allocated intervention and were entered into the analysis (EUS, 50 patients; ERC, 48 patients). Detected stones were removed endoscopically; patients without stones were followed for 1 year. The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a negative outcome, related to either endoscopic procedures (complications) or to false-negative diagnosis of stones. Investigators assessing the negative outcomes were not blinded to group assignment. The secondary end point was the total number of endoscopic procedures (EUS and ERC) performed in each group to diagnose and treat stones.
RESULTS: Bile duct stone prevalence was 28% and 25% in the EUS and ERC groups, respectively (P > 0.05). In the EUS group, 71 endoscopic procedures were performed, and 63 in the ERC group (mean per patient, 1.42 +/- 0.76, and 1.31 +/- 0.55, respectively; P > 0.05). In the EUS group, these included 49 successful and one failed initial EUS, 15 ERCs for bile duct stone treatment, and six procedures required during follow-up. In the ERC group there were 36 successful and 12 failed initial ERCs, 13 repeat procedures (EUS or ERC) performed after failed or equivocal initial ERC, and two procedures during follow-up. Five patients in the EUS group (10%, 95% CI 4-22) and 19 patients in the ERC group (40%, 95% CI 27-54) experienced a negative outcome (P < 0.001). No difference was observed when only moderate to severe complications were considered (6%, 95% CI 1-17, and 10%, 95% CI 4-23, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intermediate probability of bile duct stones, the management strategy based on EUS (with selective ERC in patients with confirmed stones) is safer and not associated with an excess of endoscopic procedures compared with a strategy based on ERC alone.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17427065     DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-966264

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  18 in total

1.  Is endoscopic ultrasound needed as an add-on test for gallstone diseases without choledocholithiasis on multidetector computed tomography?

Authors:  Byoung Wook Bang; Ji Taek Hong; Young Chul Choi; Seok Jeong; Don Haeng Lee; Hyung Kil Kim; Shin Goo Park; Yong Sun Jeon
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2012-06-23       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Dynamic liver test patterns do not predict bile duct stones.

Authors:  Chung Yao Yu; Nitzan Roth; Niraj Jani; Jaehoon Cho; Jacques Van Dam; Rick Selby; James Buxbaum
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-03-25       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Advances in the investigation of obstructive jaundice.

Authors:  J Addley; R M Mitchell
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2012-12

4.  Intraductal ultrasound for high-risk patients: when will the last be first?

Authors:  Pietro Fusaroli; Giancarlo Caletti
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Routine endoscopic ultrasound in moderate and indeterminate risk patients of suspected choledocholithiasis to avoid unwarranted ERCP: A prospective randomized blinded study.

Authors:  Rajesh Sharma; John Menachery; Narendra S Choudhary; Mandhir Kumar; Rajesh Puri; Randhir Sud
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-09-15

6.  Role of pancreatic endoscopic ultrasonography in 2010.

Authors:  Ioannis S Papanikolaou; Pantelis S Karatzas; Konstantinos Triantafyllou; Andreas Adler
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-10-16

7.  Single-session endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for evaluation of pancreaticobiliary disorders.

Authors:  Gil Ascunce; Afonso Ribeiro; Caio Rocha-Lima; Marcelo Larsen; Danny Sleeman; Jaime Merchan; Deborah Szabo; Joe U Levi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 8.  Pancreatico-biliary endoscopic ultrasound: a systematic review of the levels of evidence, performance and outcomes.

Authors:  Pietro Fusaroli; Dimitrios Kypraios; Giancarlo Caletti; Mohamad A Eloubeidi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 9.  Does endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography reduce the risk of local pancreatic complications in acute pancreatitis? A systematic review and metaanalysis.

Authors:  Maxim S Petrov; Antonina F Uchugina; Mikhail V Kukosh
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Usefulness of intraductal ultrasonography in icteric patients with highly suspected choledocholithiasis showing normal endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Authors:  Dong Choon Kim; Jong Ho Moon; Hyun Jong Choi; A Reum Chun; Yun Nah Lee; Min Hee Lee; Tae Hoon Lee; Sang Woo Cha; Sang Gyune Kim; Young Seok Kim; Young Deok Cho; Sang-Heum Park; Hae Kyung Lee
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-07-10       Impact factor: 3.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.