Natural history of asymptomatic bile duct stones and association of endoscopic treatment with clinical outcomes

Unsedated emergent ERCP is feasible and efficient for acute cholangitis in old patients over 80 years

BACKGROUND

Acute cholangitis in elderly patients poses unique challenges due to comorbidities and frailty, necessitating timely intervention. This study evaluates the feasibility and efficiency of unsedated emergent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients over 80 years with acute cholangitis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of elderly patients (≥ 80 years) presenting with acute cholangitis who underwent unsedated emergent ERCP between January 2020 and December 2023 was conducted. Data of patients' clinical characteristics, procedural success rates, adverse events, hospital stays, 30-day mortality and 6-month recurrence were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of 138 elderly patients included, 128 (92.7%) underwent successful unsedated emergent ERCP procedures. 6 patients had ERCP aborted due to patients' intolerance. 5 (3.1%) patients developed mild post-ERCP pancreatitis. The hospital stays were significantly shorter in patients with successful ERCP (6 days (4,8.5) VS 8.5 days (8,11), P = 0.022). 2 patients died after successful ERCP. 29 (22.7%) patients had recurrence within 6 months and univariate logistic regression analysis indicated patients who had concurrent pancreatitis and cholecystitis had less recurrence (OR 0.125, 95% CI 0.016-0.971).

CONCLUSION

Unsedated emergent ERCP appears to be a viable option for managing acute cholangitis in elderly patients over 80 years, offering efficient biliary decompression with acceptable safety profiles. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings and optimize management strategies for this vulnerable population.

Common bile duct exploration with choledochotomy and primary repair during pregnancy: Case Report

We present a case of a woman in the second trimester of pregnancy who was admitted due to symptomatic common bile duct stones and gallstones. The patient underwent ultrasonography (US) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) imaging, as well as a series of relevant blood tests, to establish a diagnosis. After a comprehensive assessment, simultaneous T-tube-free laparoscopic transcholedochal stone extraction and cholecystectomy were performed safely in the pregnant patient with common bile duct stones and gallstones. Postoperatively, the patient had an uneventful recovery. This case report aims to provide detailed information on the selection of treatment options for symptomatic choledocholithiasis combined with gallstones during pregnancy and to explore the feasibility and safety of performing concurrent T-tube-free laparoscopic choledochotomy for stone extraction in pregnant patients.

Is it Safe to Perform Concomitant Cholecystectomy in Patients With Confirmed Gallbladder Disease Undergoing Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery? An Updated Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Obesity is a global public health issue, and metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) remains most effective intervention for achieving and maintaining long-term weight loss. However, rapid weight loss following MBS increases the risk of gallstone formation. Concomitant cholecystectomy (CC) during MBS has been proposed to mitigate this risk, but recent studies present conflicting evidence regarding its safety and efficacy, leaving no clear consensus.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis by systematically searching MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies comparing CC plus BS versus BS alone. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Statistical analyses were performed with Review Manager v5.4 and RStudio v4.3.3.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42023480360.

RESULTS

We included 26 studies encompassing 656,830 patients with confirmed gallstones, among whom 34,409 (5.2%) underwent CC.The mean age was 41.5 years, and 79.2% were female. Patients undergoing CC + MBS had increased postoperative bleeding (OR 1.31; 95% CI 1.06-1.62; p = 0.01), wound complications (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.34-1.95; p < 0.01), respiratory complications (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.13-1.95; p < 0.01), and anastomotic complications (OR 1.86; 95% CI 1.28-2.70; p < 0.01). No significant differences in operation time, rates of postoperative mortality, length of hospital stay, and vein thrombosis were found between groups.

CONCLUSION

CC during MBS increases operative time and postoperative complications, though only anastomotic complications are clinically significant. Therefore, CC should be reserved for high-risk or symptomatic patients and avoided in bariatric procedures involving an anastomosis due to the elevated risk of complications.

Feasibility of cholecystectomy in patients with silent common bile duct stones cohort prospective single arm multicentre study

BACKGROUND

The management of patients with concomitant gallbladder stones with silent CBDS still involves a wide range of debates, and there is little evidence regarding the recommendation of CBD clearance either before cholecystectomy or in the same session. In this study, we aimed to discuss the feasibility of performing LC with a wait-and-see strategy for patients with silent CBS.

METHOD

Patients with silent CBDS identified during preoperative examinations for gallbladder stones were studied for the feasibility of performing LC with a wait-and-see strategy for silent CBS.

RESULTS

Sixty patients who presented with gallbladder stones with silent CBDS underwent LC between February 2023 and July 2023. Seventeen patients (28.3%) underwent laparoscopic acute cholecystectomy, and 43 (71.7%) patients underwent laparoscopic elective cholecystectomy; all of these procedures were completed laparoscopically. Two patients (3.3%) developed symptomatic CBDS, both of whom were treated medically without intervention. Sixteen patients (26.7%) experienced spontaneous CBDS during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Patients who present with symptomatic gall bladder stones either acutely or electively with asymptomatic CBDS can undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy without suffering from CBDS with acceptable short-term outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at Suez med - IRB office under trial registration no. 6 and registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06349876) in 31/3/2024.

Risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography complications in very elderly patients aged 90 years or older-No additional risk

AIM

In recent years, the majority of patients eligible for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) have been aged ≥75 years. We investigated ERCP safety in very elderly patients (aged ≥90 years).

METHODS

We included patients aged ≥75 years who underwent ERCP between January 2015 and December 2020. We compared background factors, comorbidities, ERCP indications, complications, and outcomes and identified risk factors for complications using binary logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting with propensity scores.

RESULTS

The study included 1344 patients aged ≥75 years (137 and 1207 very elderly and elderly patients, respectively). The very elderly group had more women, less frequent diabetes, fewer antithrombotic medications, more frequent parapapillary diverticulum, less frequent post-cholecystectomy, and worse performance status. No significant differences were observed in the ERCP indications. Experienced endoscopists were likely to perform the procedure, and the procedure time was shorter for the very elderly. Complications occurred in 21 (15%) very elderly patients and 120 (10%) elderly patients, with no significant differences. The very elderly did not have an increased risk of complications but were less likely to be discharged home and had a significantly worse performance status at discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

ERCP could be safely performed in the very elderly, and age did not increase the risk of complications. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2025; 25: 54-60.

Asymptomatic cholecystitis and its controversial issues in biliary surgery

Gallbladder stones are present in 10-20 % of the population of Western countries, and the incidence rate has almost tripled over the past 30 years. Asymptomatic cholecystitis is more common than it is mentioned in the literature. Approximately 80 % of the GI have no clinical manifestations. In most cases, the disease will remain asymptomatic throughout life. The problem of asymptomatic cholecystitis is often hushed up and ignored. Surgeons try to avoid examining this pathology. Works on asymptomatic cholecystitis are not only few, but also scattered. At the same time, there is no uniformity in the literature. Since the tactics of treating such patients still does not have an unambiguous approach. Many surgeons doubt the decision on surgical treatment, a smaller part chooses cholecystectomy at the same time, without substantiating the indications for it. That is why most cases of postcholecystectomy syndrome occur in patients operated on for asymptomatic cholecystitis. The unwillingness to discover the secret of stone formation and asymptomatic cholecystitis in humans when concretions in the gallbladder are detected without reference to surgery, to indicate the trajectory of the examination, leads to a number of tactical errors, preserving the risk of PES, and erasing practical recommendations for the management of such patients. The solution to this issue lies in a thorough study of each stage of the tactical search in patients with asymptomatic cholecystitis, which will determine a new strategy in biliary surgery.

Synergistic effect of independent risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a multicenter retrospective study in Japan

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study aimed to examine the synergistic effect of independent risk factors on post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP).

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study included 1,273 patients with native papillae who underwent ERCP for bile duct stones in Japan. Independent PEP risk factors were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. Significant risk factors for PEP in the multivariate analysis were included in the final analysis to examine the synergistic effect of independent risk factors for PEP.

RESULTS

PEP occurred in 45 of 1,273 patients (3.5%). Three factors including difficult cannulation ≥10 minutes, pancreatic injection, and normal serum bilirubin level were included in the final analysis. The incidences of PEP in patients with zero, one, two, and three factors were 0.5% (2/388), 1.9% (9/465), 6.0% (17/285), and 12.6% (17/135), respectively. With increasing risk factors for PEP, the incidence of PEP significantly increased (1 factor vs. 2 factors, p=0.006; 2 factors vs. 3 factors, p=0.033).

CONCLUSIONS

As the number of risk factors for PEP increases, the risk of PEP may not be additive; however, it may multiply. Thus, aggressive prophylaxis for PEP is strongly recommended in patients with multiple risk factors.

Comparative Risks of Post-ERCP Adverse Events in Patients with Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Choledocholithiasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the standard of care for the management of choledocholithiasis but carries risk of complications which may result in significant morbidity and mortality. While currently available guidelines endorse the use of ERCP for the management of symptomatic common bile duct stones, the need for ERCP in incidentally found asymptomatic choledocholithiasis is more controversial, and practice varies on a geographic and institutional level. This systematic review and meta-analysis is conducted to compare post-ERCP adverse events between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/Embase/Web of Science databases to include all studies comparing post-ERCP outcomes between asymptomatic and symptomatic choledocholithiasis patients. The primary outcome was post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), while secondary outcomes included post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, and perforation. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model.

RESULTS

Our analysis included six observational studies, totaling 2,178 choledocholithiasis patients (392 asymptomatic and 1786 symptomatic); 53% were female. Asymptomatic patients exhibited a higher risk of PEP compared with symptomatic patients (11.7% versus 4.8%; RR 2.59, 95% CI 1.56-4.31, p ≤ 0.001). No significant difference was observed in post-ERCP cholangitis, bleeding, or perforation rates between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Asymptomatic patients with choledocholithiasis appear to have a higher risk of PEP than symptomatic patients, while the risk of other post-ERCP adverse events is similar between the two groups. Interventional endoscopists should thoroughly discuss potential adverse events (particularly PEP) with asymptomatic patients before performing ERCP and utilize PEP-prevention measures more liberally in this subgroup of patients.

Prospective study on planned biliary stent placement to treat small common bile duct stones

Aims

Small common bile duct stones are known to occasionally clear spontaneously. This study aimed to prospectively assess the role of biliary stent placement in promoting the spontaneous clearance of small common bile duct stones.

Methods and Results

We analyzed patients presenting with common bile duct stones of ≤5 mm diameter between June 2020 and May 2022. The exclusion criteria included asymptomatic patients, biliary pancreatitis, altered gastrointestinal anatomy, bile duct strictures (malignant or benign), and a history of EST. The biliary stents were inserted without stone removal. Stone clearance was assessed using endoscopic ultrasonography or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography after 3 months. Our primary endpoint was the clearance rate of common bile duct stones over 6 months, targeting a lower limit for the 95% confidence interval (CI) exceeding 25%. Of the 32 enrolled patients, 18 (56.3%; 95% CI: 37.7-73.6%) exhibited stone clearance. Early complications occurred in 11 patients (34.4%), totaling 12 incidents: acute cholecystitis in four, acute pancreatitis in three, biliary pain in three, and cholangitis in two patients. No severe complications occurred. Six (18.8%) patients experienced asymptomatic stent migration. Following stone clearance, four (12.5%) patients experienced stone recurrence, with an average duration of 256 ± 164 days.

Conclusion

Biliary stenting appeared to effectively promote the clearance of small common bile duct stones in approximately half of the patients. However, the potential complications and risks of stone recurrence warrant close monitoring.This trial was registered in the Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT1042200020).

Non-interventional Management of Asymptomatic Diminutive Choledocholithiasis Versus Endoscopic Extraction in Consecutive Patients

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend treating choledocholithiasis, regardless of symptoms or stone size, with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, asymptomatic choledocholithiasis, discovered incidentally on imaging, may carry a higher risk of ERCP-related adverse events, and some asymptomatic and diminutive stones may not cause biliary adverse events during extended follow-up. Therefore, we aimed to clarify the best treatment strategies for asymptomatic choledocholithiasis based on stone size.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with incidental imaging-found asymptomatic diminutive (≤ 4 mm) or non-diminutive (> 4 mm) choledocholithiasis and divided them into two groups: those who did not undergo ERCP and were treated when complications arose (on-demand group) and those who underwent ERCP before being symptomatic (intervention group). Adverse events were defined as any biliary or pancreatic complication related to ERCP or arising during observation or after intervention. The primary outcome was the adjusted overall adverse event-free survival using the propensity score-based matching weights method comparing the two groups of stone size.

RESULTS

Among 148 patients identified (median follow-up period, 969 days), 68 had diminutive stones and 80 had non-diminutive stones. Of the 68 patients with diminutive stones, 51 were in the on-demand group and 17 in the intervention group. The overall adjusted adverse event-free survival was significantly higher in the on-demand group for diminutive stones (97.4% and 70.1%, respectively, at 3 years; p = 0.01).

DISCUSSION

Patients with incidental imaging-detected asymptomatic diminutive choledocholithiasis may benefit from clinical observation, pursuing ERCP when symptoms develop.

Prophylactic cholecystectomy offers best outcomes following ERCP clearance of common bile duct stones: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic calculus biliary disease is common with associated morbidity and occasional mortality, further confounded when there is concomitant common bile duct (CBD) stones. Choledocholithiasis and clearance of the duct reduces recurrent cholangitis, but the question is whether after clearance of the CBD if there is a need to perform a cholecystectomy. This meta-analysis evaluated outcomes in patients undergoing ERCP with or without sphincterotomy to determine if cholecystectomy post-ERCP clearance offers optimal outcomes over a wait-and-see approach.

METHODS

A Prospero registered meta-analysis of the literature using PRISMA guidelines incorporating articles related to ERCP, choledocholithiasis, cholangitis and cholecystectomy was undertaken for papers published between 1st January 1991 and 31st May 2021. Existing research that demonstrates outcomes of ERCP with no cholecystectomy versus ERCP and cholecystectomy was reviewed to determine the related key events, complications and mortality of leaving the gallbladder in situ and removing it. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated using Review Manager Version 5.4 and meta-analyses performed using OR using fixed-effect (or random-effect) models, depending on the heterogeneity of studies.

RESULTS

13 studies (n = 2598), published between 2002 and 2019, were included in this meta-analysis, 6 retrospective, 2 propensity score-matched retrospective studies, 3 prospective studies and 2 randomised control trials from a total of 11 countries. There were 1433 in the no cholecystectomy cohort (55.2%) and 1165 in the prophylactic cholecystectomy (44.8%) cohort. Cholecystectomy resulted in a decreased risk of cholecystitis (OR = 0.15; CI 0.07-0.36; p < 0.0001), cholangitis (OR = 0.51; CI 0.26-1.00; p = 0.05) and mortality (OR = 0.38; CI 0.16-0.9; p = 0.03). In addition, prophylactic cholecystectomy resulted in a significant reduction in biliary events, biliary pain and pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing CBD clearance, consideration should be given to performing prophylactic cholecystectomy to optimise outcomes.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis 2021

The Japanese Society of Gastroenterology first published evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for cholelithiasis in 2010, followed by a revision in 2016. Currently, the revised third edition was published to reflect recent evidence on the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of cholelithiasis conforming to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Following this revision, the present English version of the guidelines was updated and published herein. The clinical questions (CQ) in the previous version were reviewed and rearranged into three newly divided categories: background questions (BQ) dealing with basic background knowledge, CQ, and future research questions (FRQ), which refer to issues that require further accumulation of evidence. Finally, 52 questions (29 BQs, 19 CQs, and 4 FRQs) were adopted to cover the epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment, complications, and prognosis. Based on a literature search using MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi databases for the period between 1983 and August 2019, along with a manual search of new information reported over the past 5 years, the level of evidence was evaluated for each CQ. The strengths of recommendations were determined using the Delphi method by the committee members considering the body of evidence, including benefits and harms, patient preference, and cost-benefit balance. A comprehensive flowchart was prepared for the diagnosis and treatment of gallbladder stones, common bile duct stones, and intrahepatic stones, respectively. The current revised guidelines are expected to be of great assistance to gastroenterologists and general physicians in making decisions on contemporary clinical management for cholelithiasis patients.

Epidemiology and outcomes of choledocholithiasis and cholangitis in the United States: trends and urban-rural variations

BACKGROUND

Gallstone disease poses a significant health burden in the United States. Choledocholithiasis and cholangitis are common complications of gallstone disease for which data on current epidemiological trends are lacking. We aimed to evaluate temporal changes in hospitalization, management, and outcomes for patients with choledocholithiasis and cholangitis.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was used to identify discharges for choledocholithiasis and cholangitis between 2005 and 2014. Temporal trends were evaluated via annual percent changes (APCs). Joinpoint regression was used to assess inflection points. Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate associations of interest.

RESULTS

From 189,362 unweighted discharges for choledocholithiasis and/or cholangitis, there was an increase in discharges for choledocholithiasis (APC 2.3%, 95% confidence intervals, CI, 1.9-2.7%) and cholangitis (APC 1.5%, 95% CI 0.7-2.2%). Procedural interventions were more likely at urban hospitals for choledocholithiasis (adjusted odds ratio, aOR, 2.94, 95% CI 2.72 to 3.17) and cholangitis (aOR 2.97, 95% CI 2.50 to 3.54). In-hospital mortality significantly decreased annually for choledocholithiasis (aOR 0.90, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.93) and cholangitis (aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.97). In-hospital mortality between rural and urban centers was comparable for choledocholithiasis (aOR 1.16, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.52) and cholangitis (aOR 1.12, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.72).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalizations for choledocholithiasis and cholangitis have increased between 2005 and 2014, reflecting a growing burden of gallstone disease. Hospital mortality between urban and rural centers is similar, however urban centers have a higher rate of procedural interventions suggesting limitations to accessing procedural interventions at rural centers.

Observation versus intervention for incidental common bile duct stones at intraoperative cholangiogram: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The natural history of incidental common bile duct stones (CBDS) is poorly understood. Current evidence is conflicting, with several studies suggesting the majority may pass spontaneously. Despite this, guidelines recommend routine removal even if asymptomatic. This study aimed to systematically review the outcomes of expectant management for CBDS detected on operative cholangiography during cholecystectomy.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases were systematically searched. Participants were adult patients with CBDS identified by intraoperative cholangiography. Intervention was regarded as any perioperative effort to remove common bile duct stones, including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), laparoscopic and open bile duct exploration. This was compared to observation. Outcomes of interest included rates of spontaneous stone passage, success of duct clearance and complications. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included. All studies were non-randomized, heterogeneous and at serious risk of bias. In patients observed after a positive IOC, 20.9% went on to have symptomatic retained stones. In patients directed to ERCP for positive IOC, persistent CBDS were found in 50.6%. Spontaneous passage was not associated with stone size. Meta-analysis is dominated by the results from one large database, which recommends intervention for incidental stones, despite low rates of persistent stones seen at postoperative ERCP.

CONCLUSIONS

Further evidence is required before a definitive recommendation on observation can be made. There is some evidence that asymptomatic stones may be safely observed. In clinical scenarios where the risks of biliary intervention are considered high, a conservative strategy could be more widely considered.

Learning Curve of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct Exploration: A Systematic Review

Background: Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) with cholecystectomy has superior outcomes over two-stage endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram with interval cholecystectomy. With decreasing trend of LCBDE, this study aims to summarize the literature on learning curve (LC) in LCBDE. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for articles from inception to June 3, 2022 (PROSPERO Ref No: CRD42022328451). Basic clinical demographics were collected. Poisson means (95% confidence interval [95% CI]) was used to determine the number of cases required to surmount the LC (NLC). Results: Eight articles (n = 2071 patients) reported LC outcomes in LCBDE with mean study period of 5.9 ± 2.8 years. Majority of studies (62.5%) used arbitrary methods of LC analysis. Most common outcomes reported were complications (any or major) (75%), open conversion (75%), length of stay (62.5%), and operating time (50%). Mean CBD diameter was 11.3 ± 4.8 mm (n = 1122 patients). Incidence of acute cholecystitis, acute cholangitis, and acute pancreatitis were 13.9% (n = 232/1668), 7.8% (n = 128/1629), and 13.7% (n = 229/1668), respectively. Pooled analysis of all the included studies showed NLC of 78.8 cases (95% CI: 71.9-86.3). Studies that used cumulative sum control chart analysis, nonarbitrary methods, and arbitrary-based LC had NLC of 152.0 (95% CI: 135.4-170.1), 108.0 (95% CI: 96.6-120.4), and 49.7 (95% CI: 42.0-58.3) cases, respectively. NLC was 37.0 cases (95% CI: 29.1-46.5) for single surgeon LC, and 99.8 cases (95% CI: 90.2-110.0) for institutional LC. Conclusion: Studies reporting NLC in LCBDE are heterogeneous. Further studies should use nonarbitrary methods of analysis for patient-reported outcome measures and procedure-specific morbidity.

Current management of concomitant cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones

The management policy of concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis is based on a one- or two-stage procedure. It basically includes either laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration (LCBDE) in the same operation or LC with preoperative, postoperative and even intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-endoscopic sphincterotomy (ERCP-ES) for stone clearance. The most frequently used worldwide option is preoperative ERCP-ES and stone removal followed by LC, preferably on the next day. In cases where preoperative ERCP-ES is not feasible, the proposed alternative of intraoperative rendezvous ERCP-ES simultaneously with LC has been advocated. The intraoperative extraction of CBD stones is superior to postoperative rendezvous ERCP-ES. However, there is no consensus on the superiority of laparoendoscopic rendezvous. This is equivalent to a traditional two-stage procedure. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation reduces recurrence. LCBDE and intraoperative ERCP have similar good outcomes. The risk of recurrence after ERCP-ES is greater than that after LCBDE. Laparoscopic ultrasonography may delineate the anatomy and detect CBD stones. The majority of surgeons prefer the transcductal instead of the transcystic approach for CBDE with or without T-tube drainage, but the transcystic approach must be used where possible. LCBDE is a safe and effective choice when performed by an experienced surgeon. However, the requirement of specific equipment and advanced training are drawbacks. The percutaneous approach is an alternative when ERCP fails. Surgical or endoscopic reintervention for retained stones may be needed. For asymptomatic CBD stones, ERCP clearance is the first-choice method. Both one-stage and two-stage management are acceptable and can ensure improved quality of life.

Current approaches and questions yet to be resolved for the prophylaxis of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Prophylaxis is important for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP), which is the most common and serious complication of ERCP. Although the current guidelines include independent patient- and procedure-related risk factors for PEP and available PEP prophylactic measures, the synergistic effect of these risk factors on PEP should also be considered, given that patients often harbor multiple risk factors. Furthermore, a combination of prophylactic measures is often selected in clinical practice. However, established methods estimating the synergistic effect of independent risk factors on PEP incidence are lacking, and evidence on the impact of combining prophylactic measures on PEP should be discussed. Selection of appropriate candidate patients for ERCP is also important to reduce the incidence of PEP associated with unnecessary ERCP. ERCP indications in patients with asymptomatic common bile duct stones (CBDSs) and in those with suspected CBDSs with no imaging-based evidence of stones are controversial. Further studies are warranted to predict the synergistic effect of independent risk factors on PEP, determine the best prophylactic PEP measures, and identify appropriate candidates for ERCP in patients with asymptomatic CBDSs and those with suspected CBDSs.

Common bile duct stones management: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Timely management is critical for treating symptomatic common bile duct (CBD) stones; however, a single optimal management strategy has yet to be defined in the acute care setting. Consequently, this systematic review and network meta-analysis, comparing one-stage (CBD exploration or intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP] with simultaneous cholecystectomy) and two-stage (precholecystectomy or postcholecystectomy ERCP) procedures, was undertaken with the main outcomes of interest being postprocedural complications and hospital length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

PubMed, SCOPUS, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were methodically queried for articles from 2010 to 2021. The search terms were a combination of medical subject headings terms and the subsequent terms: gallstone; common bile duct (stone); choledocholithiasis; cholecystitis; endoscopic retrograde cholangiography/ERCP; common bile duct exploration; intraoperative, preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography; stone extraction; and one-stage and two-stage procedure. Studies that compared two procedures or more were included, whereas studies not recording complications (bile leak, hemorrhage, pancreatitis, perforation, intra-abdominal infections, and other infections) or LOS were excluded. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the four different approaches for managing CBD stones.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies (8,644 participants) addressing the LOS and 41 studies (19,756 participants) addressing postprocedural complications were included in the analysis. The one-stage approaches were associated with a decrease in LOS compared with the two-stage approaches. Common bile duct exploration demonstrated a lower overall risk of complications compared with preoperative ERCP, but there were no differences in the overall risk of complications in the remaining comparisons. However, differences in specific postprocedural complications were detected between the four different approaches managing CBD stones.

CONCLUSION

This network meta-analysis suggests that both laparoscopic CBD exploration and intraoperative ERCP have equally good outcomes and provide a preferable single-anesthesia patient pathway with a shorter overall length of hospital stay compared with the two-stage approaches.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Review/Meta Analysis; Level III.

Selective intraoperative cholangiography should be considered over routine intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Decades of debate surround the use of intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) during cholecystectomy. To the present day, the role of IOC is controversial as regards decreasing the rate of bile duct injury (BDI). We aimed to review and analyse the available literature on the benefits of IOC during cholecystectomy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed until 19 October 2020 in five databases using the following search keys: cholangiogra* and cholecystectomy. The primary outcomes were BDI and retained stone rate. To investigate the differences between the groups (routine IOC vs selective IOC and IOC vs no IOC), we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes and relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Of the 19,863 articles, 38 were selected and 32 were included in the quantitative synthesis. Routine IOC showed no superiority compared to selective IOC in decreasing BDI (RR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.66; 1.24). Comparing IOC and no IOC, no statistically significant differences were found in the case of BDI, retained stone rate, readmission rate, and length of hospital stay. We found an increased risk of conversion rate to open surgery in the no IOC group (RR = 0.64, CI 0.51; 0.78). The operation time was significantly longer in the IOC group compared to the no IOC group (WMD = 11.25 min, 95% CI 6.57; 15.93).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that IOC may not be indicated in every case, however, the evidence is very uncertain. Further good quality research is required to address this question.

Single-stage intraoperative ERCP combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus preoperative ERCP Followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVES

The optimal treatment strategy for cholecystocholedocholithiasis is still controversial. We conducted an up-to-date meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of the intra- endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) + LC procedure with the traditional pre-ERCP +  laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) procedure in the management of cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases up to September 2020. Published randomized controlled trials comparing intra-ERCP + LC and pre-ERCP + LC were considered. This meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager Version 5.3, and outcomes were documented by pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Eight studies with a total of 977 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding CBD stone clearance (RR = 1.03, P = .27), postoperative papilla bleeding (RR = 0.41, P = .13), postoperative cholangitis (RR = 0.87, P = .79), and operation conversion rate (RR = 0.71, P = .26). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the intra-ERCP + LC group (MD = -2.75, P < .05), and intra-ERCP + LC was associated with lower overall morbidity (RR = 0.54, P < .05), postoperative pancreatitis (RR = 0.29, P < .05) and cannulation failure rate (RR = 0.22, P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-ERCP + LC was a safer approach for patients with cholecystocholedocholithiasis. It could facilitate intubation, shorten hospital stay, and lower postoperative complications, especially postoperative pancreatitis, and reduce stone residue and reduce the possibility of reoperation for stone removal.

Increased post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis for choledocholithiasis without acute cholangitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Choledocholithiasis is the most common indication for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Identifying risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is important for reducing the risk of developing PEP after common bile duct (CBD) stone removal. However, studies examining the risk factors for PEP for CBD stones are scarce. The aim of this study was to examine whether the presence or absence of acute cholangitis is a clinical risk factor for PEP in patients with CBD stones.

METHODS

In this multicenter retrospective study, 1539 patients with naïve papillae were divided into patients without and with acute cholangitis. We compared the incidence of PEP between the two groups using one-to-one propensity score matching to adjust for the potential confounding factors of PEP.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, the rates of PEP in patients without and with acute cholangitis were 9.6% (52/542) and 1.8% (18/997), respectively (P < 0.001, odds ratio = 5.8). In the propensity-matched cohort, the rates of PEP in patients without and with acute cholangitis were 8.3% (27/326) and 2.5% (8/326), respectively (P = 0.002, odds ratio = 3.6). The rate of PEP was significantly higher in patients without acute cholangitis than in those with acute cholangitis after adjusting for the confounding factors of PEP.

CONCLUSIONS

The absence of acute cholangitis may be an important clinical risk factor for PEP due to CBD stone removal. In patients without acute cholangitis, endoscopists should explain the specific risk of PEP carefully and actively implement prophylaxis against PEP.

Disease-Based Risk Stratification of Postendoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis for Common Bile Duct Stones

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification of postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP) for common bile duct (CBD) stones is needed for clinicians to adequately explain to patients regarding the risk of PEP in advance of ERCP and to proactively take preventive measures in high-risk patients.

AIMS

To stratify the risk of PEP for CBD stones based on CBD-related diseases.

METHODS

A total of 1551 patients with naïve papilla who underwent ERCP for CBD stones were divided into three groups: Group A: asymptomatic CBD stones, Group B: obstructive jaundice and elevated liver test values without cholangitis, and Group C: mild, moderate, and severe cholangitis. We stratified the risk of PEP by comparing its incidence among the three groups using the Holm's method. Furthermore, we performed one-to-one propensity score matching between Group A and the other groups to examine the risk of PEP in Group A.

RESULTS

The incidence rates in Groups A, B, and C were 13.7%, 7.3%, and 1.8%, respectively. The Holm-adjusted p values between Groups A and B, Groups A and C, and Groups B and C were 0.023, < 0.001, and < 0.001, respectively. Propensity score matching revealed that the incidence of PEP was significantly more in Group A than in the other groups (13.3% vs. 1.5%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of PEP for CBD stones was stratified into low risk (Group C), intermediate risk (Group B), and high risk (Group A). This simple disease-based risk stratification may be useful to predict the risk of PEP in advance of ERCP.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related complications for bile duct stones in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients

Background and Aim

Current guidelines recommend the removal of common bile duct (CBD) stones by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. We conducted this study because of the limited research comparing the risks of ERCP-related complications between these two groups.

Methods

This retrospective study involved 1491 patients with native major duodenal papilla diagnosed with choledocholithiasis at three institutions in Japan. The rates of ERCP-related complications, including post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP), cholangitis, bleeding, and perforation, were compared using one-to-one propensity score matching between the asymptomatic and symptomatic patients.

Results

Complications were observed in 112 (7.5%) of the 1491 patients (asymptomatic group: 31/172 [18.0%] vs symptomatic group: 81/1319 [6.1%], P < 0.001). The rate of severe complications was higher in the asymptomatic group than that in the symptomatic group (asymptomatic group: 5/31 [16.1%] vs symptomatic group: 3/81 [3.7%], P = 0.036). In the propensity-matched asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, the incidences of PEP, cholangitis, bleeding, and perforation were 18/143 (12.6%) vs 4/143 (2.8%) (P = 0.003); 4/107 (3.7%) vs 6/107 (5.6%) (P = 0.75); 1/140 (0.7%) vs 3/140 (2.1%) (P = 0.62); and 2/140 (1.4%) vs 2/140 (1.4%) (P = 1.0).

Conclusions

ERCP for asymptomatic patients with CBD stones is associated with a higher risk of overall and severe complications than that for symptomatic patients with CBD stones; the overall rate is influenced by the high incidence of PEP in the asymptomatic group. Endoscopists should explain the risk of ERCP-related complications for asymptomatic patients before performing the procedure.

The Safety and Necessity of Concomitant Cholecystectomy During Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Obesity: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Concomitant cholecystectomy (CCE) during bariatric surgery(BS)in patients with obesity remains a matter of debate. This study aimed to estimate the safety and necessity of CCE during BS. This study analyzed the postoperative complications in patients who underwent CCE during BS and subsequent cholecystectomy rate following BS. Patients in CCE and BS-only groups had no difference in mortality. A higher postoperative complication rate was observed in the CCE group (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.3) (p < 0.001) but no severe complication in both groups. Following BS, gallstone patients had a higher subsequent cholecystectomy rate than those with normal gallbladders (OR 2.47%, 95% CI 1.5-4.1) (p < 0.001). Concomitant cholecystectomy increased the rates of postoperative complications during BS. We only recommend CCE for documented gallstones rather than for normal gallbladder.

Factors Predicting Difficult Biliary Cannulation during Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography for Common Bile Duct Stones

Background/Aims

Difficult biliary cannulation is an important risk factor for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). Therefore, this study aimed to identify the factors that predict difficult cannulation for common bile duct stones (CBDS) to reduce the risk for PEP.

Methods

This multicenter retrospective study included 1,406 consecutive patients with native papillae who underwent ERCP for CBDS. Factors predicting difficult cannulation for CBDS were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results

Univariate analysis showed that six factors significantly predicted difficult cannulation: ERCP performed by non-expert endoscopists, low-volume center, absence of acute cholangitis, normal serum bilirubin, intradiverticular papilla, and type of major duodenal papilla. Multivariate analysis identified ERCP performed by non-expert endoscopists (odds ratio [OR], 2.5; p<0.001), low-volume center (OR, 1.6; p<0.001), intradiverticular papilla (OR, 1.3; p=0.007), normal serum bilirubin (OR, 1.3; p=0.038), and absence of acute cholangitis (OR, 1.3; p=0.049) as factors significantly predicting difficult cannulation for CBDS.

Conclusions

Initial cannulation by an experienced endoscopist, early rescue cannulation, or early takeover by an experienced endoscopist should be considered when performing ERCP for CBDS in the presence of factors predicting difficult cannulation.

Intervention versus surveillance in patients with common bile duct stones detected by intraoperative cholangiography: a population-based registry study

BACKGROUND

Each year 13 000 patients undergo cholecystectomy in Sweden, and routine intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) is recommended to minimize bile duct injuries. The risk of requiring endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) following cholecystectomy for common bile duct (CBD) stones where IOC is omitted and in patients with CBD stones left in situ is not well known.

METHODS

Data were retrieved from the population-based Swedish Registry of Gallstone Surgery and ERCP between 1 January 2009 and 10 December 2019. Primary outcome was risk for postoperative ERCP for retained CBD stones.

RESULTS

A total of 134 419 patients that underwent cholecystectomy were included and 2691 (2.0 per cent) subsequently underwent ERCP for retained CBD stones. When adjusting for emergency or planned cholecystectomy, preoperative symptoms suggestive of CBD stones, sex and age, there was an increased risk for ERCP when IOC was not performed (hazard ratio (HR) 1.4, 95 per cent c.i. 1.3 to 1.6). The adjusted risk for ERCP was also increased if CBD stones identified by IOC were managed with surveillance (HR 5.5, 95 per cent c.i. 4.8 to 6.4). Even for asymptomatic small stones (less than 4 mm), the adjusted risk for ERCP was increased in the surveillance group compared with the intervention group (HR 3.5, 95 per cent c.i. 2.4 to 5.1).

CONCLUSION

IOC plus an intervention to remove CBD stones identified during cholecystectomy was associated with reduced risk for retained stones and unplanned ERCP, even for the smallest asymptomatic CBD stones.

Remaining issues of recommended management in current guidelines for asymptomatic common bile duct stones

Current guidelines for treating asymptomatic common bile duct stones (CBDS) recommend stone removal, with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) being the first treatment choice. When deciding on ERCP treatment for asymptomatic CBDS, the risk of ERCP-related complications and outcome of natural history of asymptomatic CBDS should be compared. The incidence rate of ERCP-related complications, particularly of post-ERCP pancreatitis for asymptomatic CBDS, was reportedly higher than that of symptomatic CBDS, increasing the risk of ERCP-related complications for asymptomatic CBDS compared with that previously reported for biliopancreatic diseases. Although studies have reported short- to middle-term outcomes of natural history of asymptomatic CBDS, its long-term natural history is not well known. Till date, there are no prospective studies that determined whether ERCP has a better outcome than no treatment in patients with asymptomatic CBDS or not. No randomized controlled trial has evaluated the risk of early and late ERCP-related complications vs the risk of biliary complications in the wait-and-see approach, suggesting that a change is needed in our perspective on endoscopic treatment for asymptomatic CBDS. Further studies examining long-term complication risks of ERCP and wait-and-see groups for asymptomatic CBDS are warranted to discuss whether routine endoscopic treatment for asymptomatic CBDS is justified or not.

Asymptomatic Common Bile Duct Stones Are Associated with Increased Risk of Post-Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Pancreatitis

Introduction: Common bile duct stones (CBDS) are a common disease that can cause biliary complications, including cholangitis, obstructive jaundice, and biliary pancreatitis. Regardless of the presence or absence of symptoms, endoscopic removal of CBDS is generally recommended, but endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a high-risk procedure with complications, such as post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). As few reports have addressed the risk of PEP by focusing on asymptomatic CBDS, the purpose of this study is to examine the incidence of PEP for asymptomatic CBDS.

Methods: This retrospective study included data from 302 patients with naive papilla who underwent therapeutic ERCP for CBDS between January 2012 and December 2019 at our hospital. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to investigate independent risk factors for PEP.

Results: Of the 302 patients, 32 were asymptomatic, and the remaining 270 were symptomatic. Five asymptomatic patients (15.6%) suffered from mild PEP, whereas 10 (3.7%) symptomatic patients suffered from PEP (9 were mild, and 1 was severe). Univariate analysis identified deep cannulation time more than 10 min, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD), and asymptomatic CBDS as risk factors for PEP, whereas multivariate analysis revealed deep cannulation time more than 10 min (odds ratio (OR), 6.67; p < 0.001), EPBD (HR, 5.70; p < 0.001), and asymptomatic CBDS (HR, 5.49; p < 0.001) as independent risk factors for PEP.

Conclusions: A wait-and-see approach may be an option for the management of asymptomatic CBDS. EPBD may be avoided, especially in case of asymptomatic or if difficult for bile duct cannulation.

Best evidence topic: Should patients with asymptomatic choledocholithiasis be treated differently from those with symptomatic or complicated disease?

Choledocholithiasis is a common finding in clinical practice, with presentation varying from asymptomatic to life-threatening complications. In symptomatic patients, there is no doubt that treatment to clear the bile duct is indicated, but there is still a debate regarding the treatment of patients with silent common bile duct stones (CBDS). The question addressed by this best evidence topic is whether patients with asymptomatic CBDS should be managed in the same way as patients with symptoms or complications. The search strategy yielded 609 articles, from which 8 articles found to be relevant to this topic. We also summarised the most notable societal guidelines recommendations, regarding this topic. We tabulated the article title, author, year, country, study type, outcomes, results, and comments. We concluded that patients with asymptomatic CBD stones should be offered endoscopic treatment If they are fit, after discussion of the potential risks and benefits of both options of conservative and interventional treatment with the patients.

A meta-analysis of the use of intraoperative cholangiography; time to revisit our approach to cholecystectomy?

BACKGROUND

Despite some evidence of improved survival with intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy, debate has raged about its benefit, in part because of its questionable benefit, time, and resources required to complete.

METHODS

An International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews-registered (ID CRD42018102154) meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane library from 2003 to 2018 was undertaken including search strategy "intraoperative AND cholangiogra* AND cholecystectomy." Articles scoring ≥ 16 for comparative and ≥ 10 for noncomparative using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria were included. A dichotomous random effects meta-analysis using the Mantel-Haenszel method performed on Review Manager Version 5.3 was carried out.

RESULTS

Of 2,059 articles reviewed, 62 met criteria for final analysis. The mean rate of intraoperative cholangiography was 38.8% (range 1.6%-96.4%).There was greater detection of bile duct stones during cholecystectomy with routine intraoperative cholangiography compared with selective intraoperative cholangiography (odds ratio = 3.28, confidence interval = 2.80-3.86, P value < .001). While bile duct injury during cholecystectomy was less with intraoperative cholangiography (0.39%) than without intraoperative cholangiography (0.43%), it was not statistically significant (odds ratio = 0.88, confidence interval = 0.65-1.19, P value = .41). Readmission following cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography was 3.0% compared to 3.5% without intraoperative cholangiography (odds ratio = 0.91, confidence interval = 0.78-1.06, P value = .23).

CONCLUSION

The use of intraoperative cholangiography still has its place in cholecystectomy based on the detection of choledocholithiasis and the potential reduction of unfavorable outcomes associated with common bile duct stones. This meta-analysis, the first to review intraoperative cholangiography use, identified a marked variation in cholangiography use. Retrospective studies limit the ability to critically define association between intraoperative cholangiography use and bile duct injury.

Intraoperative cholangiography with filling defects: comparative complication analysis of postoperative transcystic duct (TCD) catheter maintenance

BACKGROUND

This is a retrospective cohort of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) with positive findings for filling defects. We comparatively assessed differences in complication risks for patients that had their cholangiography catheter maintained in its transcystic duct (TCD) position postoperatively. This is a practice proposed to overcome the limited availability of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) as well as to avoid surgical exploration of the common bile duct.

METHODS

Retrospective medical record review of all positive IOC from January 2015 to December 2018 were assessed. Patients' demographic and perioperative data from the hospital stay period in which the cholecystectomy occurred until the last surgical ambulatory visit for perioperative characteristics were compared between groups (with vs. without TCD catheter). Complications were operationalized using the Clavien-Dindo scale.

RESULTS

Univariate analysis of complications showed a 2.4-fold risk increase in complications (95% CI 1.13-5.1) between comparison groups. Number of ERCPs (18 vs. 30), and MRCPs (5 vs. 17) were not significantly different between maintaining or not the TCD catheter postop, respectively. Stratified analysis followed by exact logistic regression supported the findings that maintaining the TCD catheter postoperatively increased complication rates (OR = 5.34, 95% CI 1.22, 29.83, p = 0.022), adjusting for potential confounders.

CONCLUSION

The maintenance of the TCD catheter postoperatively did not prove to be effective in significantly reducing the number of ERCP nor associated complications. Also, outcomes inherited from the practice caused adverse events that surpassed its potential benefits. Moreover, expectant follow-up is reasonable for patients with evidence of common bile duct stones, even in setting with limited resource availability. We do not recommend this practice, even in settings where there are limited resources of more modern management of choledocholithiasis.

Triaging advanced GI endoscopy procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic: consensus recommendations using the Delphi method

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is a lack of consensus on which GI endoscopic procedures should be performed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and which procedures could be safely deferred without having a significant impact on outcomes.

METHODS

We selected a panel of 14 expert endoscopists. We identified 41 common indications for advanced endoscopic procedures from the ASGE Appropriate Use of GI Endoscopy guidelines. Using a modified Delphi method, we first achieved consensus on the patient-important outcome for each procedural indication. Panelists prioritized consensus patient-important outcome when categorizing each indication into one of the following 3 procedural time periods: (1) time-sensitive emergent (schedule within 1 week), (2) time-sensitive urgent (schedule within 1 to 8 weeks), and (3) non-time sensitive (defer for >8 weeks and then reassess the timing). Three anonymous rounds of voting were allowed before attempts at consensus were abandoned.

RESULTS

All 14 invited experts agreed to participate in the study. The prespecified consensus threshold of 51% was achieved for assigning patient-important outcome(s) to each advanced endoscopy indication. The prespecified consensus threshold of 66.7% was achieved for 40 of 41 advanced endoscopy indications in stratifying them into 1 of 3 procedural time periods. For 12 of 41 indications, 100% consensus was achieved; for 20 of 41 indications, 75% to 99% consensus was achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

By using a Modified Delphi method that prioritized patient-important outcomes, we developed consensus recommendations on procedural timing for common indications for advanced endoscopy. These recommendations and the structured decision framework provided by our study can inform decision making as endoscopy services are reopened.