| Literature DB >> 35000935 |
Won Myung Lee1, Jong Ho Moon1, Yun Nah Lee1, Il Sang Shin1, Tae Hoon Lee2, Jae Kook Yang2, Sang-Woo Cha3, Young Deok Cho3, Sang-Heum Park2.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Treatment options for difficult bile duct stones are limited. Direct peroral cholangioscopy (POC)-guided lithotripsy may be an option. A newly developed multibending (MB) ultraslim endoscope has several structural features optimized for direct POC. We evaluated the utility of direct POC using an MB ultraslim endoscope for lithotripsy in patients with difficult bile duct stones.Entities:
Keywords: Common bile duct; Endoscopes; Gallstones; Peroral cholangioscopy
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35000935 PMCID: PMC9289834 DOI: 10.5009/gnl210355
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gut Liver ISSN: 1976-2283 Impact factor: 4.321
Fig. 1Direct peroral cholangioscopy-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) using a multibending ultraslim endoscope for retained common bile duct stones. (A) Retained common bile duct stones. EHL for retained common bile duct stones. Fluoroscopic view (B) and cholangioscopic view (C). (D) Fragmented stone after EHL. Confirmation of ductal clearance by fluoroscopy (E) and cholangioscopy (F).
Fig. 2Direct peroral cholangioscopy (POC)-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) using a multibending ultraslim endoscope for an impacted distal common bile duct stone. (A) Cholangiogram showing an impacted distal common bile duct stone. (B) Direct POC with a multibending ultraslim endoscope for EHL. (C) Cholangioscopic view of the impacted stone and EHL under direct visualization. (D) Confirmation of ductal clearance by occluded cholangiogram.
Fig. 3Direct peroral cholangioscopy-guided laser lithotripsy (LL) using a multibending ultraslim endoscope for a retained common bile duct stone. (A) Cholangiogram of a retained stone in the common bile duct. (B) Cholangioscopic view of LL. (C) Fragmented stone after LL. (D) Confirmation of ductal clearance by occluded cholangiogram.
Fig. 4Patient flowchart through the study.
ML, mechanical lithotripsy; POC, peroral cholangioscopy; EHL, electrohydraulic lithotripsy; LL, laser lithotripsy.
Baseline Characteristics of the Patients
| Characteristics | Value (n=20) |
|---|---|
| Age, median (range), yr | 67 (32–91) |
| Sex, male/female | 6/14 |
| Previous cholecystectomy, No. (%) | 9 (45) |
| No. of prior ERCP, mean (range) | 1.5 (1.0–4.0) |
| Stone size, median (range), mm | 28 (10–50) |
| No. of stones, mean (range) | 2.0 (1.0–5.0) |
| Location of stones, No. (%) | |
| Distal common bile duct | 13 (65.0) |
| Proximal common bile duct | 7 (35.0) |
ERCP, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Technical Outcomes of Direct POC-Guided Lithotripsy for Difficult Bile Duct Stones
| Technical outcomes | Value (n=20) |
|---|---|
| Success of direct POC, No. (%) | 20 (100) |
| Free-hand insertion | 19 (95.0) |
| Intraductal balloon assistance | 1 (5.0) |
| Electrohydraulic lithotripsy/laser lithotripsy | 9/11 |
| Success of direct POC-guided lithotripsy, No. (%) | 19 (95.0) |
| Time for lithotripsy, median (IQR), min | 25 (12–45) |
| Adverse events, No. (%) | 1 (5.0) |
POC, peroral cholangioscopy; IQR, interquartile range.
*One failure of insertion of laser probe up to the targeted stone; †One mild bleeding.
Technical Outcomes of Patients Who Achieved Complete Ductal Clearance after Direct Peroral Cholangioscopy-Guided Lithotripsy
| Technical outcomes | Value (n=20) |
|---|---|
| Complete ductal clearance, No. (%) | 19 (95.0) |
| Use of additional mechanical lithotripsy | 11 (55.0) |
| ERCP sessions for complete stone removal, | 2 (1–3) |
ERCP, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.