RESUMEN

Background and aim The role of expensive, risky, and unnecessary endoscopic interventions can be avoided by the use of non-invasive tests to predict common bile duct (CBD) stones. Therefore, our aim was to identify non-invasive predictors of choledocholithiasis (CL) in patients and further to predict a model and assess its diagnostic accuracy in predicting CL. Methods This cross-sectional study was carried out from June 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021. Patients having gall bladder stones on percutaneous transabdominal sonography and fulfilling intermediate probability criteria of CL were enrolled. These patients then underwent radial endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) followed by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for detecting CBD stones. Univariate logistic regression analysis, followed by multivariate logistic regression analysis, was performed to ascertain the independent predictors of CBD stone in patients with intermediate probability. A model was proposed, and the diagnostic accuracy was calculated at an optimal cutoff. The model was then internally validated in the patients with intermediate probability and was also compared with the pre-existing score. Results Out of 131 patients included in the study, CBD stone was noted in 85 (66%) and 88 (67.2%) patients on EUS and ERCP, respectively. On multivariate analysis, high serum bilirubin (>2 mg/dL) and alkaline phosphatase (200 IU) and dilated CBD (>6 mm) on transabdominal sonography at baseline were significant predictors of CBD stone in these patients. Using these variables, a scoring system (BATS score) was developed, which had an area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) of 0.98 in predicting the presence of CBD stone with a sensitivity of 93.18%, a specificity of 76.74%, and a diagnostic accuracy of 87.79%. In the validation cohort, a BATS score of ≥5 had a diagnostic accuracy of 95.91% in predicting CL. Conclusion The BATS score showed excellent sensitivity and good diagnostic accuracy in predicting the CBD stone with excellent results on internal validation. However, external validation of our results is required to recommend this model on a larger scale.

RESUMEN

The risk of choledocholithiasis should be assessed in every patient undergoing cholecystectomy to define the next step. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy proposed a stratified predictor scale of choledocholithiasis. Therefore, we aimed to describe our experience managing patients with an intermediate risk of choledocholithiasis according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines and the actual presence of bile duct stones in magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Methods: A retrospective observational study with a prospective database was conducted. The analysis included sociodemographic data, laboratory values, and imaging. Bivariate, multivariate, and receiver operating characteristic analysis were performed. Results: Three hundred twenty-seven patients had an intermediate risk for choledocholithiasis. Half the patients were at least 65 years old. 24.77% were diagnosed with choledocholithiasis. Bile duct dilation was documented in only 3.06% of cases. Diagnosis of choledocholithiasis is associated with an age odds ratio (OR): 1.87 (P 0.02), alkaline phosphatase OR: 2.44 (P 0.02), and bile duct dilation greater than 6 mm OR: 14.65 (P 0.00). Conclusions: High variability in the accuracy of imaging techniques results in a large number of patients classified as intermediate risk without choledocholithiasis in cholangioresonance. Therefore, enhancing the criteria to define intermediate risk for patients in order to optimize resources is of paramount importance.

RESUMEN

Objective: To determine accuracy of SAGES, ASGE and ESGE criteria for predicting presence of common bile duct (CBD) stones. Methods: In a prospective study at Jinnah Hospital Lahore from March 2021 to February 2022, patients with suspected CBD stone were stratified in High risk (HR), intermediate risk (IR) and low risk (LR) for SAGES, ASGE and ESGE criteria. All patients underwent ERCP and risk strata were analyzed using SPSS 22® for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy. Results: In 90 patients with mean age 45.18(±14.87) and male/female ratio 0.64(35/55), area Under Curve (AUC) for predicting CBD stones was 0.75, 0.81and 0.83 for HR and 0.28, 0.52 and 0.52 for IR group while it was 0.53, 0.81 and 0.53 for absence of stone in LR group of SAGES, ASGE and ESGE criteria respectively. HR groups had accuracy of 81.1%, 86.7% and 87.8% in predicting CBD stone while LR criteria had 68.8%, 86.7% and 68.1% accuracy in predicting absence of CBD stone for SAGES, ASGE and ESGE respectively. Conclusion: HR strata of SAGES, ASGE and ESGE scores have excellent accuracy in predicting CBD stones whereas IR and LR criteria are suboptimal for excluding CBD stones.

RESUMEN

Background: The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) has proposed practice guidelines for evaluating patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. This study aims to assess and compare practice patterns for following ASGE guidelines for choledocholithiasis in a large academic vs. community hospital setting. Methods: A total of one thousand ER indicated for choledocholithiasis were randomly selected. Patients' demographics, total bilirubin, imaging studies including magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and ERCP results were retrospectively collected. Patients with prior sphincterotomy were excluded. We examined the following practice deviations from the current ASGE guidelines; (1) ERCP was potentially delayed in high probability cases while awaiting additional imaging studies, (2) ERCP was performed without additional imaging studies in cases of low/intermediate-risk, or (3) ERCP was performed in low/intermediate-risk cases when additional imaging studies were negative. Results: A total of 640 patients with native papilla who underwent ERCP were included in the final analysis. Overall, the management of 43% (275) of patients was deviated from the applicable ASGE guidelines. Academic and community provider rates of non-adherence were 32 vs. 45%, respectively (p-value: < 0.01). Of 381 high-risk cases, 54.1% had additional imaging before ERCP. (Academic vs. community; 11.7 vs. 88.3%, p-value: < 0.01). In 26.7% (69/258) of low/intermediate risk cases, ERCP was performed without additional studies; academic (14.5%) vs. community (85.5%) (p-value: < 0.01). Finally, in 11.2% (19/170) of patients, ERCP was performed despite intermediate/low probability and negative imaging; academic (26.3%) vs. community (73.7%) (p-value: 0.02). Conclusion: Our study results show that providers do not adhere to ASGE practice guidelines in 43% of suspected choledocholithiasis cases. The rate of non-adherence was significantly higher in community settings. It could be due to various reasons, including lack/delays for alternate studies (i.e., MRCP, EUS), concern regarding the length of stay, patient preference, or lack of awareness/understanding of the guidelines. Increased availability of alternate imaging and educational strategies may be needed to increase the adoption of practice guidelines across academic and community settings to improve patient outcomes and save healthcare dollars.

RESUMEN

Introduction Colonoscopy quality indicators and maintenance of competency skills are relatively well established in the adult literature as compared to the pediatric gastroenterology. One of the suggested quality assurance measures is cecal intubation rate, which is suggested to be >90% in all colonoscopies as per American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines. Terminal ileum (TI) intubations are essentially required for diagnostic reasons in pediatric colonoscopies as compared to the screening reasons in adults. Maintenance of competency in pediatric colonoscopies has been described in the literature but in smaller studies contrary to the adult ones. The aims of this study are to compare our center's individual and group cecal intubation rates and compare it with the published literature, assess the group's terminal ileal intubation rates in comparison with the published literature, assess the most common reasons for failure to intubate the cecum and/or terminal ileum, and to assess whether the presence of a trainee affects the intubation rates and the duration of the procedure. Methods A retrospective chart review was performed on all pediatric patients (0-18 years). Colonoscopies performed over a two-year period at our single center were included in the study. Patients scheduled for sigmoidoscopy and with altered anatomy of their colon were excluded from the study. The endoscopy and pathology reports were reviewed to ascertain whether the cecum and TI were reached. Quality of bowel preparation and any other stated reasons for incompletion were obtained. Clinical charts were reviewed to obtain indication for colonoscopy. Skin-to-skin time, which is the time from starting to the finishing of the procedure, was recorded for each procedure. Results A total of 391 colonoscopies were performed during the two-year study period by six gastroenterologists. The number of colonoscopies per staff ranged from 57 to 89 procedures. The overall cecal intubation rate was observed to be 98.5% (range: 95.9%-98.9%). TI intubation rate was lower at a rate of 83.1% (range: 63.3%-92.1%). The main stated reason for the inability to attain cecum/TI was technical difficulty and poor bowel prep. Daytime colonoscopies were shorter (39.5 minutes vs 50.3 minutes) compared to after-hours ones and had a higher TI intubation rate (84.5% vs 62.5%). No complications were encountered in the procedures. Conclusion Despite relatively low volumes, cecal intubation rates are very high, exceeding suggested standards. TI intubation rates were low, and there was noted to be a high degree of variability. However, multicentric collaborative evaluations are required over a longer period of time to establish relevant parameters for quality assurance and competency in pediatric endoscopy.

RESUMEN

Összefoglaló. Bevezetés: Az epeúti kövesség meglétének valószínusége különbözo klinikai prediktorok alapján megbecsülheto, e faktorok szenzitivitása és specificitása azonban nem kielégíto. Az endoszkópos ultrahangvizsgálat az epeúti kövesség diagnosztizálásának szemiinvazív precíz eszköze. Célkituzés: Célunk az endoszkópos ultrahangvizsgálat diagnosztikus érzékenységének vizsgálata gyanított epeúti kövesség esetén. Módszer: A prospektív vizsgálat során a betegeket az Amerikai Emésztoszervi Endoszkópos Társaság (ASGE) ajánlása szerint meghatározott prediktorok alapján közepes és magas valószínuségi csoportokba osztottuk, és endoszkópos ultrahangvizsgálatot, valamint amennyiben szükséges volt, endoszkópos retrográd kolangiopankreatográfiát (ERCP) végeztünk. Eredmények: Összesen 95 beteget vizsgáltunk. Az endoszkópos ultrahangvizsgálat 53 (56%) beteg esetében írt le epeúti kövességet: 55%-ban (39/71) a közepes valószínuségi és 58%-ban (14/24) a magas valószínuségi csoportban. Az ERCP mindegyik choledocholithiasisos esetet megerosítette. A két valószínuségi csoport között nem volt szignifikáns különbség (p = 0,56) az ERCP által igazolt epeúti kövesség tekintetében. Az ERCP csupán 1 esetben detektált epeúti kövességet a negatív endoszkópos ultrahangvizsgálat ellenére. Az endoszkópos ultrahangvizsgálat specificitása 100%, szenzitivitása 98%, míg pozitív és negatív prediktív értéke 100%, valamint 98% volt. Megbeszélés: Az epeúti kövesség meglétének becslése különbözo klinikai prediktorok alapján kihívást jelenthet. Következtetés: Az endoszkópos ultrahangvizsgálat szenzitív és pontos diagnosztikus eszköz a choledocholithiasis kimutatására és értékelésére, olyan esetekben is, amelyeknél az elozetes képalkotók nem találtak kövességet. Orv Hetil. 2022; 163(10): 400-406. INTRODUCTION: The likelihood of common bile duct stones can be prognosticated by various clinical predictors, however, the sensitivity and specificity of these factors are moderate. Endoscopic ultrasonography has been shown to be a semi-invasive precise test for the detection of common bile duct stones. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. METHOD: Patients of this prospective study were categorized and divided into intermediate likelihood and high likelihood groups according to the clinical predictors defined by the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines and referred for linear endosonography. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was performed if needed. RESULTS: A total of 95 patients were assessed. Common bile duct stones were detected by endoscopic ultrasonography overall in 53 (56%) patients: 55% (39/71) in the intermediate likelihood and 58% (14/24) in the high likelihood group of patients. The detected common bile duct stones in all patients were confirmed by ERCP. There was no significant difference (p = 0.56) in the detection of stones by ERCP between the two likelihood groups. ERCP confirmed choledocholithiasis only in one patient whose preceding endosonography did not detect stone. The specificity and sensitivity of endoscopic ultrasonography were 100% and 98%, the positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 100% and 98%, respectively. DISCUSSION: Estimating the likelihood of choledocholithiasis based on various clinical predictors might be challenging. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic ultrasonography is a highly sensitive and accurate diagnostic tool for the detection and evaluation of common bile duct stones also in patients with previous normal imaging findings. Orv Hetil. 2022; 163(10): 400-406.

Asunto(s)

Coledocolitiasis , Endosonografía , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Coledocolitiasis/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Hungría , Estudios Prospectivos

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Esophageal function testing is an integral component of the evaluation of refractory GERD and esophageal motility disorders. This review summarizes the current technologies available for esophageal function testing, including the functional luminal imaging probe (FLIP), high-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM), and multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII) and pH monitoring. METHODS: We performed a MEDLINE, PubMed, and MAUDE database literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies through March 2021 using the following key words: esophageal manometry, HRM, esophageal impedance, FLIP, MII, and esophageal pH testing. Technical data were gathered from traditional and web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. The report was drafted, reviewed, and edited by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Technology Committee and approved by the Governing Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. RESULTS: FLIP is a high-resolution impedance planimetry system used for pressure and dimension measurement in the esophagus, pylorus, and anal sphincter. FLIP provides complementary information to HRM for esophageal motility disorders, especially achalasia. The Chicago classification, based on HRM data, is a widely adopted algorithmic scheme used to diagnose esophageal motility disorders. MII detects intraluminal bolus movement and, combined with pH measurement or manometry, provides information on acid and non-acid gastroesophageal reflux and bolus transit in patients with refractory GERD and for preoperative evaluation for anti-reflux procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal function testing techniques (FLIP, HRM, and MII-pH) have diagnostic and prognostic value in the evaluation of esophageal motility disorders and refractory GERD. Newer technologies and classification systems have enabled an increased understanding of these diseases.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Single-session endoscopic stone extraction (ESE) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has the best outcome in managing concomitant cholelithiasis (gallstone disease [GSD]) and choledocholithiasis (common bile duct stone [CBDS]). Traditional rendezvous technique with an intraoperative cholangiogram is associated with various technical (bowel distention, frozen Calot's triangle, limitation of intraoperative cholangiogram and so on) and logistical difficulties (lack of trained personnel and equipment for ESE in the operating room). We modified our approach of ESE-LC (tandem ESE-LC) to study the safety of the approach and overcome these disadvantages of the traditional rendezvous approach. METHODS: A prospective study of patients with GSD and suspected CBDS from January 2017 to December 2019 was conducted. Tandem ESE-LC involves ESE and LC under the same general anaesthesia in a single day, while ESE is performed in the endoscopic suite using carbon dioxide insufflation, a balloon/basket was used for achieving bile duct clearance and the same was confirmed with an occlusion cholangiogram. Patients were then shifted to the operating room for LC. The primary outcome included bile duct clearance and safety of the procedure. RESULTS: Of 56 patients assessed for eligibility, 42 were included in the study (median age: 53 years, 25 [60%] women). Biliary colic was the most common presenting symptom (n = 24, 57%), followed by acute cholecystitis (n = 11, 26%). The median number of stones and stone size was 1 (1-6) and 4 mm (3-10), respectively. All patients had successful bile duct clearance. Stenting was performed in 5 (12%) patients. Intraoperatively, Calot's dissection was difficult and frozen in 10 and 11 patients respectively. The cystic duct was short and wide in 13 (31%) patients. Subtotal cholecystectomy was performed in 6 (14%) patients. The median duration of postprocedural hospital stay was 1 (0-13) day. Three patients had tandem ESE-LC on a day-care basis. One patient had post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancretography pancreatitis, and another required percutaneous drainage for gall bladder fossa collection. No patient had retained CBDS at a median follow-up of 18 (3-28) months. CONCLUSION: Tandem ESE-LC is safe and effective method in managing concomitant GSD and CBDS.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether type of antiplatelet (AP) therapy, AP combination therapy, and AP continuing or switching strategy affect the risk of post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB). In this study, we sought to elucidate this risk. METHODS: We analyzed 1050 patients who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy: 525 AP users and 525 controls matched for age, sex, comorbidities, concomitant non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs use, and polyp characteristics who did not receive antithrombotics. PPB risk was evaluated by AP number, type, and continuing or switching strategies during the peri-endoscopic period. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, bleeding risk increased significantly as the number of AP agents used increased (monotherapy, adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.7; dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), 4.6; triple antiplatelet therapy (TAPT), 11.1) compared with controls. With monotherapy, significantly increased PPB risk was found for aspirin (aOR 4.3), thienopyridine (aOR 6.3), and cilostazol (aOR 5.9), but not for eicosapentaenoic acid or other APs (beraprost, limaprost, sarpogrelate, dilazep, or dipyridamole). With DAPT, significantly increased PPB risk was found for combination aspirin plus cilostazol, but not aspirin plus other APs. Bleeding rates for continuing monotherapy were 4.3% for aspirin and 0% for thienopyridine, cilostazol, and other APs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of this large polypectomy dataset showed that the use of low-dose aspirin, thienopyridine, or cilostazol and a combination of these is associated with increased PPB risk. Although PPB risk was high with DAPT or TAPT, PPB rate in any antiplatelet monotherapy even with a continuing strategy was low at < 5%.

Asunto(s)

Pólipos del Colon/complicaciones , Pólipos del Colon/cirugía , Endoscopía/métodos , Hemorragia/tratamiento farmacológico , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/farmacología , Estudios Retrospectivos

RESUMEN

Adults with foreign body ingestion are mainly secondary to psychiatric disorders, alcoholic intoxication, and secondary gains. Conservative management without any intervention is successful in 80% of the ingested foreign bodies. Risk factors for complication include sharp objects, objects larger than 6 mm, recurrent ingestion, and previous gastrointestinal tract surgeries. Sharp objects specifically account for 35% perforation rates and impactions, most commonly at the ileocecal valve. There is limited evidence on the role of colonoscopy after the distal migration of foreign bodies into the ileum and colon. In our case report, we present a case of a 53-year-old-male with a history of recurrent foreign body ingestion secondary to a multitude of psychiatric disorders. It describes multiple foreign body ingestions, leading to failure of a screw at the ileocecal valve at day 5 of ingestion, despite conservative management with serial bowel preparations and abdominal radiographs. There is limited evidence on the management of foreign bodies after distal migration to the ligament of Trietz. Existing literature and guidelines suggest surgically managing the sharp foreign bodies after the failure of conservative management for three to five days. In the case report, we have attempted to emphasize the noninvasive, colonoscopic approach as initial management in removing impacted foreign bodies. This abstract has been presented and accepted at the American college of gastroenterology meeting held from October 22, 2021, to October 27, 2021, in Las Vegas as a poster.

RESUMEN

Resumen Introducción: la patología biliar litiásica es una de las entidades más frecuentes en el área de cirugía general y en gastroenterología. El tratamiento varía según el lugar donde se alojen los cálculos. Para esto, se han definido diversas escalas de estratificación del riesgo de presentar coledocolitiasis, pero son los criterios planteados por la Sociedad Americana de Endoscopia Gastrointestinal (American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, ASGE) los más usados a nivel mundial, ya que tienen una precisión diagnóstica definida del 70 %. Los procedimientos o ayudas diagnósticas establecidas por estos criterios, en ocasiones, prolongan el tiempo de hospitalización, aumentan los costos y pueden tener complicaciones. Metodología: se realizó un estudio observacional analítico, de tipo transversal retrospectivo, con datos obtenidos a partir de las historias clínicas de pacientes sometidos a colecistectomía laparoscópica, en la Clínica CES de Medellín, entre julio y diciembre de 2017. Resultados y conclusiones: se analizaron 424 historias clínicas de pacientes sometidos a colecistectomia laparoscópica. De ellos, 254 (56,76 %) se categorizaron como de riesgo bajo, mientras que 94 (22,11 %) fueron de riesgo intermedio y 76 (17,88 %) de riesgo alto. Se encontró una frecuencia de coledocolitiasis del 90,8 % en aquellos categorizados como de riesgo alto y del 26,6 % en los pacientes de riesgo intermedio. En la categoría de riesgo intermedio se hallaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre ambos grupos para los valores de bilirrubina total, bilirrubina directa y aspartato aminotransferasa (AST) (p = 0,001; p = 0,014; p = 0,007, respectivamente). La baja frecuencia de coledocolitiasis en la categoría de riesgo intermedio puede ser explicada por cálculos menores a 5 mm no visibles en la colangiorresonancia. A partir de este estudio, se propone ajustar los rangos de valores de los criterios de la ASGE para la categoría de riesgo intermedio, permitiendo tener una mayor precisión a la hora de clasificar los pacientes con patología litiásica y disminuir costos y estancia hospitalaria.

---

Abstract Introduction: Biliary lithiasis is one of the most frequent diseases in the area of general surgery and gastroenterology. Treatment varies depending on the location of the gallstones. Several stratification scales of the risk of choledocholithiasis have been defined, being the criteria proposed by the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) the most used worldwide, with a diagnostic accuracy of 70%. However, the procedures or diagnostic aids defined by these criteria, sometimes, increase hospital stay, costs, and may lead to the development of complications. Methodology: An observational, analytical, retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted with data obtained from the clinical records of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy at the CES Clinic in Medellín, Colombia, between July and December of 2017. Results and conclusions: 424 medical records were analyzed, of which 254 (56.76%) were classified as low-risk, 94 (22.11%) as intermediate-risk and 76 (17.88%) as high-risk. The frequency of choledocholithiasis was 90.8% in high-risk patients and 26.6% in intermediate-risk patients. For the intermediate-risk category, statistically significant differences were found between the two groups for the total bilirubin, direct bilirubin, and AST values (p: 0.001, p: 0.014, p:0.007, respectively). The low frequency of choledocholithiasis in the intermediate-risk category can be explained by less than 5mm gallstones not identified by the cholangioresonance. Based on this study, we propose to adjust the ranges of the ASGE criteria variables for the intermediate-risk category for better accuracy when classifying patients with biliary lithiasis and, thus, reduce costs and hospital stay.

Asunto(s)

Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad , Colecistectomía Laparoscópica , Coledocolitiasis , Pacientes , Aspartato Aminotransferasas , Bilirrubina , Riesgo , Estudios Transversales , Litiasis

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic intervention is often the first line of therapy for GI nonvariceal bleeding. Although some of the devices and techniques used for this purpose have been well studied, others are relatively new, with few available outcomes data. METHODS: In this document, we review devices and techniques for endoscopic treatment of nonvariceal GI bleeding, the evidence regarding their efficacy and safety, and financial considerations for their use. RESULTS: Devices used for endoscopic hemostasis in the GI tract can be classified into injection devices (needles), thermal devices (multipolar/bipolar probes, hemostatic forceps, heater probe, argon plasma coagulation, radiofrequency ablation, and cryotherapy), mechanical devices (clips, suturing devices, banding devices, stents), and topical devices (hemostatic sprays). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic evaluation and treatment remains a cornerstone in the management of nonvariceal upper- and lower-GI bleeding. A variety of devices is available for hemostasis of bleeding lesions in the GI tract. Other than injection therapy, which should not be used as monotherapy, there are few compelling data that strongly favor any one device over another. For endoscopists, the choice of a hemostatic device should depend on the type and location of the bleeding lesion, the availability of equipment and expertise, and the cost of the device.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Several studies evaluated the current guideline of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and reported only suboptimal accuracy. This study evaluated the diagnostic performance of the ASGE guideline based on computed tomography (CT) and role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis but negative CT finding. METHODS: Patients with suspected choledocholithiasis undergoing ERCP between January 2016 and January 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent CT to detect choledocholithiasis. EUS or MRCP was performed when the CT scan showed negative findings. Patients were classified into the high and intermediate-risk groups, based on predictors from the ASGE criteria. RESULTS: Of 583 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis, 340 (58.3%) had stones on ERCP (65.9% in the high-risk group and 40.6% in the intermediate-risk group). The accuracy of ASGE guideline for CT was 63.98% (79.12% sensitivity, 42.80% specificity) and 36.02% (20.88% sensitivity, 57.20% specificity) in the high-risk and intermediate-risk groups, respectively. In 103 patients in the high-risk group underwent both CT and US, the accuracy of CT was higher than that of US for detecting choledocholithiasis (78.64% vs. 53.40%), with a significant difference in area under the curve (AUC) (0.78 vs. 0.59, P < 0.001). Of 339 with negative CT finding, the accuracy of EUS was higher than that of MRCP (90.91% vs. 82.76%), but with no significant difference in AUC (0.91 vs. 0.83, P = 0.347). CONCLUSIONS: CT-based ASGE guideline showed superior diagnostic performance than US for predicting choledocholithiasis. The diagnostic options, EUS or MRCP, with negative CT finding showed comparable performance. Therefore, the diagnostic modality should be selected based on availability, experience, cost, and contraindications.

Asunto(s)

Pancreatocolangiografía por Resonancia Magnética , Coledocolitiasis/diagnóstico por imagen , Endosonografía , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Adulto , Anciano , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Pronóstico , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Estudios Retrospectivos

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Choledocholithiasis is one of the main complications of cholelithiasis with a prevalence in the Mexican population of 14%. The management through the guide proposed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) in 2010 can support the surgeon for the timely resolution of the pathology. OBJECTIVE: To determine that the guide proposed by ASGE for the management of choledocholithiasis in patients with "high risk" reduces the complications of this pathology. METHODS: A comparative, retrospective case-control study was conducted from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. We included patients who were stratified at high risk of choledocholithiasis according to the ASGE guidelines. They were divided into 2 groups: the case group (diagnosis by ASGE guidelines) was submitted directly to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), the second group (no ASGE) followed the protocol of performing computed tomography, magnetic cholangioresonance, and finally ERCP. RESULTS: Of 61 patients with choledocholithiasis, the following groups were compared: the appearance of cholangitis, the complications after ERCP, time of ERCP, days of hospital stay and mortality. Obtaining significant difference in: "complications post ERCP" group ASGE 3/35 (9%), group no ASGE 8/26 (30.7%) with OR of 0.2 (0.05 - 0.9 IC 95%) and a p = 0.03; "Cholangitis" group ASGE 2/35 (5.7%), group no ASGE 8/26 (30-7%) with ORP 0.13 (0.03-0.71 IC 95%) and p = 0.009. CONCLUSION: In our setting, the use of the ASGE guideline reduces the presence of cholangitis and post-ERCP complications.

---

ANTECEDENTES: La coledocolitiasis es una de las principales complicaciones de la colelitiasis, con una prevalencia en la población mexicana del 14%. El manejo a través de la guía propuesta por la American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) en 2010 puede apoyar al cirujano para la resolución oportuna de la patología. OBJETIVO: Determinar que el uso de la guía de la ASGE para el manejo de coledocolitiasis en pacientes con «alto riesgo¼ reduce las complicaciones de esta patología. MÉTODO: Estudio comparativo, retrospectivo, de casos y controles, del 1 de enero de 2015 al 31 de diciembre de 2017. Se incluyeron pacientes que se estratificaron en alto riesgo de coledocolitiasis de acuerdo con la guía ASGE y se dividieron en dos grupos: el grupo de casos (diagnóstico por guía ASGE) fue sometido directamente a colangiopancreatografía retrógrada endoscópica (CPRE), y el otro grupo (no ASGE) siguió el protocolo de realizar tomografía computarizada, colangiorresonancia magnética y finalmente CPRE. RESULTADOS: De 61 pacientes con coledocolitiasis, se comparó entre los grupos la aparición de colangitis, las complicaciones posteriores a la CPRE, el tiempo de realización de la CPRE, los días de estancia hospitalaria y la mortalidad. Se obtuvo diferencia significativa en complicaciones tras la CPRE (grupo ASGE 3/35 [9%], grupo no ASGE 8/26 [30.7%]; odds ratio [OR]: 0.2; intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC 95%]: 0.05-0.9; p = 0.03) y en colangitis (grupo ASGE 2/35 [5.7%], grupo no ASGE 8/26 [30-7%]; OR: 0.13; IC 95%: 0.03-0.71; p = 0.009). CONCLUSIÓN: En nuestro medio, el empleo de la guía ASGE reduce la presencia de colangitis y las complicaciones tras la CPRE.

Asunto(s)

Colangitis/prevención & control , Coledocolitiasis/diagnóstico por imagen , Endoscopía del Sistema Digestivo/normas , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Sociedades Médicas/normas , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efectos adversos , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/mortalidad , Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/normas , Colangitis/etiología , Coledocolitiasis/complicaciones , Coledocolitiasis/mortalidad , Estudios Transversales , Endoscopía del Sistema Digestivo/efectos adversos , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/efectos adversos , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/mortalidad , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/normas , Femenino , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , México , Persona de Mediana Edad , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Retrospectivos , Riesgo , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Estados Unidos , Adulto Joven

RESUMEN

Introduction Extensive use of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) with the advent of open access centers has resulted in inappropriate endoscopies. Our study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines for UGE and to assess the diagnostic yield of endoscopy in a tertiary care center in South India. Methods The study was conducted as a prospective analytical study. Indications for endoscopy were classified as "ASGE appropriate" and "ASGE inappropriate". The significance of association of ASGE guidelines and other categorical variables with endoscopic findings were assessed. Results ASGE appropriate indications and inappropriate indications accounted for 85.9% and 14.1% of endoscopies, respectively. The most common appropriate indication was persistent dyspepsia despite adequate proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (28.1%) and the only inappropriate indication for endoscopy was isolated dyspepsia without adequate PPI therapy (14.1%). The diagnostic yield of endoscopy for appropriate indications was 69.5% and for inappropriate indications was 55.1%, the difference was statistically significant (P= 0.003; OR-1.857). The sensitivity and specificity of ASGE guidelines was 88.5% and 19.5%, respectively. Conclusion According to our study, ASGE guidelines may be considered as appropriate guidelines for UGE in our population and these guidelines were followed 85.9% of the times in referring patients for the same. However, the high diagnostic yield even in inappropriate endoscopies indicates the necessity of further studies that might identify other relevant indications for endoscopy, thus avoiding misutilization of resources without missing out on relevant cases.

RESUMEN

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.

Asunto(s)

Colangiopancreatografia Retrógrada Endoscópica/efectos adversos , Coledocolitiasis/diagnóstico por imagen , Coledocolitiasis/cirugía , Endosonografía , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Probabilidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Seúl , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto Joven

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Lithotripsy is a procedure for fragmentation or destruction of stones to facilitate their removal or passage from the biliary or pancreatic ducts. Although most stones may be removed endoscopically using conventional techniques such as endoscopic sphincterotomy in combination with balloon or basket extraction, lithotripsy may be required for clearance of large, impacted, or irregularly shaped stones. Several modalities have been described, including intracorporeal techniques such as mechanical lithotripsy (ML), electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL), and laser lithotripsy, as well as extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL). METHODS: In this document, we review devices and methods for biliary and pancreatic lithotripsy and the evidence regarding efficacy, safety, and financial considerations. RESULTS: Although many difficult stones can be safely removed using ML, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) has emerged as an alternative that may lessen the need for ML and also reduce the rate of adverse events. EHL and laser lithotripsy are effective at ductal clearance when conventional techniques are unsuccessful, although they usually require direct visualization of the stone by the use of cholangiopancreatoscopy and are often limited to referral centers. ESWL is effective but often requires coordination with urologists and the placement of stents or drains with subsequent procedures for extracting stone fragments and, thus, may be associated with increased costs. CONCLUSIONS: Several lithotripsy techniques have been described that vary with respect to ease of use, generalizability, and cost. Overall, lithotripsy is a safe and effective treatment for difficult biliary and pancreatic duct stones.