Endoscopic sphincterotomy and mechanical basket lithotripsy for management of difficult common bile duct stones

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) for removal of stones is a major therapeutic advance in the management of choledocholithiasis. However, this technique, using a standard Dormia basket or balloon catheters, often fails with large stones (exceeding 15mm in diameter). Mechanical basket lithotripsy (MBL) has been developed to overcome this deficiency. With recently improved devices, consisting of an entirely, i.e., one self-contained system which can be used without removing the endoscope, the overall efficacy of stone removal is more than 93%, regardless of the size of the stones. This MBL is a simple, safe, effective and inexpensive procedure in experienced hands and has emerged as the procedure of choice for endoscopic management of difficult stones.     

Endoscopic management of recurrent primary bile duct stones

Background: The management of recurrent choledocholithiasis today remains as challenging as in the pre‐endoscopic era. Between 2 and 7% of affected patients have historically required surgical intervention for the treatment of recurrent or retained choledocholithiasis and of these, as many as 24% develop biliary complications. To avoid surgery, repeated endoscopic management of the problem has been suggested. In this study, we evaluate our policy of repeated endoscopic management of recurrent primary bile duct stones. Methods: This study examined a cohort of nine patients identified from a prospective database with recurrent choledocholithiasis. Demographic, clinical and investigative details were recorded and data were analysed. Complications were determined from a review of the patient’s file. Results: There were nine patients and 66 procedures were carried out. Mean age at time of first endoscopy was 70.1 years (36–91 years). Three patients were of male sex (33.3%). The mean number of endoscopies carried out per patient was 7.3 (3‐13). Failure to completely clear the duct occurred in 36.4% of all endoscopies. There were no periprocedural complications. Conclusion: Repeated endoscopic stone extraction by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography when required is a safe policy. However, this technique will only provide temporary relief from primary duct stones and repeated endoscopic treatment, again safe, will be required.     

Timing of cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones

Background  According to the literature, the conversion rate for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) after endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) for cholecystodocholithiasis reaches 20%, at least when LC is performed 6 to 8 weeks afterward. It is hypothesized that early planned LC after ES prevents recurrent biliary complications and reduces operative morbidity and hospital stay. Methods  All consecutive patients who underwent LC after ES between 2001 and 2004 were retrospectively evaluated. Recurrent biliary complications during the waiting time for LC, conversion rate, postoperative complications, and hospital stay were documented. Results  This study analyzed 167 consecutive patients (59 men) with a median age of 54 years. The median interval between ES and LC was 7 weeks (range, 1–49 weeks). During the waiting time for LC, 33 patients (20%) had recurrent biliary complications including cholecystitis (n = 18, 11%), recurrent choledocholithiasis (n = 9, 5%), cholangitis (n = 4, 2%), and biliary pancreatitis (n = 2, 1%). Of these 33 patients, 15 underwent a second endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC). The median time between ES and the development of recurrent complications was 22 days (range, 3–225 days). Most of the biliary complications (76%) occurred more than 1 week after ES. Conversion to open cholecystectomy occurred for 7 of 33 patients with recurrent complications during the waiting period, compared with 13 of 134 patients with an uncomplicated waiting period (p = 0.14). This concurred with doubled postoperative morbidity (24% vs 11%; p = 0.09) and a longer hospital stay (median, 4 vs 2 days; p < 0.001). Conclusion  In this retrospective analysis, 20% of all patients had recurrent biliary complications during the waiting period for cholecystectomy after ES. These recurrent complications were associated with a significantly longer hospital stay. Cholecystectomy within 1 week after ES may prevent recurrent biliary complications in the majority of cases and reduce the postoperative hospital stay. The abstract of this work was presented at the Society of American Gastroendoscopic Suregons (SAGES) 2007 annual meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.     

Long-term symptoms following endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones

Background: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) has an important role in the management of biliary stones. However, the long-term effects of free duodenobiliary reflux are not established, and it may lead to low-grade morbidity. Methods: We used a questionnaire survey to assess the prevalence of symptoms of biliary disorder in patients who had undergone endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) and ES under the care of a single surgeon (R.J.R.G) between November 1993 and May 1998. Results: ES was carried out on 136 patients during this period. Current addresses were available for 94 patients, and 54 of them (57%) responded. Patients were surveyed a mean of 43 months after ES. Only 42.1% of patients denied having any symptoms. Nausea and pale stools were reported by 28% and 26% of patients, respectively, and nearly one-fifth of patients had symptoms suggestive of cholangitis. In addition, 18.5% of patients experienced one or more symptoms frequently. Conclusion: Severe long-term symptoms are uncommon following ES; however, a significant minority of patients do suffer occasional symptoms that suggest biliary dysfunction.     

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography management of common bile duct stones in a surgical unit

BACKGROUND: Choledocholithiasis, if left untreated, can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. The management of such a problem has progressed tremendously but controversy still exists as to ideal management, laparoscopic exploration or endoscopic retrograde pancreatography with sphincterotomy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the results of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in a surgical unit. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review on 336 patients who underwent ERCP between 1997-2000. RESULTS: We achieved a successful cannulation rate of 98% and stone clearance rate exceeding 90%. Morbidity has been minimal and there was no mortality in our study. CONCLUSION: We conclude that ERCP is an effective and safe surgical alternative for the management of choledocholithiasis.     

ʮ��ָ������ͷ��Լ���п������ܹܽ�ʯ�����������ط���

目的探讨十二指肠镜乳头括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)后胆管结石复发的相关风险因素。方法回顾性分析天津市南开医院2000年6月至2002年9月1971例因胆管结石行EST术病人的临床资料,以EST术后是否复发胆管结石为因变量,进行单因素及多因素非条件Logistic逐步回归分析。结果 EST术后1616例获得确切随访,其中181例胆管结石复发,复发率为11.2%,通过统计学单因素及多因素分析显示胆囊状态、胆道积气、壶腹憩室、行碎石术与EST术后胆管结石复发有关。结论纠正或避免胆道积气、壶腹憩室等风险因素对预防胆管结石的复发有重要意义。     

Management of gallbladder and common bile duct stones: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy versus open surgery

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is becoming more widely employed as a therapeutic option for the management of gallbladder stones (GBS) and common bile duct stones (CBDS). To compare the results of LC plus preoperative EST with the results of open surgery, in terms of morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, length of operation, and hospital cost, we reviewed the charts of 105 patients who had concomitant GBS and CBDS: in 34, preoperative EST had been attempted, and 71 had undergone open surgery. Twenty-six of the 71 patients who had undergone open cholecystectomy, common bile duct exploration, and T-tube placement were selected for comparison as a T-tube group, since they had exhibited no condition that contraindicated LC. EST was unsuccessful in 6 of the 34 patients in whom it was attempted, and all 6 underwent open surgery. Successful EST and duct clearance were achieved in 28 patients (82.4%); 4 of them had serious medical problems and were followed without operation, 7 underwent open cholecystectomy, and the remaining 17 underwent LC (LC-after-EST group). Total hospital stay was longest in the 6 patients who underwent open surgery because of unsuccessful EST, and their total hospital cost was significantly higher than that of the patients in the LC-after-EST group. Operation time, rate of early postoperative complications, and hospital stay were significantly lower in the LC-after-EST group than in the T-tube groups, although total hospital cost was not different. The combination of preoperative EST and LC is a safe and effective option for the management of GBS and CBDS. However, when EST is unsuccessful and the patient is switched to open surgery, the hospital stay is much longer and more costly than when EST and LC are successful. The patient should be informed of the disadvantages if EST should fail.     

经内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术与传统开腹胆总管切开取石术治疗胆总管结石的疗效比较

目的探讨经内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术与传统开腹胆总管切开取石术治疗胆总管结石的临床疗效。方法选择我院2010年6月至2013年1月行手术治疗胆总管结石患者70例,其中行内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术35例作为治疗组,开腹胆总管切开取石手术治疗35例作为对照组。观察并比较两组临床疗效结果。结果 70例手术均获成功。其中观察组在手术时间、引流时间、术后下床活动时间、术后排气恢复时间、术后住院天数、术后并发症发生率方面均优于对照组(P0.05)。结论经内镜乳头括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石具有创伤小、术后恢复快、痛苦少、住院时间短及术后并发症少等优点,是目前治疗胆总管结石的理想微创术式之一,临床上值得推广应用。     

腔镜胆总管切开术与内镜联合腹腔镜治疗胆总管结石的临床分析

目的对腹腔镜胆总管切开术与内镜联合腹腔镜治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石的疗效进行比较和评价。方法回顾性分析2002年7月至2007年7月，20例行腹腔镜胆囊切除、胆总管探查（LCD组），15例行腹腔镜胆囊切除联合内镜乳头括约肌切开取石术（EST＋LC组）患者的手术及术后情况。结果LCD组近期并发症发生率低于EST＋LC组（20％ vs 5％，P〈0．05），LCD组平均住院日和平均住院费用均明显低于EST＋LC组（P〈0．05），手术成功率两组差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论腹腔镜胆总管切开术是治疗胆囊结石并胆总管结石疗效肯定的微创手术。     

内镜下十二指肠乳头小切开+塑料支架内引流治疗难取性胆总管结石的临床观察

目的 探讨内镜下十二指肠乳头小切开(limited endoscopic sphincterotomy,limited EST)+胆道塑料支架内引流(endoscopic retrograde bilioduodenal drainage,ERBD)治疗难取性胆总管结石的临床价值。方法 常规方法行ERCP,观察组25例行乳头小切开,对照组23例非切开,在导丝引导下置入8.5 Fr胆道塑料支架内引流治疗,观察术后1周的腹痛程度、发热、血白细胞、淀粉酶、脂肪酶等相关指标,以及1、3、6月肝功能指标、结石情况,评价小EST+ERBD的安全性及有效性。结果 两组对于症状缓解均有明显效果,无出现出血、穿孔等严重并发症,1、3月的结果相似,无统计学差异,6月后观察组有优势。结论 对于难取性胆总管结石,小EST+ERBD不失为一种简单、安全而有效的过渡治疗方法,为二次处理赢得时间。     

Cholangioscopic laser lithotripsy of common bile duct stones —an overview

Since the introduction of endoscopic papillotomy (EPT), stone clearance by conventional means has become possible in approximately 85% of cases of choledocholithiasis. Several endoscopic therapies for any remaining stones have been introduced. Laser therapy under direct visual control via the insertion of a cholangioscope, by either peroral transpapillary cholangioscopy (POCS) or percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy (PTCS) has proven highly effective, raising the success rate of biliary stone clearance to almost 100%. POCS is technically more difficult and thus has a lower success rate, but is far less time-consuming and causes fewer complications than PTCS. The technical equipment employed for POCS should be further improved. In selected patients, laser application via PTCS is an uncomplicated but highly efficient method; however, the rate of complications and the time needed to establish a transhepatic tract continue to cause problems.     

两镜法治疗胆囊合并胆总管结石36例疗效分析

目的探讨十二指肠镜乳头括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy, EST)联合腹腔镜胆囊切除术(laparoscopic cholecystectomy, LC)治疗胆囊合并总胆管结石的疗效. 方法胆囊合并胆总管结石36例,首先经EST取出胆管结石,然后采用LC切除胆囊. 结果 EST成功34例(94.4%); 失败2例,均因胆管末端狭窄,开腹行胆管空肠吻合术治愈.腹腔镜手术34例,成功32例(94.1%),2例中转开腹. 结论 EST联合LC是治疗胆囊合并胆管结石的优选术式,EST失败者主要原因为胆管狭窄,应首选胆管空肠吻合术.     

Endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct calculi

A series of 74 patients having endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct calculi is reported. Complete stone extraction was achieved in 53 cases (72%). Seventeen of 21 patients with retained calculi following recent biliary surgery had successful extractions (80%). Of 30 patients having had a cholecystectomy, 21 (70%) were successful, but only 15 of 23 patients with obstructive jaundice and no previous biliary surgery had the ducts cleared of calculi. Failure was due to multiple stones in the duct, or calculi too large to pass through the sphincterotomy. Endoscopic sphincterotomy is advocated in patients with obstructive jaundice due to stones, moving to early surgery should it prove unsuccessful. The results in patients with a T-tube in situ are comparable to extraction of the calculi along the T-tube tract.     

腹腔镜胆总管探查术与内窥镜下括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石的临床应用比较

目的 比较腹腔镜胆总管探查术(LCBDE)和内镜下括约肌切开术(EST)治疗不同胆总管结石的疗效及并发症,探讨其适应证的差异,指导临床合理应用.方法 202例胆总管结石患者,按手术方式分为腹腔镜胆总管探查术组(LCBDE组,45例)和内镜下括约肌切开术组(EST组,157例);评价两组操作成功率、一期手术治愈率、残余结石和(或)病变率、并发症率、平均住院时间和费用.结果 LCBDE组和EST组操作成功率分别为97.8％(44/45)和98.7％(155/157)(P> 0.05).一期手术治愈率分别为84.4％(38/45)和45.2％(71/157) (P<0.01).LCBDE组术后残余病变主要为残石,残石率为15.6％(7/45); EST组主要为术后遗留未处理的胆囊病变和肝内外胆管结石,残留率为54.8％(86/157)(P<0.01).LCBDE组并发术后胆漏4例、残余感染1例,并发癌率为11.1％;EST组并发术后胆漏3例、出血4例、高淀粉酶血症32例(其中急性胰腺炎14例)、急性胆管炎15例,并发症率34.4％ (P< 0.05).平均住院时间为(10.0±2.8)和(9.4±4.1)d (P>0.05);住院费用为(17504±4128)和(16453±3541)元(P>0.05).结论 LCBDE和EST均有操作成功率高、住院时间短等优点;但LCBDE并发症率、残余病变率均低于EST; LCBDE主要适于胆囊合并胆总管结石的患者,尤其是Oddi括约肌功能完好者;EST主要适于单纯胆总管结石或胆管炎患者,特别是年老体弱、Oddi括约肌无功能或既往有胆道手术史且不愿再次手术者.     

经内镜乳头括约肌小口切开并放置塑料支架分期治疗巨大或多发胆总管结石

【摘要】目的探讨经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术（ERCP）Ⅰ期先行乳头括约肌小口切开并放置塑料支架解除梗阻,一月后再Ⅱ期取石,分期治疗巨大或多发胆总管结石的临床应用的安全性及有效性。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2015年12月在我科住院首次行ERCP治疗的72例直径≥20mm或结石数量≥3粒的胆总管结石患者,分为观察组（一期ERCP放置支架,1月后二期取石,n=36）;对照组（一期治疗组,n=36）。观察和比较两组病例术后结石清除率,ERCP后胰腺炎（PEP）、重症胰腺炎发生,术后出血、胆道感染发生情况。结果在术后结石清除率方面观察组34例（94.4%）与对照组31例（91.2%）,比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）;观察组ERCP术后胰腺炎1例,对照组有8例（P<0.05）;观察组无重症胰腺炎发生,对照组发生2例;观察组1例发生术后出血,对照组则有6例发生（P<0.05）;观察组没有发生术后胆道感染,对照组发生5例（P<0.05）。结论内镜下乳头括约肌小切开并放置塑料支架分期取石术治疗巨大或多发胆总管结石是安全、有效、可行的。     

内镜下十二指肠乳头小切开联合气囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石

目的比较内镜下乳头括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)、乳头气囊扩张术(endoscopic papilla balloon dilatation,EPBD)和乳头括约肌小切开联合气囊扩张术(limited endoscopic sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic balloon dilatation,LEST+EPBD)三种方法治疗胆总管结石的疗效。方法回顾性分析上海交通大学附属仁济医院2011年7月至2014年7月398例胆总管结石患者的临床资料,按照治疗方式分为单纯乳头括约肌切开术组(EST组,n=228例)、乳头气囊扩张术组(EPBD组,n=36例)和乳头括约肌小切开联合乳头气囊扩张术组(LEST+EPBD组,n=134例),比较分析三组的取石成功率、平均住院天数、平均住院费用、单枚结石平均最大直径、术后短期(24 h内)血淀粉酶的改变,以及近期(术后1周内)并发症如胰腺炎、出血、穿孔、胆道感染和远期(术后2年内)并发症如反流性胆管炎、结石复发等情况。结果三组性别组成、年龄、住院天数,取石成功率和一次取石成功率,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。与EST组比,EPBD组和LEST+EPBD组住院费用较高,且LEST+EPBD组费用最高,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。与EST组及EPBD组比,LEST+EPBD组的结石直径最大,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。三组近期并发症比较,EPBD组胰腺炎发生率高于其他两组(P0.05),而LEST+EPBD组与EST组比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。其他近期并发症如高淀粉酶血症、出血、穿孔、胆道感染发生率,三组比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。术后远期并发症中,反流性胆管炎三组间无统计学差异(P0.05),但LEST+EPBD组结石复发率较EST组低,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 LEST+EPBD治疗胆总管结石是安全有效的,值得临床推广应用。     

Laparoscopic management of common bile duct stones

We reviewed our experience with the management of common bile duct (CBD) stones in 100 consecutive patients treated laparoscopicaly during the past 9 years (1990–1998) and evaluated the advantages, disadvantages, and feasibility of the treatment, to elucidate reasonable therapeutic strategies for patients harboring CBD stones. We conclude that the most rational management of CBD stones is that which is decided according to the size of the CBD, which, in turn, depends on the size, number, and location of stones. The cystic duct in patients with a non-dilated CBD is narrow, because the size of the CBD depends on the size and number of stones that have migrated through the narrow cystic duct, and the stones in the non-dilated CBD are therefore usually small in size and number. Patients with a dilated CBD, however, are good candidates to undergo single-stage laparoscopic treatment. In our Department, therefore, even if complete removal of stones has failed in patients with non-dilated CBD, further choledochotomy is not carried out, and a C-tube is placed through the cystic duct for a subsequent postoperative transduodenal approach, because laparoscopic transcystic CBD exploration and choledochotomy may not be always feasible in those patients with non-dilated CBD, and spontaneous migration of small stones into the duodenum is frequently noted. In fact, some stones demonstrated on intraoperative cholangiograms were not revealed by postoperative cholangiography. In contrast, retained stones detected postoperatively were successfully removed by postoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), the endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation technique (EPBDT), or postoperative cholangioscopy (POCS) without any injury to the sphinter of Oddi. With this approach, we believe that the causes of stone recurrence can be avoided in the majority of cases. Received for publication on Aug. 21, 1999; accepted on Sept. 2, 1999     

腹腔镜术中联合胰胆镜治疗胆石症疗效评价

目的　评价腹腔镜胆囊切除术 (laparoscopiccholecystectomy,LC)术中联合应用内镜括约肌切开术 (intraoperativeendoscopicsphincterotomy,IOEST)治疗胆石症的疗效。　方法　回顾性分析LC联合IOEST治疗LC术前诊断和术中常规胆道造影确诊的 6 8例胆囊合并胆总管结石患者的临床效果。　结果　联合手术成功率为 97.1% (6 6 6 8) ;IOEST成功率 98.5 % (6 7 6 8) ,取净结石率 10 0 % (6 7 6 7)。IOEST后并发轻度急性胰腺腺炎 3例 ,并发胃潴留 2例。术后平均住院时间 2 .8天。　结论　LC联合IOEST能一次性有效治疗胆囊结石合并胆总管结石 ,优于术前或术后联合EST。     

Endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and effective

Management strategy for common bile duct (CBD) stones is controversial with several treatment options if stones in the CBD are recognized intraoperatively. The aim of this study was to report our experience with same-session combined endoscopic-laparoscopic treatment of gallbladder and CBD stones. We retrospectively evaluated 31 patients with cholecystolithiasis and CBD stones undergoing same-session combined endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy and endoscopic stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Same-session ERCP and sphincterotomy were performed in all patients, and stone extraction was successfully performed in 29 patients (93%) with 2 failures (7%) due to impacted stones. In 8 patients (26%), the laparoscopic procedure was converted to open cholecystectomy because of dense adhesions or unclear anatomy. Two patients (7%) developed mild pancreatitis postoperatively and no other morbidity or mortality. In conclusion, same-session ERCP with stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy seems to be a safe and effective treatment strategy for CBD stones.