Literature DB >> 31541625

Efficacy of digital single-operator cholangioscopy and factors affecting its accuracy in the evaluation of indeterminate biliary stricture.

Sunguk Jang1, Tyler Stevens1, Lei Kou2, John J Vargo1, Mansour A Parsi3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Indeterminate biliary stricture remains a significant diagnostic challenge. The current method of ERCP with bile duct brush cytology has substantial room for improvement. We aimed to determine the efficacy of a digital single-operator cholangioscopy (DSOC) in evaluation of indeterminate biliary stricture.
METHODS: An observational cohort study was conducted among the patients who underwent DSOC for the indication of indeterminate biliary stricture at a tertiary academic medical center. The outcomes of interests were the accuracy of DSOC in visual interpretation and bile duct sample and identification of any factor(s) that could influence its effectiveness.
RESULTS: One hundred five patients were included. The overall accuracy of DSOC in visual interpretation was 89.5%, whereas the accuracy of bile duct sample was 83.2%. The sensitivities of visual impression and bile duct sample were 89.1% and 69.8% and their specificities were 90% and 97.9%, respectively. The degree of endoscopists' experience with fewer than 25 cases and the severity of hyperbilirubinemia negatively impacted the accuracy of DSOC. Among 55 patients with definitive diagnosis of malignant stricture, the sensitivity of combined intraductal forceps biopsy sampling and brush cytology was 80.6%, whereas the sensitivity of brush cytology alone was 47.1%.
CONCLUSIONS: DSOC augments ERCP in evaluating indeterminate biliary stricture. The acquisition of intraductal forceps biopsy samples should be a requisite in evaluation of indeterminate biliary stricture with DSOC. Discovery of modifiable factors such as the degree of endoscopists' expertise and the severity of hyperbilirubinemia, which can influence the accuracy of DSOC, warrants further studies on patient preprocedure optimization and an endoscopic training program that will cultivate procedural competency.
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31541625     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.09.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  5 in total

1.  Update on Cholangioscopy.

Authors:  Paul R Tarnasky
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2020-05

Review 2.  Choledochoscopy: An update.

Authors:  Tsinrong Lee; Thomas Zheng Jie Teng; Vishal G Shelat
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2021-12-16

3.  Comparison of tube-assisted mapping biopsy with digital single-operator peroral cholangioscopy for preoperative evaluation of biliary tract cancer.

Authors:  Tsuyoshi Takeda; Takashi Sasaki; Takafumi Mie; Takeshi Okamoto; Chinatsu Mori; Takaaki Furukawa; Yuto Yamada; Akiyoshi Kasuga; Masato Matsuyama; Masato Ozaka; Naoki Sasahira
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2022-07-20

4.  Usefulness of peroral cholangioscopy in the differential diagnosis of IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: a single-center retrospective study.

Authors:  Yasutaka Ishii; Masahiro Serikawa; Tomofumi Tsuboi; Ryota Kawamura; Ken Tsushima; Shinya Nakamura; Tetsuro Hirano; Ayami Fukiage; Juri Ikemoto; Yusuke Kiyoshita; Sho Saeki; Yosuke Tamura; Kazuaki Chayama
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  Peroral Cholangioscopy-Guided Targeted Biopsy versus Conventional Endoscopic Transpapillary Forceps Biopsy for Biliary Stricture with Suspected Bile Duct Cancer.

Authors:  Katsunori Sekine; Ichiro Yasuda; Shinpei Doi; Noriyuki Kuniyoshi; Takayuki Tsujikawa; Yuichi Takano; Masatoshi Mabuchi; Kosuke Takahashi; Masashi Kawamoto; Mikiko Takahashi; Tatsuya Aso; Tatsuhiko Miyazaki; Takuji Iwashita
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 4.241

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.