Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation in patients with large biliary stones and periampullary diverticula: Results of a multicentric series

Outcome of long-term biliary stenting for stones in the 2010s: beware the cholecystectomised!

Objective

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the mainstay of management for most patients with common bile duct stones (CBDS). Duct clearance at initial ERCP may not be achieved in a third of patients, many of whom may be elderly with multiple comorbidities rendering them at potentially high risk for further procedures. We aimed to quantify the rate of biliary sequelae and mortality among a large cohort undergoing a single ERCP with sphincterotomy and stent insertion without having undergone complete ductal clearance (permanent stent insertion, PSI), and to examine factors that may predispose to adverse outcomes.

Design/method

Outcomes of all ERCPs undertaken on the intact papilla between February 2010 and January 2020 were distilled to identify a cohort who had undergone PSI for initially irretrievable CBDS. These were subjected to retrospective follow-up until the development of biliary sequelae, death or survival into 2023.

Results

There were 2175 index ERCPs for CBDS, of whom 114 met the PSI criteria. Eleven did not survive their index hospitalisation, leaving 103 for follow-up. Of these, 25 (24%) developed late biliary sequelae, 19 (18%) required at least one further ERCP and 8 (8%) died from biliary sequelae. Adverse outcomes were found to be more common among those who had undergone cholecystectomy prior to ERCP, and those with periampullary diverticula.

Conclusions

Long-term biliary stenting following sphincterotomy remains a valid option for selected patients with initially irretrievable bile duct stones who could be at high risk from repeat procedures.

Factors and techniques associated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography outcomes in patients with periampullary diverticulum: Results from a large tertiary center

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for patients with periampullary diverticulum (PAD) remains a challenge. This study aims to investigate the factors and techniques related to successful and safe ERCP in patients with PAD.

METHODS

We enrolled patients who underwent ERCP in a large tertiary center. The difficult cannulation rate, technical success rate, clinical success rate, and adverse events (AEs) rate were compared between patients with or without PAD. Three independent logistic regression models were established to identify factors and techniques associated with difficult cannulation, clinical success, and AEs.

RESULTS

Five thousand five hundred and ninety patients were included, of which 705 (12.6%) were diagnosed with PAD. Patients with PAD had a significantly higher difficult cannulation rate compared with patients without PAD (10.6% vs 8.0%, P < 0.0001), but the rates of technical success (clinical success (95.2% vs 95.2%, P = 0.951), and AEs (16.5% vs 14.4%, P = 0.156) were similar. Type I PAD (odds ratio [OR] = 2.114, 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.05-5.25) and ERCP indication for pancreatic diseases (OR = 1.196, 95%CI: 1.053-1.261) were independently associated with difficult cannulation. Small endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) with balloon dilatation (OR = 1.581, 95%CI: 1.044-2.393) was independently associated with clinical success. Somatostatin injection showed no preventive effect on post-ERCP pancreatitis (OR = 1.144, 95%CI: 1.044-1.254). Moreover, the auxiliary cannulation techniques were safe for PAD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

PAD did not affect ERCP outcomes. However, the choice of techniques and AE prophylactic measures should be more specific, especially for patients with type I PAD.

Influence of periampullary diverticula on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

The present study aimed to explore the influence of the presence of periampullary diverticula (PAD) on the implementation of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). A total of 388 patients with pancreaticobiliary disease who underwent ERCP for the first time between January 2017 and December 2018 were included and they were divided into a PAD group (n=179) and non-PAD (N-PAD) group (n=209) according to the presence or absence of PAD. A logistic regression model was used to analyze the risk factors for PAD. The prevalence of PAD in males was higher than that in females [odds ratio (OR)=2.250, 95% CI: 1.670-3.801]. The prevalence of PAD in patients with bile duct stone was 57.92% and higher than that in patients without stone (OR=4.475, 95% CI: 2.932-7.679). The morbidity of PAD in elderly patients with bile duct stone was higher than in those without stone (OR=6.728, 95% CI: 3.790-11.943). Among the elderly patients, the constituent ratio of males in the PAD group was higher than that in the N-PAD group (χ²=13.543, P<0.001). The constituent ratio of patients who underwent endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) was lower than that in the N-PAD group (χ²=10.800, P<0.001). In conclusion, the occurrence of PAD was high in elderly males and closely related to the occurrence of bile duct stones.

Dilation assisted stone extraction for complex biliary lithiasis: Technical aspects and practical principles

Common bile duct stones are frequently diagnosed worldwide and are one of the main indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography. Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) has been used for the removal of bile duct stones for the past 40 years, providing a wide opening to allow extraction. Up to 15% of patients present with complicated choledocholithiasis. In this context, additional therapeutic approaches have been proposed such as endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy, intraductal or extracorporeal lithotripsy, or endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD). EPLBD combined with EST was introduced in 2003 to facilitate the passage of large or multiple bile duct stones using a balloon greater than 12 mm in diameter. EPLBD without EST was introduced as a simplified technique in 2009. Dilation-assisted stone extraction (DASE) is the combination of two techniques: EPLBD and sub-maximal EST. Several studies have reported this technique as safe and effective in patients with large bile duct stones, without any increased risk of adverse events such as pancreatitis, bleeding, or perforation. Nevertheless, it is difficult to analyze the outcomes of DASE because there are no standard techniques and definitions between studies. The purpose of this paper is to provide technical guidance and specific information about the main issues regarding DASE, based on current literature and daily clinical experience in biliary referral centers.

Difficult biliary stones in the elderly: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiography - A single surgical tertiary centre experience with follow-up

Background

Pancreaticobiliary diseases and choledocholithiasis are common in elderly patients. Endoscopic treatment of biliary stones represents a well-established mini-invasive technique. However, limited data are available regarding the treatment of 'difficult' biliary stones, especially in the elderly population. The aim of our study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients ≥85 years of age with complex biliary stones.

Materials and Methods

From January 2015 to January 2017, data from ERCP procedures performed for complex biliary stones were retrospectively collected. The patients were divided into two groups based on their age: Group A - aged 85 years or older (n = 110) and Group B - aged 65 years or younger (n = 62). Demographic data, success, complications and recurrence rates for both groups were reported.

Results

Chronic comorbidities (86.3% vs. 24.2%; P < 0.001) and use of antithrombotic drugs (48.2% vs. 19.3%; P < 0.001) were more frequent in the elderly. The technical success rate (95.4% vs. 96.7%; P > 0.6) and complication rate (8.2% vs. 13%; P > 0.2) were not statistically different among the two groups. Periampullary diverticula (PAD) were observed more frequently in Group A (38.1% vs. 17.7%; P < 0.006). More patients from Group B underwent cholecystectomy during the same admission (8.2% vs. 42.3%; P < 0.001). The recurrence rate was not different among the groups (7.6% vs. 5%; P > 0.5). PAD was identified as the risk factor for recurrence (P < 0.02).

Conclusion

ERCP in the elderly was found to be a safe procedure, carrying a high degree of success for the treatment of difficult biliary stones.

Clinical significance of different periampullary diverticulum classifications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cannulation

BACKGROUND

Different types of periampullary diverticulum (PAD) may differentially affect the success of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) cannulation, but the clinical significance of the two current PAD classifications for cannulation is limited.

AIM

To verify the clinical value of our newly proposed PAD classification.

METHODS

A new PAD classification (Li-Tanaka classification) was proposed at our center. All PAD patients with native papillae who underwent ERCP from January 2012 to December 2017 were classified according to three classification systems, and the effects of various types of PAD on ERCP cannulation were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 3564 patients with native papillae were enrolled, including 967 (27.13%) PAD patients and 2597 (72.87%) non-PAD patients. In the Li-Tanaka classification, type I PAD patients exhibited the highest difficult cannulation rate (23.1%, P = 0.01), and type II and IV patients had the highest cannulation success rates (99.4% in type II and 99.3% in type IV, P < 0.001). In a multivariable-adjusted logistic model, the overall successful cannulation rate in PAD patients was higher than that in non-PAD patients [odds ratio (OR) = 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-3037, P = 0.037]. In addition, compared to the non-PAD group, the difficulty of cannulation in the type I PAD group according to the Li-Tanaka classification was greater (OR = 2.04, 95%CI: 1.13-3.68, P = 0.004), and the successful cannulation rate was lower (OR = 0.27, 95%CI: 0.11-0.66, P < 0.001), while it was higher in the type II PAD group (OR = 4.44, 95%CI: 1.61-12.29, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Among the three PAD classifications, the Li-Tanaka classification has an obvious clinical advantage for ERCP cannulation, and it is helpful for evaluating potentially difficult and successful cannulation cases among different types of PAD patients.

Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilation Versus Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Treatment of Bile Duct Stones

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current literature focusing on the indications, efficacy, and safety of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) and endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of bile duct stones. • EPBD without EST is associated with a higher risk of post-procedural pancreatitis and lower rate of stone clearance than EST alone. • EPBD without EST should be at least 2 min in duration, and placement of a pancreatic stent and other measures to reduce pancreatitis risk should be considered. • EPBD without EST is most useful to reduce risk of bleeding in patients with coagulopathy. • EPLBD combined with EST can be used as an alternative or adjunct to mechanical lithotripsy in the removal of large or difficult bile duct stones. • EPLBD combined with EST results in fewer complications than EST alone for removal of bile duct stones.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, lights and shadows: Handle with care

The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has dramatically changed in the last years, mainly into that of a therapeutic procedure. The treatment of benign biliary disease, like “difficult” choledocolithiasis, with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation combined with endoscopic sphinterotomy has proven an effective and safe technique. Moreover, safety in ERCP has improved as well, with the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis and patient-to-patient transmission of infections. The advent of self-expandable metal stenting has radically changed the management of biliopancreatic malignant strictures, while the role for therapy of benign strictures is still controversial. In addition, cholangioscopy (though the direct visualization of the biliopancreatic ductal system) has allowed for characterization of indeterminate biliary strictures and facilitated rescue therapy of large biliary stones deemed removable. Encouraging data from tissue ablation techniques, such as photodynamic therapy and radiofrequency ablation, need to be confirmed by large sample size clinical controlled trials. On the other hand, we have no drug-coated stents yet available to implant and evidence for the use of biodegradable stents is still weak. The competency and privileging of ERCP and endoscopic ultrasonography have been analyzed longer but the switch between the two procedures, at the same time, is becoming ordinary; as such, the endoscopist interested in this field should undergo parallel edification through training plans. Finally, the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy’s statement on non-anesthesiologist administration of propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy is not actually endorsed by the European Society of Anaesthesiology, having many medical-legal implications in some European countries.