OBJECTIVE: To analyse the short and long term outcome of endoscopic stent treatment after bile duct injury (BDI), and to determine the effect of multiple stent treatment. DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in a tertiary referral centre to analyse the outcome of endoscopic stenting in 67 patients with cystic duct leakage, 26 patients with common bile duct leakage and 110 patients with a bile duct stricture. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Long term outcome and independent predictors for successful stent treatment. RESULTS: Overall success in patients with cystic duct leakage was 97%. In patients with common bile duct leakage, stent related complications occurred in 3.8% (n = 1). The overall success rate was 89% (n = 23). In patients with a bile duct stricture, stent related complications occurred in 33% (n = 36) and the overall success rate was 74% (n = 81). After a mean follow up of 4.5 years, liver function tests did not identify "occult" bile duct strictures. Independent predictors for outcome were the number of stents inserted during the first procedure (OR 3.2 per stent; 95% CI 1.3 to 8.4), injuries classified as Bismuth III (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.91) and IV (OR 0.04; CI 0.003 to 0.52) and endoscopic stenting before referral (OR 0.24; CI 0.06 to 0.88). Introduction of sequential insertion of multiple stents did not improve outcome (before 77% vs after 66%, p = 0.25), but more patients reported stent related pain (before 11% vs after 28%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a postoperative bile duct leakage and/or strictures, endoscopic stent treatment should be regarded as the choice of primary treatment because of safety and favourable long term outcome. Apart from the early insertion of more than one stent, the benefit from sequential insertion of multiple stents did not become readily apparent from this series.
OBJECTIVE: To analyse the short and long term outcome of endoscopic stent treatment after bile duct injury (BDI), and to determine the effect of multiple stent treatment. DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in a tertiary referral centre to analyse the outcome of endoscopic stenting in 67 patients with cystic duct leakage, 26 patients with common bile duct leakage and 110 patients with a bile duct stricture. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Long term outcome and independent predictors for successful stent treatment. RESULTS: Overall success in patients with cystic duct leakage was 97%. In patients with common bile duct leakage, stent related complications occurred in 3.8% (n = 1). The overall success rate was 89% (n = 23). In patients with a bile duct stricture, stent related complications occurred in 33% (n = 36) and the overall success rate was 74% (n = 81). After a mean follow up of 4.5 years, liver function tests did not identify "occult" bile duct strictures. Independent predictors for outcome were the number of stents inserted during the first procedure (OR 3.2 per stent; 95% CI 1.3 to 8.4), injuries classified as Bismuth III (OR 0.12; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.91) and IV (OR 0.04; CI 0.003 to 0.52) and endoscopic stenting before referral (OR 0.24; CI 0.06 to 0.88). Introduction of sequential insertion of multiple stents did not improve outcome (before 77% vs after 66%, p = 0.25), but more patients reported stent related pain (before 11% vs after 28%, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a postoperative bile duct leakage and/or strictures, endoscopic stent treatment should be regarded as the choice of primary treatment because of safety and favourable long term outcome. Apart from the early insertion of more than one stent, the benefit from sequential insertion of multiple stents did not become readily apparent from this series.
Authors: Ladislav Kuzela; Marian Oltman; Jarolim Sutka; Rudolf Hrcka; Tatiana Novotna; Anton Vavrecka Journal: Hepatogastroenterology Date: 2005 Sep-Oct
Authors: Arthur John Kaffes; Luke Hourigan; Nicolas De Luca; Karen Byth; Stephen John Williams; Michael John Bourke Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: S J Savader; K D Lillemoe; C A Prescott; A B Winick; A C Venbrux; G B Lund; S E Mitchell; J L Cameron; F A Osterman Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Zhi Ven Fong; Henry A Pitt; Steven M Strasberg; Andrew P Loehrer; Jason K Sicklick; Mark A Talamini; Keith D Lillemoe; David C Chang Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Anne Marthe Schreuder; Olivier R Busch; Marc G Besselink; Povilas Ignatavicius; Antanas Gulbinas; Giedrius Barauskas; Dirk J Gouma; Thomas M van Gulik Journal: Dig Surg Date: 2019-01-17 Impact factor: 2.588
Authors: Miguel Angel Mercado; Carlos Chan; Juan Carlos Jacinto; Norberto Sanchez; Alexandra Barajas Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-12-01 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Duveken B Y Fontein; Robert N Gibson; Neil A Collier; Gabrielle T W Tse; Luke L K Wang; Tony G Speer; Richard Dowling; Amanda Robertson; Benjamin Thomson; Albert de Roos Journal: Insights Imaging Date: 2011-07-28