| Literature DB >> 30993165 |
Divyesh V Sejpal1,2, Arvind J Trindade2,3, Calvin Lee1,2, Larry S Miller2,3, Petros C Benias1,2, Sumant Inamdar1,2, Gurshawn Singh1,2, Molly Stewart1,2, Benley J George1,2, Anil K Vegesna3,4.
Abstract
Background and study aims After stone removal in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), an occlusion cholangiogram (OC) is performed to confirm bile duct clearance. OC can miss residual stones that can lead to recurrent biliary symptoms. The aim of this study was to assess if digital peroral cholangioscopy (POC) increased the diagnostic yield of residual biliary stones that are missed with OC. Patients and methods Patients having ERCP performed for choledocholithiasis were enrolled into the study only if they had one of the following criteria: dilated bile duct ≥ 12 mm and/or if lithotripsy was being performed. An OC was performed to confirm duct clearance after removal of stones followed by POC, based on inclusion criteria. The incremental yield of biliary stones missed by OC but confirmed by POC was then measured. A total of 96 POC procedures were performed on 93 patients in two tertiary care centers. Results Residual biliary stones were found in 34 % of cases. The average bile duct size in cases with residual stones was 15.1 mm ± 0.7 mm. One- to three-mm stones were found in 41 % of cases, 4- to 7-mm stones in 45 % of cases, and ≥ 8-mm stones in 14 % of cases. Lithotripsy was performed in 13 % of cases and was significantly associated with residual stones (30 % vs. 3 %, P < 0.001). Conclusions Occlusion cholangiogram can miss residual stones in patients with dilated bile ducts and those receiving lithotripsy. Digital POC can increase the yield of residual stone detection in these patients and should be considered to confirm clearance of stones. (ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT03482375).Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30993165 PMCID: PMC6461551 DOI: 10.1055/a-0842-6450
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endosc Int Open ISSN: 2196-9736
Demographics and patient characteristics.
| Total qualified procedures | Negative POC | Positive POC |
| Positive POC with stones ≥ 4 mm |
| ||
| Count | 96 (100 %) | 63 (66 %) | 33 (34 %) | 20 (21 %) | |||
| Age | 65.1 ± 1.7 | 64.2 ± 2.3 | 66.9 ± 2.6 | 0.47 | 66.5 ± 3.6 | 0.61 | |
|
| Male | 33 (34 %) | 19 (30 %) | 14 (42 %) | 0.23 | 9 (45 %) | 0.22 |
| Female | 63 (66 %) | 44 (70 %) | 19 (58 %) | 11 (55 %) | |||
|
| Hispanic | 17 (18 %) | 14 (23 %) | 3 (9 %) | 0.26 | 0 (0 %) | 0.07 |
| Non-Hispanic | 67 (71 %) | 41 (66 %) | 26 (79 %) | 17 (85 %) | |||
| Not reported | 11 (12 %) | 7 (11 %) | 4 (12 %) | 3 (15 %) | |||
|
| 27.7 ± 0.7 | 27.6 ± 0.8 | 27.7 ± 1.1 | 0.96 | 29.2 ± 1.4 | 0.33 | |
|
| Bile duct size ≥ 12 mm only | 84 (88 %) | 61 (97 %) | 23 (70 %) |
< 0.001
| 13 (65 %) |
0.006
|
| Lithotripsy only | 2 (2 %) | 0 (0 %) | 2 (6 %) |
0.048
| 2 (10 %) |
0.011
| |
| Both bile duct size ≥ 12 mm and had lithotripsy | 10 (10 %) | 2 (3 %) | 8 (24 %) |
0.001
| 5 (25 %) | 0.08 | |
|
| 44 (46 %) | 28 (44 %) | 16 (49 %) | 0.71 | 11 (55 %) | 0.41 | |
|
| ERCP | 64 (67 %) | 39 (62 %) | 25 (76 %) | 0.17 | 15 (75 %) | 0.29 |
| Balloon extraction | 37 (39 %) | 25 (40 %) | 12 (36 %) | 0.75 | 6 (30 %) | 0.44 | |
| Lithotripsy | 13 (14 %) | 6 (10 %) | 7 (21 %) | 0.11 | 5 (25 %) | 0.08 | |
| Sphincterotomy | 26 (27 %) | 17 (27 %) | 9 (27 %) | 0.98 | 4 (20 %) | 0.53 | |
| Balloon dilation | 7 (7 %) | 4 (6 %) | 3 (9 %) | 0.63 | 1 (5 %) | 0.83 | |
| Basket retrieval | 3 (3 %) | 3 (5 %) | 0 (0 %) | 0.11 | 0 (0 %) | 0.32 | |
| Biliary stent | 47 (49 %) | 27 (43 %) | 20 (61 %) | 0.09 | 12 (60 %) | 0.18 | |
| Other | 3 (3 %) | 1 (2 %) | 2 (6 %) | 0.25 | 1 (5 %) | 0.39 | |
|
| Total bilirubin | 2.8 ± 0.4 | 2.4 ± 0.4 | 3.4 ± 0.9 | 0.26 | 3.7 ± 0.7 | 0.12 |
| Direct bilirubin | 2.1 ± 0.3 | 2.2 ± 0.5 | 1.8 ± 0.4 | 0.53 | 1.9 ± 0.5 | 0.70 | |
| Indirect bilirubin | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.2 | 0.75 | 1.3 ± 0.17 | 0.97 | |
| Alkaline phosphatase | 221.3 ± 17.6 | 196 ± 20.6 | 270.3 ± 31.7 |
0.04
| 293 ± 39.8 |
0.03
| |
| ALT | 187.1 ± 20.5 | 177.9 ± 21.6 | 205.3 ± 43.8 | 0.53 | 180.7 ± 37.9 | 0.95 | |
| AST | 154.2 ± 20.9 | 159.2 ± 26.1 | 144.3 ± 33.5 | 0.74 | 118.5 ± 27.1 | 0.42 | |
|
| Inpatient | 33 (35 %) | 23 (37 %) | 10 (30 %) | 0.51 | 7 (35 %) | 0.87 |
| Outpatient | 62 (65 %) | 39 (63 %) | 23 (70 %) | 13 (65 %) | |||
ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase. P values are based on comparing to patients with negative POC.
Significant
POC characteristics/findings in patients with residual stones .
| Positive POC N = 33 cases (34 %) | Positive POC with stones ≥ 4 mm (N = 20) | ||
| Location of stones | Common hepatic duct | 2 (6 %) | 1 (5 %) |
| Common bile duct | 22 (67 %) | 13 (65 %) | |
| Hilum | 5 (15 %) | 3 (15 %) | |
| Cystic stump | 4 (12 %) | 3 (15 %) | |
| Average number of stones per patient | 1.6 ± 0.1 | 1.6 ± 0.2 | |
| Average stone size (mm) | 4.2 ± 0.3 (Range 1 to 10) (Median 4) | 5.6 ± 0.3 (Range 4 to 10) (Median 5) | |
| Grouping based on stone sizes | Stone size 1 to 3 mm | 21 (41 %) | ___________ |
| Stone size 4 to 7 mm | 23 (45 %) | 23 (77 %) | |
| Stone size ≥ 8 mm | 7 (14 %) | 7 (23 %) | |
| Treatment after POC | Balloon extraction | 24 (73 %) | 15 (75 %) |
| Biliary stent placement | 8 (24 %) | 4 (20 %) | |
| Lithotripsy | 6 (18 %) | 4 (20 %) | |
Mechanical | 0 (0 %) | 0 (0 %) | |
EHL | 6 (18 %) | 4 (20 %) | |
| Sphincterotomy | 1 (3 %) | 1 (5 %) | |
| Balloon dilatation | 2 (6 %) | 1 (5 %) | |
| Basket retrieval | 0 (0 %) | 0 (0 %) | |
| Other | 1 (3 %) | 1 (5 %) | |
EHL, electrohydraulic lithotripsy
Fig. 1 aNegative occlusion cholangiogram in a dilated bile duct after removal of multiple stones. b Digital cholangioscopy showing a 6-mm residual stone in the common bile duct.
Fig. 2Digital cholangioscopy showing a residual stone that was found within the cystic stump.
ERCP procedure characteristics.
| Total qualified procedures | Negative POC | Positive POC |
| Positive POC with stones ≥ 4 mm |
| ||
|
| 4 (4 %) | 3 (5 %) | 1 (3 %) | 0.69 | 1 (3 %) | 0.97 | |
|
| 48 (50 %) | 27 (43 %) | 21 (64 %) |
0.05
| 13 (65 %) | 0.08 | |
|
| Average | 14.5 ± 0.3 | 14.3 ± 0.2 | 15.1 ± 0.7 | 0.2 | 15.5 ± 1.1 | 0.13 |
| Median | 14 | 14 | 15 | 14 | |||
| Range | 11 – 30 | 12 – 20 | 11 – 30 | 11 – 30 | |||
| ≥ 15 mm | 44 % | 40 % | 52 % | 0.27 | 40 % | 0.98 | |
| ≥ 18 mm | 9 % | 10 % | 9 % | 0.95 | 15 % | 0.49 | |
|
| Average | 7.6 ± 0.4 | 6.7 ± 0.4 | 9.6 ± 0.9 |
0.001
| 8.9 ± 1.2 |
0.02
|
|
| Round | 70 (40 %) | 44 (40 %) | 26 (39 %) | 0.84 | 16 (53 %) | 0.20 |
| Cuboidal | 33 (19 %) | 13 (12 %) | 20 (30 %) |
0.003
| 4 (13 %) | 0.84 | |
| Ovoid | 63 (36 %) | 43 (40 %) | 20 (30 %) | 0.12 | 9 (30 %) | 0.34 | |
| Other | 10 (6 %) | 9 (8 %) | 1 (2 %) | 0.06 | 1 (3 %) | 0.36 | |
|
| Balloon extraction | 93 (97 %) | 63 (100 %) | 30 (91 %) |
0.015
| 18 (90 %) |
0.011
|
| Biliary stent placement | 6 (6 %) | 2 (3 %) | 4 (12 %) | 0.08 | 3 (15 %) | 0.07 | |
| Lithotripsy | 12 (13 %) | 2 (3 %) | 10 (30 %) |
< 0.001
| 6 (30 %) |
< 0.001
| |
Mechanical |
2 (3 %)
| 1 (2 %) |
1 (3 %)
| 0.64 | 1 (5 %) | 0.39 | |
EHL | 11 (11 %) | 1 (2 %) |
10 (30 %)
|
< 0.001
| 6 (30 %) |
< 0.001
| |
| Sphincterotomy | 37 (39 %) | 28 (44 %) | 9 (27 %) | 0.10 | 5 (25 %) | 0.12 | |
| Balloon dilatation | 16 (17 %) | 8 (13 %) | 8 (24 %) | 0.15 | 5 (25 %) | 0.19 | |
| Basket retrieval | 2 (2 %) | 1 (2 %) | 1 (3 %) | 0.65 | 0 (0 %) | 0.57 | |
| Other | 1 (1 %) | 0 (0 %) | 1 (3 %) | 0.17 | 0 (0 %) | ______ |
P values are based on comparing to patients with negative POC. EHL, electrohydraulic lithotripsy; ERCP, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography
Significant
One patient had both mechanical lithotripsy and EHL