EUS with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration as the first endoscopic test for the evaluation of obstructive jaundice

BACKGROUND: This study assesses the cost savings associated with using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for evaluating patients with suspected obstructive jaundice. METHODS: One hundred forty-seven patients with obstructive jaundice of unknown or possibly neoplastic origin had EUS as their first endoscopic procedure. With knowledge of the final diagnosis and actual management for each patient, their probable evaluation and outcomes and their additional costs were reassessed assuming that ERCP would have been performed as the first endoscopic procedure. Also calculated were the additional costs incurred if EUS were unavailable for use after ERCP and had to be replaced by computed tomography or other procedures. RESULTS: The final diagnoses in these patients included malignancies (65%), choledocholithiasis or cholecystitis (18%), "medical jaundice" (11%), and miscellaneous benign conditions (6%). Fifty-four percent had EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration but only 53% required ERCP after EUS. An EUS-first approach saved an estimated $1007 to $1313/patient, but the cost was $2200 more if EUS was unavailable for use after ERCP. Significant savings persisted through sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Performing EUS with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration as the first endoscopic procedure in patients suspected to have obstructive jaundice can obviate the need for about 50% of ERCPs, helps direct subsequent therapeutic ERCP, and can substantially reduce costs in these patients.     

Comparison of early endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the management of acute biliary pancreatitis: a prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The role and potential benefits of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in the management of acute biliary pancreatitis have not been documented. We report a large prospective randomized study comparing early EUS and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in the management of these patients. METHODS: A prospective randomized study was performed on 140 patients with acute pancreatitis suspected to have a biliary cause. The patients were randomized to have EUS (n = 70) or ERCP (n = 70) within 24 hours from admission. In the EUS group, when EUS detected choledocholithiasis, therapeutic ERCP was performed during the same endoscopy session. In the ERCP group, diagnostic ERCP was performed, followed by therapeutic endoscopy when choledocholithiasis was detected. RESULTS: Examination of the biliary tree by EUS was successful in all patients in the EUS group, whereas cannulation of the common duct during ERCP was unsuccessful in 10 patients (14%) in the ERCP group (P = .001). Combined percutaneous ultrasonography and ERCP missed detection of cholelithiasis in 6 patients in the ERCP group. The overall morbidity rate was 7% in the EUS group, and that in the ERCP group was 14% (P = .172). The hospital stay and mortality rates were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients with acute biliary pancreatitis, EUS could safely replace diagnostic ERCP in the management for selecting patients with choledocholithiasis for therapeutic ERCP with a higher successful examination rate, a higher sensitivity in the detection of cholelithiasis, and a comparable morbidity rate.     

Comparison of EUS and ERCP in the investigation with suspected biliary obstruction caused by choledocholithiasis: a randomized study

BACKGROUND: EUS may be used to reduce the need of diagnostic ERCP. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to investigate the benefits and safety of an EUS-guided versus an ERCP-guided approach in the management of suspected biliary obstructive diseases caused by choledocholithiasis, in whom a US study is not diagnostic. DESIGN: A randomized study. SETTING: A university medical unit. PATIENTS: Patients with clinical, biochemical, or radiologic suspicion of biliary obstruction. INTERVENTIONS: In the EUS group, therapeutic ERCP was performed at the same EUS session if a lesion was found. In the ERCP group, therapeutic treatment was carried out at the discretion of the endoscopist. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The number of ERCPs avoided, procedure-related complications, and recurrent biliary symptoms on follow-up at 1 year. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were randomized to EUS and 32 to ERCP. Three patients (9.4%) had failed ERCPs, whereas all EUS procedures were successful. Nine (27.3%) patients in the EUS group were found to have biliary lesions that were all treated by ERCP. In the ERCP group, 7 (22%) patients had biliary lesions detected that were treated in the same session. More patients had serious complications (bleeding, acute pancreatitis, and umbilical abscess) in the ERCP group. One patient in each group had recurrent biliary symptoms during follow-up. With EUS used as a triage tool, diagnostic ERCP and its related complications could be spared in 49 (75.4%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients suspected to have biliary obstructive disease, EUS is a safe and accurate test to select patients for therapeutic ERCP.     

Can endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography replace ERCP in patients with suspected biliary disease? A prospective trial and cost analysis

OBJECTIVES: ERCP is the gold standard for pancreaticobiliary evaluation but is associated with complications. Less invasive diagnostic alternatives with similar capabilities may be cost-effective, particularly in situations involving low prevalence of disease. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and ERCP in the same patients with suspected extrahepatic biliary disease. The economic outcomes of EUS-, MRCP-, and ERCP-based diagnostic strategies were evaluated. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients referred for ERCP with suspected biliary disease. MRCP and EUS were performed within 24 h before ERCP. The investigators were blinded to the results of the alternative imaging studies. A cost-utility analysis was performed for initial ERCP, MRCP, and EUS strategies for these patients. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were studied. ERCP cholangiogram failed in one patient, and another patient did not complete MRCP because of claustrophobia. The final diagnoses (N = 28) were CBD stone (mean = 4 mm; range = 3-6 mm) in five patients; biliary stricture in three patients, and normal biliary tree in 20. Two patients had pancreatitis after therapeutic ERCP, one after precut sphincterotomy followed by a normal cholangiogram. EUS was more sensitive than MRCP in the detection of choledocolithiasis (80% vs 40%), with similar specificity. MRCP had a poor specificity and positive predictive value for the diagnosis of biliary stricture (76%/25%) compared to EUS (100%/100%), with similar sensitivity. The overall accuracy of MRCP for any abnormality was 61% (95% CI = 0.41-0.78) compared to 89% (CI = 0.72-0.98) for EUS. Among those patients with a normal biliary tree, the proportion correctly identified with each test was 95% for EUS and 65% for MRCP (p < 0.02). The cost for each strategy per patient evaluated was $1346 for ERCP, $1111 for EUS, and $1145 for MRCP. CONCLUSIONS: In this patient population with a low disease prevalence, EUS was superior to MRCP for choledocholithiasis. EUS was most useful for confirming a normal biliary tree and should be considered a low-risk alternative to ERCP. Although MRCP had the lowest procedural reimbursement, the initial EUS strategy had the greatest cost-utility by avoiding unnecessary ERCP examinations.     

内镜超声检查对胆总管无扩张伴可疑胆总管结石的诊断价值

目的 探讨胆总管无扩张伴可疑胆总管结石患者（CBDS）行超声内镜检查（EUS）的价值.方法 对33例经多次腹部B超检查诊断胆囊结石,胆总管直径〈8 mm,未发现CBDS但有急性胰腺炎、阻塞性黄疸或反复胆绞痛等病史之一的患者行EUS,并与手术或ERCP结果进行比较.结果 33例患者行EUS,20例发现CBDS.经进一步手术或ERCP,该20例患者中有16例证实有CBDS.EUS对本组病例CBDS诊断的灵敏度为100%,特异度为76.5%,阳性预测价值为80%,阴性预测价值为100%.结论 对胆总管无扩张但有可疑CBDS者行EUS检查有较高的临床价值.     

Endoscopic ultrasonography versus cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis

Background: Choledocholithiasis is a major source of morbidity among patients undergoing cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallstones. There is no consensus on the best approach to diagnosing bile duct stones. We compared the safety, accuracy, diagnostic yield, and cost of EUS- and ERCP-based approaches. Methods: Sixty-four consecutive pre- and post-cholecystectomy patients referred for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for suspected choledocholithiasis were prospectively evaluated in a blinded fashion. All were stratified into risk groups using predefined criteria. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and ERCP were sequentially performed by two endoscopists. Results: The success rates of EUS and ERCP were 98% and 94%, respectively. The accuracy of EUS for diagnosing choledocholithiasis was 94%. EUS provided an additional or alternative diagnosis to bile duct stones in 21% of patients. The complication rate of EUS was significantly lower than diagnostic ERCP. An EUS-based strategy costs less than diagnostic ERCP in patients with low, moderate, or intermediate risk. Conclusions: EUS is comparably accurate, but safer and less costly than ERCP for evaluating patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. It is useful in patients with an increased risk of having common bile duct stones based on clinical criteria and those with contraindications for or prior unsuccessful ERCP. EUS may enable selective performance of ERCP and improve the cost-effectiveness of diagnosing choledocholithiasis. (Gastrointest Endosc 1998;47:439-48.)     

EUS vs MRCP for detection of choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND: Numerous published studies have shown the high diagnostic performance of both EUS and MRCP compared with ERCP for the detection of choledocholithiasis. DESIGN: We undertook a systematic review of all published randomized, prospective trials that compared EUS with MRCP with the primary aim being to compare the overall diagnostic accuracy for the detection of choledocholithiasis in patients with suspected biliary disease. METHODS: A MEDLINE review was performed. We identified 5 randomized, prospective, blinded trials comparing MRCP and EUS for the detection of choledocholithiasis, with subsequent ERCP or intraoperative cholangiography as a criterion standard. The study-specific variables for EUS and MRCP for choledocholithiasis were calculated from the data, and analyses were performed by using aggregated variables (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and likelihood ratios). RESULTS: The pooled data set consisted of 301 patients. The aggregated sensitivities of EUS and MRCP for the detection of choledocholithiasis were 0.93 and 0.85, respectively, whereas their specificities were 0.96 and 0.93, respectively. The aggregated positive predictive values for EUS and MRCP were 0.93 and 0.87, respectively, with the corresponding negative predictive values of 0.96 and 0.92, respectively. Positive likelihood ratios were >10 for both tests, and corresponding negative likelihood ratios approached 0.10 for both tests. No statistically significant differences between EUS and MRCP were found in our analysis. CONCLUSIONS: EUS and MRCP have high diagnostic performance overall. Our analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the modalities. We recommend taking into consideration other factors, such as resource availability, experience, and cost considerations in deciding between these 2 tests.     

Early EUS of the bile duct before endoscopic sphincterotomy for acute biliary pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sphincterotomy can benefit patients with suspected biliary pancreatitis, although there are procedure-related complications. EUS can be used to select patients for endoscopic sphincterotomy. The results of this strategy were assessed. METHODS: Information on patients referred for EUS were recorded in a database. One hundred twenty-three patients with suspected biliary pancreatitis (57 men, 66 women; median age 55 years) were included and followed. All underwent EUS followed by endoscopic sphincterotomy during the same procedure if choledocholithiasis was identified. Outcomes were studied in relation to the initial severity of biliary pancreatitis (Ranson and Balthazar scores), presence of stones, and time span between onset of biliary pancreatitis and EUS plus endoscopic sphincterotomy. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients (28%) had a Ranson score greater than 3 on admission and 38 (31%) were Balthazar D-E. The median time from admission to EUS was 3 days. EUS imaging of the bile duct was complete in all but 3 patients. Thirty-three patients (27%) had choledocholithiasis on EUS and underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy. Stones were more frequent in patients with jaundice (p < 0.005) and when EUS was performed less than 3 days after admission (p < 0.05). One hundred patients (81%) recovered without complication. Two patients (1.6%) died, 1 had recurrent BP develop, 6 (5%) had further biliary symptoms, and 16 (13%) had complications of pancreatitis develop (9 pseudocysts). There were 3 mild endoscopic sphincterotomy-related complications (complication rate 6.5%). CONCLUSIONS: In this series in which endoscopic sphincterotomy was performed selectively depending on the endosonographic presence or absence of ductal stones early in the course of the pancreatitis, and not according to its predicted severity, mortality and complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy were low and unrelated to the predicted severity of biliary pancreatitis or the presence of choledocholithiasis. Controlled trials are needed to confirm the superiority of this strategy compared with ERCP alone for the management of biliary pancreatitis.     

荟萃分析:超声内镜和ERCP诊断胆总管结石的比较

目的 通过荟萃分析对超声内镜和ERCP对胆总管结石诊断能力进行比较.方法 从Pubmed、Embase、Elsevier Science Direct和中国期刊全文数据库中检索比较超声内镜和ERCP对怀疑有胆总管结石病人诊断能力的前瞻性研究.对各项研究中的敏感性、特异性、准确率的比数比(OR)行荟萃分析,采用固定效应模型或随机效应模型进行数据统计分析.结果 共有5项对照研究入选(n=325).超声内镜的敏感性显著高于ERCP(146/159 vs 134/159,固定效应模型:OR 2.02,95%CI=1.01-4.03,P=0.05).超声内镜和ERCP对检测胆总管结石的特异性相似(161/166 vs 164/166,固定效应模型:OR 0.49,95% CI=0.12-1.99,P＞0.05).超声内镜的准确性略高于ERCP,但没有显著性差异(307/325 vs 298/325,固定效应模型:OR 1.53,95% CI=0.83-2.80,P＞0.05).ERCP相关的不良反应发生率显著高于超声内镜(P＜0.01).结论 由于准确率、安全性高,侵入性相对较小,超声内镜可认为是诊断胆总管结石的理想检查项目并能替代诊断性ERCP.对于这两种方法 的选择,应该取决于病人的一般状况、医疗单位所具备的能力,以及病灶是否可能需要采取进一步的介入治疗.     

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound after removal of common bile duct stone

Abstract

Objective: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a standard procedure for choledocholithiasis. Nonetheless, the recurrence rate remains quite high. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and related factors of remnant biliary stone or sludge using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) after the removal of common bile duct (CBD) stone and to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes.

Methods: A prospective study enrolling a consecutive series of patients who underwent ERCP for CBD stone removal was performed between June 2014 and November 2015. Following confirmation of complete CBD stone removal by the operator, EUS was performed to determine whether biliary stone or sludge remained. Patients underwent cholecystectomy if a gallstone was identified and were subsequently followed up at a regular interval of 3–6?months. We investigated whether symptomatic recurrence would occur.

Results: A total of 130 patients were enrolled. The presence of remnant biliary stone or sludge after ERCP was confirmed in 36.9% (48/130) of patients. Acute angulation of the distal CBD was the sole factor associated with remnant biliary stone or sludge (p?Conclusions: Acute angulation of the distal CBD was associated with remnant biliary stone or sludge after ERCP. Remnant biliary sludge on EUS and large CBD diameter were strong predictors of symptomatic recurrence. EUS evaluation following CBD stone removal could be an effective strategy in the treatment of choledocholithiasis.     

超声内镜对胆胰疾病诊断价值的探讨

目的 探讨超声内镜（EUS）对胆胰疾病的诊断价值。方法 采用超声胃镜（频率为7．5MHz和20Mnz），应用水囊法结合水充盈法，对54例临床疑为胆胰病变的患者进行EUS检查，并与腹部B超、CT及ERCP比较。结果 EUS、US、CT、ERCP对胆胰疾病诊断的阳性率分别为92．6％（50/54）、57．4％（31／54）、64．8％（35／54）及76．2％（32／42）。EUS对胰腺癌诊断的阳性率达100％。高于腹部B超、CT及ERCP；EUS对胆总管结石及慢性胰腺炎的准确率分别为100％和88．9％。结论 EUS对胆胰疾病的诊断率高于腹部B超，CT及ERCP影像检查，尤其对胆管扩张病因的定位及定性诊断均有较大的诊断价值。     

Prospective assessment of the utility of EUS in the evaluation of gallstone pancreatitis

BACKGROUND: The ability to identify common bile duct stones by noninvasive means in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis is limited. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the ability of endosonography (EUS) to identify cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis and predict disease severity in patients with nonalcoholic pancreatitis. METHODS: EUS was performed immediately before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) by separate blinded examiners within 72 hours of admission. Gallbladder findings were compared between EUS and transabdominal ultrasonography (US). Using endoscopic extraction of a bile duct stone as the reference standard for choledocholithiasis, the diagnostic yield of EUS was compared with transabdominal US and ERCP. Features identified during endosonographic imaging of the pancreas were correlated with length of hospitalization. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were studied. EUS and transabdominal US were concordant in their interpretation of gallbladder findings in 92% of patients. The sensitivity of transabdominal US, EUS, and ERCP for identifying choledocholithiasis was 50%, 91%, and 92% and the accuracy was 83%, 97%, and 89%, respectively. Length of hospital stay was longer in patients with peripancreatic fluid (9.2 vs. 5.7 days, p < 0.1) and shorter in patients with coarse echo texture (2.6 vs. 7.2 days, p < 0.05) demonstrated on EUS. CONCLUSIONS: EUS can reliably identify cholelithiasis and is more sensitive than transabdominal US in detecting choledocholithiasis in patients with biliary pancreatitis. EUS may be used early in the management of patients with acute pancreatitis to select those who would benefit from endoscopic stone extraction. The utility of EUS for predicting pancreatitis severity requires further investigation.     

The substitution of endoscopic ultrasound for endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography: implications for service development and training

OBJECTIVES: Choledocholithiasis and other benign conditions of the biliary tree are difficult to define clinically. Endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) is increasingly being replaced as the investigation of choice by other imaging modalities. The aim of this study was to measure the impact of substituting endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for ERCP in terms of case throughput and the proportion of therapeutic ERCPs performed. METHODS: Over a 12-month period, cases with a low/medium likelihood for biliary pathology were triaged to EUS rather than ERCP. Data were collected on the proportion of ERCPs performed with diagnostic or therapeutic intent and compared with data from the preceding 12-month period. RESULTS: In the 12 months to April 2001, 518 cases were referred for ERCP; 140 underwent EUS and 378 underwent ERCP. The proportions of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP were 14% and 86%, respectively. Benign biliary disease represented 33% of all referrals for EUS, and calculi were identified in 6% of these cases. During the preceding year, 637 ERCPs were performed. The proportion of diagnostic (33%) and therapeutic (67%) cases differed from the index year (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The substitution of EUS for ERCP results in significant quantitative and qualitative change to ERCP practice, which has direct consequences for training and service development.     

EUS: a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND: EUS has been proposed as a less invasive means of diagnosing choledocholithiasis and may eliminate the need for ERCP and its associated risks. The literature pertaining to EUS for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis reports widely varying sensitivities and specificities. OBJECTIVE: To more precisely estimate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS in suspected choledocholithiasis. DESIGN: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were used to identify prospective cohort studies in which the results of EUS were compared with the results of an acceptable criterion standard, including ERCP, intraoperative cholangiography, or surgical exploration. Two independent reviewers extracted standardized data and assessed trial quality. A random effects model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and a summary receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed. All predefined potential sources of heterogeneity were explored by subgroup analysis and meta-regression. PATIENTS: A total of 2673 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis were reported in 27 studies that satisfied the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: EUS had a high overall pooled sensitivity of 0.94 (95% CI, 0.93-0.96), a specificity of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.94-0.96), and an area under the curve of 0.98. Three variables appeared to yield a higher DOR: a higher disease prevalence, an adequate time interval between index test and criterion standards, and the presence of verification bias. LIMITATIONS: Misclassification of patients by imperfect criterion standards could potentially underestimate the performance of an EUS. CONCLUSIONS: An EUS is a noninvasive test, with excellent overall sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing choledocholithiasis. An EUS should, therefore, be used to select patients for a therapeutic ERCP to minimize the risk of complications associated with unnecessary diagnostic ERCP.     

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the diagnosis of pancreatobiliary diseases: a prospective study

OBJECTIVES: To compare the diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in: (a) patients with a dilated biliary tree unexplained by ultrasonography (US) (group 1), and (b) the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis in patients with nondilated biliary tree (group 2). METHODS: Patients were prospectively evaluated with EUS and MRCP. The gold standard used was surgery or EUS-FNA and ERCP, intraoperative cholangiography, or follow-up when EUS and/or MRCP disclosed or precluded malignancy, respectively. Likelihood ratios (LR) and pretest and post-test probabilities for the diagnosis of malignancy and choledocholithiasis were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 159 patients met one of the inclusion criteria but 24 of them were excluded for different reasons. Thus, 135 patients constitute the study population. The most frequent diagnosis was choledocholithiasis (49% in group 1 and 42% in group 2, P= 0.380) and malignancy was more frequent in group 1 (35%vs 7%, respectively, P < 0.001). When EUS and MRCP diagnosed malignancy, its prevalence in our series (35%) increased up to 98% and 96%, respectively, whereas it decreased to 0% and 2.6% when EUS and MRCP precluded this diagnosis. In patients in group 2, when EUS and MRCP made a positive diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, its prevalence (42%) increased up to 78% and 92%, respectively, whereas it decreased to 6% and 9% when any pathologic finding was ruled out. CONCLUSIONS: EUS and MRCP are extremely useful in diagnosing or excluding malignancy and choledocholithiasis in patients with dilated and nondilated biliary tree. Therefore, they are critical in the approach to the management of these patients.     

Long term outcome of EUS-based strategy for suspected choledocholithiasis but negative CT finding

Abstract

Objectives: The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines offered the risk-stratified approach in suspected choledocholithiasis. Previous studies have raised concern about the insufficient accuracy of the guideline, especially in high probability group. The purposes of this study were to authenticate the stratification and clinical predictors of the guidelines for suspected choledocholithiasis with no visible choledocholithiasis on computed tomography (CT) and to make clear the clinical strategy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS).

Materials and methods: We carried out the retrospective single-center study of 156 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis but negative findings on CT who underwent EUS for about 8 years at Samsung Medical Center. We assessed the clinical predictors of the ASGE guidelines in predicting the presence of choledocholithiasis and the outcome of the EUS.

Results: Fifty-three of the 156 patients had positive findings on EUS that included choledocholithiasis (n?=?43, 27.6%) or obstructive papillitis (n?=?10, 6.4%). Among the 53 patients, 51 (96.2%) had choledocholithiasis or obstructive papillitis on ERCP. The 101 patients of 103 patients with negative finding on EUS did not show biliary events during follow-up period. EUS accuracy was 98.7% (sensitivity 100%; specificity 98.1%). Among the 49 patients with high probability, 21 (42.9%) had choledocholithiasis on ERCP. In 107 patients who were classified as intermediate probability, 30 (27.3%) had choledocholithiasis. There were no complications related to EUS.

Conclusions: Not only intermediate probability group but also high probability group without definite acute cholangitis may require EUS. Application of EUS for suspected choledocholithiasis is highly accurate, safe and reduces unnecessary invasive ERCP in 57.1% of patients with high probability group.     

Single-session endosonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for biliopancreatic diseases is feasible,effective and cost beneficial

BackgroundEndoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are often required in patients with pancreaticobiliary disorders.AimsTo assess the clinical impact and costs savings of a single session EUS-ERCP.MethodsPatient and intervention data from April 2009 to March 2012 were prospectively recruited and retrospectively analyzed from a database at a tertiary hospital. Indications, diagnostic yield, procedure details, complications and costs were evaluated.ResultsFifty-five scheduled combined procedures were done in 53 patients. The accuracy of EUS–fine needle aspiration for malignancy was 90%. The main clinical indication was a malignant obstructing lesion (66%). The ERCP cannulation was successful in 67%, and in 11/15 failed ERCP (73%), drainage was completed thanks to an EUS-guided biliary drainage: 6 transmurals, 5 rendezvous. Eight patients (14%) had related complications: bacteremia (n = 3), pancreatitis (n = 2), bleeding (n = 2) and perforation (n = 1). The mean duration was 65 ± 22.2 min.The mean estimated cost for a single session was €3437, and €4095 for two separate sessions. The estimated cost savings using a single-session strategy was €658 per patient, representing a total savings of €36,189.ConclusionCombined EUS and ERCP is safe, technically feasible and cost beneficial. Furthermore, in failed ERCP cases, the endoscopic biliary drainage can be completed with EUS-guided biliary access in the same procedure.     

The detection of bile duct stones in suspected biliary pancreatitis: comparison of MRCP, ERCP, and intraductal US

OBJECTIVES: Early ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy for stone extraction can benefit the prognosis in patients with severe biliary pancreatitis, but are associated with complications. The ability to identify choledocholithiasis by noninvasive means in biliary pancreatitis is limited. The aim of this study was evaluation of the ability of MRCP to detect choledocholithiasis in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis. In addition, we investigated whether intraductal US (IDUS) could help manage these patients. METHODS: Thirty-two patients with suspected biliary pancreatitis were studied prospectively. MRCP was performed immediately before ERCP by separate blinded examiners within 24 h of admission. Wire-guided IDUS was performed during ERCP within 72 h of admission, regardless of the results of MRCP. Using endoscopic extraction of a stone as the reference standard, the diagnostic yield of MRCP was compared with transabdominal US, CT, ERCP, and IDUS. RESULTS: The sensitivity of US, CT, MRCP, ERCP, and IDUS for identifying choledocholithiasis was 20.0%, 40.0%, 80.0%, 90.0%, and 95.0%, respectively. The overall agreement between MRCP and ERCP was 90.6% for choledocholithiasis (kappa= 0.808, p < 0.01). The sensitivity of MRCP for detecting choledocholithiasis decreased with dilated bile ducts (bile duct diameter > 10 mm, 72.7% vs 88.9%). The combination of ERCP and IDUS improved accuracy in the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. CONCLUSIONS: MRCP can be used to select patients with biliary pancreatitis who require ERCP. IDUS may be applied in the management of biliary pancreatitis if ERCP is performed.     

EUS for detection of occult cholelithiasis in patients with idiopathic pancreatitis

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in detecting occult cholelithiasis and determining a probable etiology in patients classified as having idiopathic pancreatitis by conventional radiologic methods. METHODS: A prospective study was performed in 89 consecutive patients with acute pancreatitis. Transcutaneous ultrasonography (US), CT, or both was performed on all patients within 24 hours of admission. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed in all patients with confirmed or suspected biliary pancreatitis. EUS was performed in patients classified as having idiopathic pancreatitis. RESULTS: Cholelithiasis was identified in 64 patients (72%) by conventional radiologic methods. Eighteen patients (20%) were classified as having idiopathic pancreatitis after evaluation by US (all 18 patients), repeated US (9 patients), CT (6 patients) and ERCP (13 patients). EUS performed in these 18 patients revealed small gallbladder stones (1 to 9 mm) in 14 patients; 3 were found to have concomitant choledocholithiasis. All stones were confirmed by subsequent ERCP and cholecystectomy. The remaining 4 patients in whom no etiology was identified had no clinical or radiologic evidence of cholelithiasis at a median follow-up of 22 months. CONCLUSION: Cholelithiasis is detected by EUS in a large number of patients classified as having idiopathic pancreatitis by conventional radiologic examinations. With identification of a biliary cause of acute pancreatitis, treatment can be initiated early, thereby reducing the risk of recurrent pancreatitis with its associated morbidity and mortality. EUS is a valuable diagnostic modality in the management of patients with acute pancreatitis.     

Noninvasive vs. selective invasive biliary imaging for acute biliary pancreatitis: an economic evaluation by using decision tree analysis

BACKGROUND: ERCP is used selectively in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP). In patients with ABP, ERCP often is difficult and has the potential to cause further damage. In addition, the prevalence of residual choledocholithiasis in ABP is low (<30%). EUS and MRCP accurately diagnose choledocholithiasis, but the performance of MRCP may be inferior in ABP. EUS, with ERCP when a stone is seen, has been shown to be feasible. This study assessed the relative costs and outcomes of EUS and MRCP in patients with ABP compared with standard care involving selective ERCP. METHODS: A decision tree was constructed, modeling standard care for nonsevere ABP (selective ERCP) and severe ABP (ERCP with sphincterotomy and balloon sweep). The other arms included either EUS or MRCP first, with the conversion to or the addition of ERCP when a bile-duct stone was seen. Probabilities and accuracy of EUS and MRCP were taken from published data. Costs were locally quantified in Canadian dollars (CDN), including nursing/technical/professional personnel, equipment maintenance, and disposable equipment. The robustness of assumptions was tested by sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Overall, EUS in all patients with ABP was marginally dominant compared with standard care with selective ERCP ($58 CDN per patient less expensive; 0.9% fewer cases of pancreatitis [ERCP-related or recurrent]). In the severe ABP subgroup, EUS was more clearly dominant ($742 CDN per patient less expensive; 3% fewer cases of pancreatitis), and the nonsevere subgroup had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $17,000 per case of pancreatitis avoided. MRCP was more expensive than EUS in both subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: EUS is dominant in severe ABP. In nonsevere ABP, it is slightly more costly but is associated with fewer ERCPs and ERCP-related complications. A randomized trial would help to quantify the benefits of avoiding ERCP in these patients.