Preoperative versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in mild to moderate gallstone pancreatitis: a prospective randomized trial

Juan Miguel Acosta: His Revolutionary Contribution to Our Understanding of the Pathophysiology of Gallstone Pancreatitis

It is not every day that true scientific pioneers come along. Fortunately, the early 20th century gifted us with immensely talented professionals like Dr Eugene Opie, who set the groundwork for Dr Juan Acosta and his associates to make revolutionary advancements on the pathophysiologic origin and proper management of acute biliary pancreatitis. Amidst a modest hospital in the city of Rosario, Argentina, Dr Acosta pioneered numerous studies to validate his hypothesis that transient gallstone obstruction of the lumen was the true source of acute biliary pancreatitis. His findings, along with his mentorship within his residency program, and his dedication to improving patient outcomes, have cemented his name into patient care as we know it today. The goal of this paper is to outline the relentless dedication of Dr Acosta to the improvement of patient care and pancreatitis management.

Proper timing or ERCP and cholecystectomy on acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To determine if endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) should be performed with surgery or as a different step, on acute cholecystitis, and which strategy has the least complications and morbimortality.

METHODS

Various databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, clinical trials, Google Scholar) were searched for randomized trials comparing the different timings for ERCP and cholecystectomy. No language or time restrictions were applied. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2.0 (Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2), and evidence certainty evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Data synthesis used R-4.1.0 Project for Statistical Computing for Windows, with meta-analysis via fixed-effects model and I2 for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Eleven studies was used, and meta-analysis was performed independently for each outcome. Different outcomes were evaluated, with preoperative ERCP as an intervention and intraoperative ERCP as the control: length of stays (four trials with mean differences - MD = -1.44; 95% confidence interval - 95%CI -3,87-0,98); bile leak (odds ratio - OR = 0.67; 95%CI 0.11-4.09); cholangitis (OR = 1.32; 95%CI 0.29-5.98); bleeding from sphincterotomy (OR = 0.98; 95%CI 0.20-4.86); wound infection (OR = 0.33; 95%CI 0.04-3.14); incisional bleeding (OR = 0.5; 95%CI 0.04-5.70); elevated amylase activity (OR = 5.22; 95%CI 2.17-12.59); acute pancreatitis (OR = 4.61; 95%CI 1.72-12.38); operative time (MD = -6,26; 95%CI -37.24-24.73); failure rate (OR = 1.74; 95%CI 0.99-3.05); conversion (OR = 1.34; 95%CI 0.6-2.96); morbidity (OR = 2.75; 95%CI 1.7-4.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of bias was significant due to lack of blindness. The morbidity, pancreatitis, and elevated amylase activity outcomes were the only ones to find statistical significance and favored the intraoperative approach.

Management of Gallstone Pancreatitis: A Review

Importance

Gallstone pancreatitis (GSP) is the leading cause of acute pancreatitis, accounting for approximately 50% of cases. Without appropriate and timely treatment, patients are at increased risk of disease progression and recurrence. While there is increasing consensus among guidelines for the management of mild GSP, adherence to these guidelines remains poor. In addition, there is minimal evidence to guide clinicians in the treatment of moderately severe and severe pancreatitis.

Observations

The management of GSP continues to evolve and is dependent on severity of acute pancreatitis and concomitant biliary diagnoses. Across the spectrum of severity, there is evidence that goal-directed, moderate fluid resuscitation decreases the risk of fluid overload and mortality compared with aggressive resuscitation. Patients with isolated, mild GSP should undergo same-admission cholecystectomy; early cholecystectomy within 48 hours of admission has been supported by several randomized clinical trials. Cholecystectomy should be delayed for patients with severe disease; for severe and moderately severe disease, the optimal timing remains unclear. Preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is only useful for patients with suspected cholangitis or biliary obstruction, although the concomitance of these conditions in patients with GSP is rare. Modality of evaluation of the common bile duct to rule out concomitant choledocholithiasis varies and should be tailored to level of concern based on objective measures, such as laboratory results and imaging findings. Among these modalities, intraoperative cholangiography is associated with reduced length of stay and decreased use of ERCP. However, the benefit of routine intraoperative cholangiography remains in question.

Conclusions and Relevance

Treatment of GSP is dependent on disease severity, which can be difficult to assess. A comprehensive review of clinically relevant evidence and recommendations on GSP severity grading, fluid resuscitation, timing of cholecystectomy, need for ERCP, and evaluation and management of persistent choledocholithiasis can help guide clinicians in diagnosis and management.

Effect of surgical timing on outcomes after cholecystectomy for mild gallstone pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Retrospective and single-center studies have demonstrated that early cholecystectomy is associated with shorter length of stay in patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis. However, these studies are not powered to detect differences in adverse events. Using a nationally representative cohort, we evaluated the association of timing for cholecystectomy with clinical outcomes and resource use in patients with gallstone pancreatitis.

METHODS

All adult hospitalizations for gallstone pancreatitis were tabulated from the 2016-2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Using International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision codes, patient comorbidities and operative characteristics were determined. Patients with end-organ dysfunction or cholangitis were excluded to isolate those with only mild gallstone pancreatitis. Major adverse events were defined as a composite of 30-day mortality and perioperative (cardiovascular, respiratory, neurologic, infectious, and thromboembolic) complications. Timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy was divided into Early (within 2 days of admission) and Late (>2 days after admission) cohorts. Multivariable logistic and linear regression were then used to evaluate the association of cholecystectomy timing with major adverse events and secondary outcomes of interest, including postoperative hospital duration of stay, costs, non-home discharge, and readmission rate within 30 days of discharge.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 129,451 admissions for acute gallstone pancreatitis, 25.6% comprised the Early cohort. Compared to patients in the Early cohort, Late cohort patients were older (56 [40-69] vs 53 [37-66] years, P < .001), more likely male (36.6 vs 32.8%, P < .001), and more frequently underwent preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (22.2 vs 10.9%, P < .001). In addition, the Late cohort had higher unadjusted rates of major adverse events and index hospitalization costs, compared to Early. After risk adjustment, late cholecystectomy was associated with higher odds of major adverse events (adjusted odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.29-1.51) and overall adjusted hospitalization costs by $2,700 (95% confidence interval 2,400-2,800). In addition, compared to the Early group, those in the Late cohort had increased odds of 30-day readmission (adjusted odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.23) and non-home discharge (adjusted odds ratio 1.42, 95% confidence interval 1.31-1.55).

CONCLUSION

Cholecystectomy >2 days after admission for mild gallstone pancreatitis was independently associated with increased major adverse events, costs, 30-day readmissions, and non-home discharge. Given the significant clinical and financial consequences, reduced timing to surgery should be prioritized in the overall management of this patient population.

Is early laparoscopic cholecystectomy after clearance of common bile duct stones by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography superior?: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

With medical advancement, common bile duct stones were treated by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), considered the standard treatment. However, ERCP might induce complications including pancreatitis and cholecystitis that could affect a subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC), leading to conversion to open cholecystectomy perioperative complications. It is not yet known whether or not the time interval between ERCP and LC plays a role in increasing conversion rate and complications. Bides, in the traditional sense, after ERCP, for avoiding edema performing LC was several weeks later. Even no one study could definite whether early laparoscopic cholecystectomy after ERCP affected the prognosis or not clearly.

OBJECTIVE

Comparing some different surgical timings of LC after ERCP.

METHOD

Searching databases consist of all kinds of searching tools, such as Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, etc. All the included studies should meet the demands of this meta-analysis. In all interest outcomes below, we took full advantage of RevMan5 and WinBUGS to assess; the main measure was odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence. Moreover, considering the inconsistency of the specific time points in different studies, we set a subgroup to analyze the timing of LC after ERCP. For this part, Bayesian network meta-analysis was done with WinBUGS.

RESULT

In the pool of conversion rate, the result suggested that the early LC group was equal compared with late LC (OR = 0.68, I2 = 0%, P = .23). Besides, regarding morbidity, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups (OR = 0.74, I2 = 0%, P = .26). However, early LC, especially for laparoscopic-endoscopic rendezvous that belonged to performing LC within 24 hours could reduce the post-ERCP pancreatitis (OR = 0.16, I2 = 29%, P = .0003). Considering early LC included a wide time and was not precise enough, we set a subgroup by Bayesian network, and the result suggested that performing LC during 24 to 72 hours was the lowest conversion rate (rank 1: 0%).

CONCLUSION

In the present study, LC within 24 to 72 hours conferred advantages in terms of the conversion rate, with no recurrence of acute cholecystitis episodes.

A retrospective analysis of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography investigating gallstones in a contemporary surgical setting

BACKGROUNDS

The New Zealand Public Health System operates in a resource limited environment. Pre-operative investigation of choledocholithiasis (CDL) is variable. Protocol driven practice has improved patient outcomes and cost-effectiveness. The aim is to explore risk stratification for CDL and specific thresholds for accessing magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in this contemporary setting.

METHODS

All adult (16+ years) acute inpatient MRCP requests for gallstone work-up between 1 Jan 2018 and 2031 Dec 2019 at Dunedin Hospital were included. Patients with characteristics not in fitting with an acute symptomatic examination were excluded. Receiver operating characteristic curves were estimated for bilirubin versus MRCP positive by the presence/absence of dilated ducts, indication and American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) risk grouping.

RESULTS

A 106 patients were included. Mean bilirubin at presentation and time of MRCP, 47 versus 28 μmol/L, respectively. MRCP confirmed CDL in 39 (37%) patients. 38 (97%) had biochemical changes with choledocholithiasis. 21 (40%) with CBD dilation had ductal stones versus 18 (34%) with normal ducts. ASGE risk stratification showed 36 (34%), 66 (62%) and 4 (4%) were high, intermediate and low risk, respectively. Of these groups 44%, 35% and 0% had CBD stones on MRCP, respectively. Combination thresholds involving duct size and bilirubin can yield negative predictive values >90%, substantially reducing MRCP load.

CONCLUSIONS

MRCP requests can be triaged to maximize stones detected without overly increasing the rate of missed duct stones whilst protecting the limited MRI and ERCP resources. International thresholds and risk stratification alone may not be applicable in our resource limited environment.

[Temporal sequence of bile duct clearance with simultaneous cholecystolithiasis or choledocholithiasis-Preoperative, intraoperative or postoperative?]

Approximately 10% of patients with symptomatic cholecystolithiasis also have choledocholithiasis. The probability of this can be estimated on the basis of sonographic and laboratory chemistry parameters. If the probability is high, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) or cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) should be performed and if the probability is low, cholecystectomy can be performed without further diagnostics. If the findings are equivocal, further work-up should be performed to detect or exclude choledocholithiasis by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP). If choledocholithiasis is detected, it can be treated by ERC preoperatively, intraoperatively or postoperatively or alternatively by laparoscopic cholangiography. Regarding the temporal sequence, there is no clear advantage of a specific time point; however, considering the high availability of ERCP in German-speaking countries, preoperative clearance of choledocholithiasis seems reasonable. With respect to the time interval between clearance of choledocholithiasis and cholecystectomy, a number of multicenter studies and a meta-analysis have shown that a short time interval or a procedure during the same period of hospitalization is advantageous.

Efficacy of Common Bile Duct Stenting on the Reduction in Gallstone Migration and Symptoms Recurrence in Patients with Biliary Pancreatitis Who Were Candidates for Delayed Cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND

In patients with severe biliary pancreatitis, delayed cholecystectomy associated with a high risk of recurrence is recommended. The current study aimed to evaluate the effect of common bile duct (CBD) stenting on reducing gallstones migration and recurrence of symptoms in patients with pancreatitis and delayed cholecystectomy candidates.

METHODS

To this purpose, the randomized, controlled clinical trial was performed on 40 patients with biliary pancreatitis who were candidates for delayed cholecystectomy. Patients were randomly divided into two groups of A and B that underwent CBD stenting after ERCP and received endoscopic treatment without stenting, respectively. A checklist recorded demographics and complications. Group A was followed up after four weeks to remove the stent and record the complications. Group B underwent MRCP to examine the migration of new gallstones as well as the complications.

RESULTS

Of the 40 patients, 20 subjects (11 males and 9 females) were allocated to each group, matched for demographic variables. In the one-month follow-up, only one subject in group A manifested symptoms of gallstone migration and recurrence, while in group B, recurrence was observed in 6 patients (P = 0.037). There was no significant difference in the success rate of ERCP and the incidence of complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

CBD stenting in patients with biliary pancreatitis and gallstone could reduce the risk of recurrence and remigration of gallstones in delayed cholecystectomy cases.

The Overall Poor Specificity of MRCP in the Preoperative Evaluation of the Jaundiced Patient Will Increase the Incidence of Nontherapeutic ERCP

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains one of the most common surgical operations. Common bile duct stones (CBDS) are estimated to be present in 10%-20% of individuals with symptomatic gallstones. Preoperative magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) remain the most common methods of evaluation, with subsequent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for stone extraction if positive for CBDS. We examined our experience with preoperative MRCP versus IOC for the management of the jaundiced patient with cholelithiasis. This is a retrospective single-institution study that examined all laparoscopic cholecystectomies performed over a 15-month period between 2017 and 2018. Outpatient elective cases were excluded from the analysis. Charts were reviewed for demographics, operative details, and whether an MRCP, IOC, or ERCP was performed. Data were evaluated using a 2-sample t-test. A total of 460 patients underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy over a 15-month period. Of those, 147 underwent either an MRCP or an IOC for clinical suspicion for CBDS. ERCP after MRCP was nontherapeutic in 11/32 (34%) compared with 2/12 (17%) of patients following IOC. The sensitivity and specificity of MRCP were 91% and 80%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 66% and a negative predictive value of 96%. The sensitivity and specificity of IOC were 83% and 97%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 83% and a negative predictive value of 97%. MRCP and IOC have unique advantages and disadvantages. MRCP has greater sensitivity, but poor specificity, resulting in unnecessary ERCPs with associated morbidity and increased costs to the patient.

Optimizing cholecystectomy time in moderate acute biliary pancreatitis: A randomized clinical trial study

Background

In mild to moderate gallstone pancreatitis, cholecystectomy is the most appropriate treatment for prevention of further biliary attacks. However, the timing of cholecystectomy is not precisely determined. The present study was conducted to compare outcomes of very early (within 48 h) versus delayed (more than 1 week) laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP).

Methods

This randomized clinical trial study was conducted in Shahid Beheshti Hospital of Kashan University of Medical Sciences from September 2016 to Mar 2019. Two hundred and eight cases with mild to moderate ABP were randomly assigned to 2 groups, with 104 patients in group 1 (operation within 48 h) and 104 in group 2 (operation after one week). Age, sex, biochemical parameters, clinical manifestation at the time of admission, operation time, recurrent biliary problems, relapse, peri-operative complications, conversion rate, and hospital length of stay in the two groups were recorded and compared. In addition, Ranson's score and Revised Atlanta criteria, the American Society of Anaesthesiologists Physical Status ASA-PS, Charlson Co-Morbidity Index (CCI), complexity of surgery and Clavien-Dindo score were also determined.

Results

There were no differences in demographics, peri-operative complications 4 (4%) vs. 4 (4%), P = 1), conversion rate (10.6% vs. 11.5%; P = 0.825) and procedure time (83 vs. 81 minutes, P = 0.110) between the two groups. There were no deaths in either group; however, the length of hospital stay was shorter in the early group compared to the delayed one, (3.66 ± 1.12 vs. 10.35 ± 1.76, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Cholecystectomy within 48 h decreases significantly the length of hospital stay, without any difference in conversion rate, procedure time, or complication rate.

Severe Epigastric Pain with Nausea and Vomiting

A 41-year-old woman presents to the emergency department complaining of severe and continuous epigastric pain for the past 24 hours. The pain radiates straight through to her back. She has had progressive nausea with vomiting. The vomit is bile-stained and without blood. She has had similar but less severe episodes of abdominal pain in the past, usually after eating heavy meals, but they always resolved within a few hours. She is gravida two and para two, with last menses 2 weeks ago, and does not consume any alcohol. On exam, she is afebrile, heart rate is 115 beats/min, blood pressure of 128/86 mmHg, and respiratory rate is 18/min. Her abdomen is not distended. She has no surgical scars on her abdomen and no obvious masses visible. She has no bruising around her umbilicus or along her flank. Bowel sounds are hypoactive. She has marked tenderness to palpation in her epigastrium, without guarding or rebound. The remainder of her abdomen is soft and non-tender to palpation. No masses or organomegaly are appreciated. Laboratory examination reveals a white blood cell count of 17.2 × 10³cells/μL (normal 4.1–10.9 × 10³ cells/uL), amylase of 1545 u/L (30–110 u/L), lipase of 1134 u/L (7–60 u/L), ALT of 245 u/L (7–56 u/L), AST of 263 u/L (5–35 u/L), serum glucose of 156 mg/dl (65–110 mg/dL), and LDH 180 u/L (0–250 u/L). An abdominal series demonstrates gas throughout the small and large bowel and a focal dilated loop of proximal small bowel without air fluid levels. There is no free air under the diaphragm.

Protocol driven management of suspected common duct stones: A Southwestern Surgical Congress multi-centered trial

BACKGROUND

Several options exist for the diagnosis and management of suspected common duct stones. We hypothesized that a protocol-directed approach would shorten length of stay in this patient population.

METHODS

Patients from four participating institutions with a peak bilirubin <4 mg/dL underwent surgery as the initial procedure, whereas patients with a bilirubin ≥4 mg/dL underwent endoscopy. The primary endpoint was length of stay. Analysis involved chi square and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test with significance at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

214 patients were managed under the protocol during six-month study period. 111 patients (52%) required endoscopy and surgery. Length of stay and the number of MRCPs performed pre-operatively significantly decreased following protocol implementation (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

"Surgery first" approach in patients with bilirubin <4 ml/dL resulted in low morbidity and mortality, reduced MRCP, and length of stay.

Dynamic liver test patterns do not predict bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Numerous models have been developed to predict choledocholithiasis. Recent work has shown that these algorithms perform suboptimally. Identification of clinical predictors with high positive and negative predictive value would minimize adverse events associated with unnecessary diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) while limiting the use of expensive tests including magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for indeterminate cases.

METHODS

Consecutive unique inpatients who received their first ERCP at Los Angeles County Medical Center between January 2010 and November 2016 for suspected bile duct stones were reviewed. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with specific combinations of liver enzyme patterns, transabdominal ultrasound, and clinical features who had stones confirmed on ERCP. As a secondary outcome, we assessed the performance of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) risk stratification algorithm in our population.

RESULTS

Of the 604 included patients, bile duct stones were confirmed in 410 (67.9%). Detailed assessment of liver enzyme patterns alone and in combination with clinical features and imaging findings yielded no highly predictive algorithms. Additionally, the ASGE high-risk criterion had a positive predictive value of only 68% for stones. For the 236 patients for whom MRCP was performed, this imaging modality was shown to have highest predictive value for the presence of stones on ERCP.

CONCLUSION

Exhaustive exploration of various threshold values and dynamic patterns of liver enzymes combined with clinical features and basic imaging findings did not reveal an algorithm to accurately predict the presence of stones on ERCP. The ASGE risk stratification criteria were also insensitive in our population. Though desirable, there may be no "perfect" combination of clinical features that correlate with persistent bile duct stones. MRCP or EUS may be considered to avoid unnecessary ERCP and associated complications.

Acute Biliary Disease

Acute biliary disease is a ubiquitous acute surgical complaint. General surgeons managing emergency surgical patients must be knowledgeable and capable of identifying and caring for common presentations. This article discusses the work-up, diagnosis, and management of the varying pathologies that make up biliary disease including cholelithiasis, cholecystitis, biliary dyskinesia, choledocholithiasis, cholangitis, gallstone pancreatitis, and gallstone ileus. Also addressed are more challenging and rare presentations including pregnancy and bariatric anatomy.

Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography to detect bile duct stones in acute biliary pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic value of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in detecting common bile duct (CBD) stones in acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP).

METHODS

The medical records of patients presenting with ABP from January 2008 to July 2013 were reviewed to assess the value of MRCP in detecting CBD stones in ABP. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was used as the reference standard to assess the diagnostic yield of MRCP in detecting choledocholithiasis. When ERCP was unavailable, intraoperative cholangiography or clinical follow-up was used as the reference standard.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients who underwent MRCP were diagnosed with ABP, and thirty of the 78 patients (38%) were confirmed to have CBD stones per the study protocol. The sensitivity of MRCP in detecting CBD stones in ABP was 93.3% compared to 66.7% for abdominal CT (P < 0.008). The overall accuracy of MRCP in detecting choledocholithiasis was 85.9% compared to 74.0% for abdominal CT (P < 0.041). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of MRCP in detecting CBD stones was 0.882, which was more accurate than the AUC of 0.727 for abdominal CT (P = 0.039). In 38 patients who underwent ERCP, the sensitivity and negative predictive value of MRCP in detecting CBD stones were both 100% regardless of the dilatation of the bile duct (≥7 mm versus < 7 mm).

CONCLUSION

MRCP is an effective, noninvasive modality to detect CBD stones in ABP and can help identify patients who require ERCP.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus laparoscopic exploration for common bile duct stones in post-cholecystectomy patients: a retrospective study

Background and Objective

Common bile duct (CBD) stones are common in patients even after cholecystectomy. Besides endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP), laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is also applied. This study aims to compare clinical indications, therapeutic benefits and complications for these two managements.

Methods

From October 2012 to February 2015, 1072 consecutive patients were diagnosed as choledocholithiasis in our single hospital. Post-cholecystectomy patients who underwent ERCP or LCBDE were included. Clinical data were analyzed, such as success rate, complications, procedure duration, postoperative hospital stay, total cost and recurrence of ductal stones. Prior ERCP, previous biliary anatomic alteration surgeries and lost to follow up were the excluding criteria.

Results

141 patients were included according to the criteria, and 87 cases underwent ERCP and 54 cases underwent LCBDE. Age and sex distribution of patients were comparable between the two groups. The success rate for CBD stones clearance was 97.7% in the ERCP group, compared with 87.0% in the LCBDE group (p=0.03). The mean procedure duration was also significantly shorter in ERCP group (52.0±15.8 vs. 102.9±40.1 min; p<0.001). Postoperative hospital stay was similar (5.5±2.6 vs. 5.9±2.3 days; p=0.40). And no significant difference for postoperative complications (3.4% vs. 11.1%; p=0.15), total cost ($3787.1±1061.5 vs. $3983.54±1257.1, p=0.32), and the rate of bile duct stones recurrence (6.9% vs. 7.4%, p=1.00).

Conclusions

For clearing CBD stones in patients after cholecystectomy, ERCP was more efficient and might be the first choice, while LCBDE might be beneficial for patients with large stones.

Comparison of one stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intra-operative endoscopic sphincterotomy versus two-stage pre-operative endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the management of pre-operatively diagnosed patients with common bile duct stones: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for symptomatic gallstone disease is one of the most common surgical procedures. Concomitant common bile duct (CBD) stones are detected with an incidence of 4-20% and the ideal management is still controversial. The frequent practice is to perform endoscopic sphincterotomy pre-operatively (POES) followed by LC, to allow subsequent laparoscopic or open exploration if POES fails. However, POES has shown different drawbacks such as need for two hospital admissions, need of two anesthesia inductions, higher rate of pancreatitis, and longer hospital stay. Hence, an intra-operative endoscopic sphincerotomy (IOES) has been proposed.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the 1 stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) combined with IOES versus 2-stage POES followed by LC for the management of pre-operatively known cholecystocholedocholithiasis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search terms bile duct stones/calculi, ERCP, endoscopic sphincterotomy, laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV), and laparoscopic ductal clearance/choledochotomy/exploration were used. A comprehensive hand-based search of reference lists of published articles and review articles was performed to ensure inclusion of all possible studies and exclude duplicates.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing 1 stage LC combined with IOES versus 2-stage POES followed by LC for the management of pre-operatively known cholecystocholedocholithiasis in adults.

DATA COLLECTION & ANALYSIS

Three reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted the data. Data were entered in revman version 5.3. The trials were grouped according to the outcome measure assessed such as success rate of CBD stone clearance, incidence of pancreatitis, overall morbidity, and length of hospital stay.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 629 patients in 5 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The success rate of CBD clearance (IOES = 93%, POES = 92%) was the same in both groups (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.45-0.97; p = 0.60). Findings showed that IOES was associated with less pancreatitis (0.6%) than POES (4.4%) (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.06-0.67; p = 0.01; I ² = 43%). The incidence of overall morbidity was lower in the IOES group (6%) than the POES group (11%) (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.31-0.96; p = 0.03; I ² = 20%). The mean days of hospital stay for IOES group (M = 3.52, SD = 1.434, N = 5) was significantly less than the POES group (M = 6.10, SD = 2.074, N = 5), t(8) = 2.29, p <= 0.051.

CONCLUSION

IOES is at par with two-stage POES in terms of CBD clearance, with less incidence of post-operative pancreatitis, overall morbidity, and less hospital stay.

Routine intraoperative cholangiography is unnecessary in patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis and normalizing bilirubin levels

BACKGROUND

The benefit of intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) is controversial in patients with gallstone pancreatitis whose bilirubin levels are normalizing. IOC with subsequent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography may lengthen duration of surgery and length of stay, whereas failure to clear the common bile duct may result in recurrent pancreatitis.

METHODS

We performed a 6-year retrospective cohort analysis of consecutive adult patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy at 2 university-affiliated medical centers. Institution A routinely performed IOC, whereas institution B did not. The primary outcome was readmission within 30 days for recurrent pancreatitis.

RESULTS

Of 520 patients evaluated, 246 (47%) were managed at institution A (routine IOC) and 274 (53%) were managed at institution B (restricted IOC). Patients at institution B had a shorter duration of surgery (1.0 vs 1.6 hours, P < .001), shorter length of stay (4 vs 5 days, P < .001), and fewer postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies performed (1.8% vs 21%, P < .001), without a difference in readmissions (1.5% vs 0%, P = .12).

CONCLUSIONS

Routine IOC is not necessary in the setting of mild gallstone pancreatitis with normalizing bilirubin values.

Outcomes of early versus delayed cholecystectomy in patients with mild to moderate acute biliary pancreatitis: A randomized prospective study

BACKGROUND

In patients with acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP), cholecystectomy is mandatory to prevent further biliary events, but the precise timing of cholecystectomy for mild to moderate disease remain a subject of ongoing debate. The aim of this study is to assess the outcomes of early versus delayed cholecystectomy. We hypothesize that early cholecystectomy as compared to delayed cholecystectomy reduces recurrent biliary events without a higher peri-operative complication rate.

METHODS

Patients with mild to moderate ABP were prospectively randomized to either an early cholecystectomy versus a delayed cholecystectomy group. Recurrent biliary events, peri-operative complications, conversion rate, length of surgery and total hospital length of stay between the two groups were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients were enrolled at a single public hospital. Of them, 38 were randomized to the early group and 34 patients to the delayed group. There were no differences regarding peri-operative complications (7.78% vs 11.76%; p = 0.700), conversion rate to open surgery (10.53% vs 11.76%; p = 1.000) and duration of surgery performed (80 vs 85 minutes, p = 0.752). Nevertheless, a greater rate of recurrent biliary events was found in the delayed group (44.12% vs 0%; p ≤ 0.0001) and the hospital length of stay was longer in the delayed group (9 vs 8 days, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

In mild to moderate ABP, early laparoscopic cholecystectomy reduces the risk of recurrent biliary events without an increase in operative difficulty or perioperative morbidity.

Scoring System for the Management of Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis: Cost Analysis of a Prospective Study

Predicting the presence of a persistent common bile duct (CBD) stone is a difficult and expensive task. The aim of this study is to determine if a previously described protocol-based scoring system is a cost-effective strategy. The protocol includes all patients with gallstone pancreatitis and stratifies them based on laboratory values and imaging to high, medium, and low likelihood of persistent stones. The patient's stratification then dictates the next course of management. A decision analytic model was developed to compare the costs for patients who followed the protocol versus those that did not. Clinical data model inputs were obtained from a prospective study conducted at The Mount Sinai Medical Center to validate the protocol from Oct 2009 to May 2013. The study included all patients presenting with gallstone pancreatitis regardless of disease severity. Seventy-three patients followed the proposed protocol and 32 did not. The protocol group cost an average of $14,962/patient and the non-protocol group cost $17,138/patient for procedural costs. Mean length of stay for protocol and non-protocol patients was 5.6 and 7.7 days, respectively. The proposed protocol is a cost-effective way to determine the course for patients with gallstone pancreatitis, reducing total procedural costs over 12 %.

Surgeons, ERCP, and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: do we need a standard approach for common bile duct stones?

BACKGROUND

Variation exists in the management of choledocholithiasis (CDL). This study evaluated associations between demographic and practice-related characteristics and CDL management.

METHODS

A 22-item, web-based survey was administered to US general surgeons. Respondents were classified into metropolitan or nonmetropolitan groups by zip code. Univariate tests and multivariable logistic regression were used to determine factors associated with CDL management preferences.

RESULTS

The survey was sent to 32,932 surgeons; 9902 performed laparoscopic cholecystectomy within the last year; 750 of 771 respondents had a valid US zip code and were included in the analysis. Mean practice time was 18 ± 10 years, 87% were male, and 83% practiced in a metropolitan area. For preoperatively known CDL, 86% chose preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Those in metropolitan areas were more likely to select preoperative ERCP than those in nonmetropolitan areas (88 vs. 79%, p < 0.001). For CDL discovered intraoperatively, 30% selected laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) as their preferred method of management with no difference between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas (30 vs. 26%, p = 0.335). The top reasons for not performing LCBDE were: having a reliable ERCP proceduralist available, lack of equipment, and lack of comfort performing LCBDE. Factors associated with preoperative ERCP were: metropolitan status, selective intraoperative cholangiography (IOC), and availability of a reliable ERCP proceduralist. Those who perform selective IOC were 70% less likely to prefer LCBDE (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.18-0.57, p < 0.001). Those with a reliable ERCP proceduralist available were 90% less likely to prefer LCBDE (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.04-0.26, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of respondents preferred ERCP for the management of CDL. Having a reliable ERCP proceduralist available, use of selective IOC, and metropolitan status were independently associated with preoperative ERCP. Postoperative ERCP was preferred for managing intraoperatively discovered CDL. Many surgeons are uncomfortable performing LCBDE, and increased training may be needed.

Parenteral immunonutrition in patients with acute pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Acute pancreatitis is a systemic immunoinflammatory response to auto-digestion of the pancrease and peri-pancreatic organs. Patients with acute pancreatitis can rapidly develop nutritional deficiency; hence nutritional support is important and critical. Sometimes parenteral nutrition (PN) is inevitable in acute pancreatitis. Due to immunosuppressive and inflammatory nature of the disease, it seems that immunonutrients like glutamine and omega-3 fatty acids (ω-3 FAs) added to parenteral formulas may improve the conditions. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of parenteral immunonutrition on clinical outcomes (infectious complications, length of hospital stay (LOS) and mortality) in patients with acute pancreatitis.

METHODS

A computerized literature search on four databases (PubMed, Cochrane, ISI Web of Science, and Iran Medex) was performed to find all the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessed the effects of parenteral immunonutrition in acute pancreatitis. Necessary data were extracted and quality assessment of RCTs was performed with consensus in the study team. Fixed effects model was used to conduct the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety four references were found via our search in which 7 articles matched our criteria for enrolling the meta-analysis. Parenteral immunonutrition significantly reduced the risk of infectious complications (RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.88; p ≤ 0.05) and mortality (RR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.11-0.59; p ≤ 0.001). LOS was also shorter in patients who received immunonutrition (MD = -2.93 days; 95% CI, -4.70 to -1.15; p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Immunonutrients like glutamine and ω-3 FAs added to parenteral formulas can improve prognoses in patients with acute pancreatitis.

Single-stage cholecystectomy at the time of pancreatic necrosectomy is safe and prevents future biliary complications: a 20-year single institutional experience with 217 consecutive patients

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend cholecystectomy (CCY) during the index admission for mild to moderate biliary pancreatitis as delayed CCY is associated with a substantial risk of recurrent biliary events. Delayed CCY is recommended in severe pancreatitis. The optimal timing of CCY in necrotizing pancreatitis, however, has not been well studied. We sought to determine the safety of single-stage CCY performed at the time of necrosectomy and its effectiveness in preventing subsequent biliary complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively queried our institutional database of patients who underwent pancreatic necrosectomy for necrotizing pancreatitis from 1992 to 2012.

RESULTS

We identified 217 consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic necrosectomy during the study period. The most common etiologies of pancreatitis were biliary (41 %) and alcoholic (24%), with a median computed tomography (CT) severity index score of 6 ± 1.6 and a 63.6% incidence of infected necrosis. Ninety-eight patients had undergone CCY prior to necrosectomy. Seventy patients (59% of those with gallbladders in situ) underwent CCY at the time of pancreatic necrosectomy. CCY was not performed in the remaining 49 due to a clear non-biliary etiology (35%), technical difficulty (29%), intraoperative hemodynamic instability (18%), or surgeon preference (18%). Postoperative morbidity and mortality was no different between the CCY and no CCY groups, with no bile duct injury or bile leaks in patients undergoing CCY at the time of necrosectomy. Of the patients undergoing CCY, 43% of patients without cholelithiasis or biliary sludge on preoperative imaging had gallstones or sludge identified pathologically after single-stage CCY. Of those who did not receive a single-stage CCY, biliary complications developed in 17 (35%) of patients (21% cholecystitis, 14% recurrent gallstone pancreatitis) at a median time to incidence of 10 months. Seventeen (35%) patients eventually received a postnecrosectomy cholecystectomy, of which 75% required an open procedure.

CONCLUSION

Single-stage CCY at the time of pancreatic necrosectomy is safe in selected patients and should be performed if technically feasible to prevent future biliary complications and reduce the need for a subsequent separate, often open, CCY.

Evidence-Based Management of Common Gallstone-Related Emergencies

Gallstone-related disease is among the most common clinical problems encountered worldwide. The manifestations of cholelithiasis vary greatly, ranging from mild biliary colic to life-threatening gallstone pancreatitis and cholangitis. The vast majority of gallstone-related diseases encountered in an acute setting can be categorized as biliary colic, cholecystitis, choledocholithiasis, and pancreatitis, although these diagnoses can overlap. The management of these diseases is uniquely multidisciplinary, involving many specialties and treatment options. Thus, care may be compromised due to redundant tests, treatment delays, or inconsistent management. This review outlines the evidence for initial evaluation, diagnostic workup, and treatment for the most common gallstone-related emergencies. Key principles include initial risk stratification of patients to aid in triage and timing of interventions, early initiation of appropriate antibiotics for patients with evidence of cholecystitis or cholangitis, patient selection for endoscopic biliary decompression, and growing evidence in favor of early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for clinically stable patients.

Treatment strategy for gallstone pancreatitis and the timing of cholecystectomy

AIM: To reviewed the literature and evaluated the scope and timing of the application of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) and cholecystectomy.

METHODS: A pooled odds ratio (OR) and a pooled mean difference with the 95%CI were used to assess the enumeration data of included studies. A pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) and a pooled mean difference with the 95%CI were used to assess the measurement data of included studies. Statistical heterogeneity was tested with the χ² test. According to forest plots, heterogeneity was not significant, so the fixed effect model was adopted. The significance of the pooled OR was determined by the Z test and statistical significance was considered at P < 0.05.

RESULTS: Data were collected from two studies (353 patients, 142 in the early cholecystectomy group and 211 in the delayed cholecystectomy group) regarding the length of hospital stay [The WMD was -2.87 (95%CI: -3.36--2.39, P < 0.01). Data were collected from four studies (618 patients, 211 in the early cholecystectomy group and 408 in the delayed cholecystectomy group) regarding perioperative complications (OR = 0.94, 95%CI: 0.41-2.12, P > 0.05). Data were collected from four studies (618 patients, 211 in the early cholecystectomy group and 408 in the delayed cholecystectomy group) on the number of patients who underwent ERCP± ES postoperatively (OR = 0.80, 95%CI: 0.45-1.41, P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Cholecystectomy offers better protection than ES against further bouts of pancreatitis in patients with gallstone pancreatitis, although ES is an acceptable alternative.

Can ultrasound common bile duct diameter predict common bile duct stones in the setting of acute cholecystitis?

BACKGROUND

Our aim is assessment of ultrasound (US) common bile duct (CBD) diameter to predict the presence of CBD stones in acute cholecystitis (AC).

METHODS

A retrospective review from 2007 to 2011 with codes for ultrasound, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and AC was conducted.

RESULTS

The incidence of CBD stones was 1.8%. Two hundred forty eight individuals had US+MRCP+ERCP+AC, of which 48 had CBD stones and 200 did not have CBD stones. US CBD diameter range was 3.6 to 19 mm. Ninety percent of MRCPs were negative, and it delayed care by 2.9 days. Mean CBD diameter was narrower in those negative for CBD stones (5.8 vs 7.08; P = .0043). Groups based on diameter ranges <6, 6 to 9.9, and ≥10 mm demonstrated 14%, 14%, and 39% CBD stones, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

US CBD diameter is not sufficient to identify patients at significant risk for CBD stones. MRCP delayed care by 2.9 days. Intraoperative cholangiography may be more effective, based on the low risk of CBD stones in AC.

Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Between 10% to 18% of people undergoing cholecystectomy for gallstones have common bile duct stones. Treatment of the bile duct stones can be conducted as open cholecystectomy plus open common bile duct exploration or laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC + LCBDE) versus pre- or post-cholecystectomy endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in two stages, usually combined with either sphincterotomy (commonest) or sphincteroplasty (papillary dilatation) for common bile duct clearance. The benefits and harms of the different approaches are not known.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to systematically review the benefits and harms of different approaches to the management of common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, 2013) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to August 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials which compared the results from open surgery versus endoscopic clearance and laparoscopic surgery versus endoscopic clearance for common bile duct stones.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models meta-analyses, performed with Review Manager 5.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen randomised clinical trials with a total of 1758 randomised participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria of this review. Eight trials with 737 participants compared open surgical clearance with ERCP; five trials with 621 participants compared laparoscopic clearance with pre-operative ERCP; and two trials with 166 participants compared laparoscopic clearance with postoperative ERCP. One trial with 234 participants compared LCBDE with intra-operative ERCP. There were no trials of open or LCBDE versus ERCP in people without an intact gallbladder. All trials had a high risk of bias.There was no significant difference in the mortality between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 5/371 (1%) versus 10/358 (3%) OR 0.51;95% CI 0.18 to 1.44). Neither was there a significant difference in the morbidity between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 76/371 (20%) versus 67/358 (19%) OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.62). Participants in the open surgery group had significantly fewer retained stones compared with the ERCP group (seven trials; 609 participants; 20/313 (6%) versus 47/296 (16%) OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.62), P = 0.0002.There was no significant difference in the mortality between LC + LCBDE versus pre-operative ERCP +LC (five trials; 580 participants; 2/285 (0.7%) versus 3/295 (1%) OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.12 to 4.33). Neither was there was a significant difference in the morbidity between the two groups (five trials; 580 participants; 44/285 (15%) versus 37/295 (13%) OR 1.28; 95% CI 0.80 to 2.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the number of participants with retained stones (five trials; 580 participants; 24/285 (8%) versus 31/295 (11%) OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.39).There was only one trial assessing LC + LCBDE versus LC+intra-operative ERCP including 234 participants. There was no reported mortality in either of the groups. There was no significant difference in the morbidity, retained stones, procedure failure rates between the two intervention groups.Two trials assessed LC + LCBDE versus LC+post-operative ERCP. There was no reported mortality in either of the groups. There was no significant difference in the morbidity between laparoscopic surgery and postoperative ERCP groups (two trials; 166 participants; 13/81 (16%) versus 12/85 (14%) OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.72). There was a significant difference in the retained stones between laparoscopic surgery and postoperative ERCP groups (two trials; 166 participants; 7/81 (9%) versus 21/85 (25%) OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.72; P = 0.008.In total, seven trials including 746 participants compared single staged LC + LCBDE versus two-staged pre-operative ERCP + LC or LC + post-operative ERCP. There was no significant difference in the mortality between single and two-stage management (seven trials; 746 participants; 2/366 versus 3/380 OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.12 to 4.33). There was no a significant difference in the morbidity (seven trials; 746 participants; 57/366 (16%) versus 49/380 (13%) OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.89). There were significantly fewer retained stones in the single-stage group (31/366 participants; 8%) compared with the two-stage group (52/380 participants; 14%), but the difference was not statistically significantOR 0.59; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.94).There was no significant difference in the conversion rates of LCBDE to open surgery when compared with pre-operative, intra-operative, and postoperative ERCP groups. Meta-analysis of the outcomes duration of hospital stay, quality of life, and cost of the procedures could not be performed due to lack of data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Open bile duct surgery seems superior to ERCP in achieving common bile duct stone clearance based on the evidence available from the early endoscopy era. There is no significant difference in the mortality and morbidity between laparoscopic bile duct clearance and the endoscopic options. There is no significant reduction in the number of retained stones and failure rates in the laparoscopy groups compared with the pre-operative and intra-operative ERCP groups. There is no significant difference in the mortality, morbidity, retained stones, and failure rates between the single-stage laparoscopic bile duct clearance and two-stage endoscopic management. More randomised clinical trials without risks of systematic and random errors are necessary to confirm these findings.

Endoscopic management of acute biliary pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis represents numerous unique challenges to the practicing digestive disease specialist. Clinical presentations of acute pancreatitis vary from trivial pain to severe acute illness with a significant risk of death. Urgent endoscopic treatment of acute pancreatitis is considered when there is causal evidence of biliary pancreatitis. This article focuses on the diagnosis and endoscopic treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis.

Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Between 10% to 18% of people undergoing cholecystectomy for gallstones have common bile duct stones. Treatment of the bile duct stones can be conducted as open cholecystectomy plus open common bile duct exploration or laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LC + LCBDE) versus pre- or post-cholecystectomy endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in two stages, usually combined with either sphincterotomy (commonest) or sphincteroplasty (papillary dilatation) for common bile duct clearance. The benefits and harms of the different approaches are not known.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to systematically review the benefits and harms of different approaches to the management of common bile duct stones.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 7 of 12, 2013) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), and Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to August 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials which compared the results from open surgery versus endoscopic clearance and laparoscopic surgery versus endoscopic clearance for common bile duct stones.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the trials for inclusion and independently extracted data. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using both fixed-effect and random-effects models meta-analyses, performed with Review Manager 5.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen randomised clinical trials with a total of 1758 randomised participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria of this review. Eight trials with 737 participants compared open surgical clearance with ERCP; five trials with 621 participants compared laparoscopic clearance with pre-operative ERCP; and two trials with 166 participants compared laparoscopic clearance with postoperative ERCP. One trial with 234 participants compared LCBDE with intra-operative ERCP. There were no trials of open or LCBDE versus ERCP in people without an intact gallbladder. All trials had a high risk of bias.There was no significant difference in the mortality between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 5/371 (1%) versus 10/358 (3%) OR 0.51;95% CI 0.18 to 1.44). Neither was there a significant difference in the morbidity between open surgery versus ERCP clearance (eight trials; 733 participants; 76/371 (20%) versus 67/358 (19%) OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.62). Participants in the open surgery group had significantly fewer retained stones compared with the ERCP group (seven trials; 609 participants; 20/313 (6%) versus 47/296 (16%) OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.21 to 0.62), P = 0.0002.There was no significant difference in the mortality between LC + LCBDE versus pre-operative ERCP +LC (five trials; 580 participants; 2/285 (0.7%) versus 3/295 (1%) OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.12 to 4.33). Neither was there was a significant difference in the morbidity between the two groups (five trials; 580 participants; 44/285 (15%) versus 37/295 (13%) OR 1.28; 95% CI 0.80 to 2.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the number of participants with retained stones (five trials; 580 participants; 24/285 (8%) versus 31/295 (11%) OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.45 to 1.39).There was only one trial assessing LC + LCBDE versus LC+intra-operative ERCP including 234 participants. There was no reported mortality in either of the groups. There was no significant difference in the morbidity, retained stones, procedure failure rates between the two intervention groups.Two trials assessed LC + LCBDE versus LC+post-operative ERCP. There was no reported mortality in either of the groups. There was no significant difference in the morbidity between laparoscopic surgery and postoperative ERCP groups (two trials; 166 participants; 13/81 (16%) versus 12/85 (14%) OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.72). There was a significant difference in the retained stones between laparoscopic surgery and postoperative ERCP groups (two trials; 166 participants; 7/81 (9%) versus 21/85 (25%) OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.72; P = 0.008.In total, seven trials including 746 participants compared single staged LC + LCBDE versus two-staged pre-operative ERCP + LC or LC + post-operative ERCP. There was no significant difference in the mortality between single and two-stage management (seven trials; 746 participants; 2/366 versus 3/380 OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.12 to 4.33). There was no a significant difference in the morbidity (seven trials; 746 participants; 57/366 (16%) versus 49/380 (13%) OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.89). There were significantly fewer retained stones in the single-stage group (31/366 participants; 8%) compared with the two-stage group (52/380 participants; 14%), but the difference was not statistically significantOR 0.59; 95% CI 0.37 to 0.94).There was no significant difference in the conversion rates of LCBDE to open surgery when compared with pre-operative, intra-operative, and postoperative ERCP groups. Meta-analysis of the outcomes duration of hospital stay, quality of life, and cost of the procedures could not be performed due to lack of data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Open bile duct surgery seems superior to ERCP in achieving common bile duct stone clearance based on the evidence available from the early endoscopy era. There is no significant difference in the mortality and morbidity between laparoscopic bile duct clearance and the endoscopic options. There is no significant reduction in the number of retained stones and failure rates in the laparoscopy groups compared with the pre-operative and intra-operative ERCP groups. There is no significant difference in the mortality, morbidity, retained stones, and failure rates between the single-stage laparoscopic bile duct clearance and two-stage endoscopic management. More randomised clinical trials without risks of systematic and random errors are necessary to confirm these findings.

Minimally invasive treatment of cholecysto-choledocal lithiasis: The point of view of the surgical endoscopist

The rate of choledocholithiasis in patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis is estimated to be approximately 10%-33%, depending on the patient's age. Development of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Laparoscopic Surgery and improvement of diagnostic procedures have influenced new approaches to the management of common bile duct stones in association with gallstones. At present available minimally-invasive treatments of cholecysto-choledocal lithiasis include: single-stage laparoscopic treatment, perioperative endoscopic treatment and endoscopic treatment alone. Published data evidence that, associated endoscopic-laparoscopic approach necessitates increased number of procedures per patient while single-stage laparoscopic treatment is associated with a shorter hospital stay. However, current data does not suggest clear superiority of any one approach with regard to success, mortality, morbidity and cost-effectiveness. Considering the variety of therapeutic options available for management, a critical appraisal and decision-making is required. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography/EST should be adopted on a selective basis, i.e., in patients with acute obstructive suppurative cholangitis, severe biliary pancreatitis, ampullary stone impaction or severe comorbidity. In a setting where all facilities are available, decision in the selection of the therapeutic option depends on the patients, the number and size of choledocholithiasis stones, the anatomy of the cystic duct and common bile duct, the surgical history of patients and local expertise.

The impact of intraoperative cholangiography on recurrent pancreatitis and biliary complications in patients with gallstone pancreatitis

INTRODUCTION

Although gallstone pancreatitis is initiated by the presence of stones in the common bile duct, the benefit associated with routine intraoperative cholangiography at the time of cholecystectomy in these patients is unclear. The purpose of this study, using population-based data, was to determine the impact of cholangiography on clinical outcomes after cholecystectomy for gallstone pancreatitis.

METHODS

All patients who were admitted to hospital from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2001 in Nova Scotia, Canada with pancreatitis who underwent cholecystectomy during the same admission were identified. The rates of recurrent pancreatitis and biliary complications after surgery were compared between patients who underwent cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography ± common bile duct exploration and those who underwent cholecystectomy alone, using three linked administrative databases.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-two patients were identified, 119 had cholangiography at the time of cholecystectomy and 213 did not. After a median follow-up of after 3.8 years, there was no difference in the rate of recurrent pancreatitis or biliary complications between those who had cholangiography ± common bile duct exploration at the time of surgery and those who did not; 13.4 versus 10.8 %, respectively (p = 0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that intraoperative cholangiography does not improve outcomes after cholecystectomy for gallstone pancreatitis.

Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones

AIM: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones.

METHODS: Four databases, including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Science Citation Index up to September 2011, were searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Data were extracted from the studies by two independent reviewers. The primary outcomes were stone clearance from the common bile duct, postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were conversion to other procedures, number of procedures per patient, length of hospital stay, total operative time, hospitalization charges, patient acceptance and quality of life scores.

RESULTS: Seven eligible RCTs [five trials (n = 621) comparing preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) + laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with LC + laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE); two trials (n = 166) comparing postoperative ERCP/EST + LC with LC + LCBDE], composed of 787 patients in total, were included in the final analysis. The meta-analysis detected no statistically significant difference between the two groups in stone clearance from the common bile duct [risk ratios (RR) = -0.10, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -0.24 to 0.04, P = 0.17], postoperative morbidity (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.10, P = 0.16), mortality (RR = 2.19, 95% CI: 0.33 to 14.67, P = 0.42), conversion to other procedures (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.54 to 2.70, P = 0.39), length of hospital stay (MD = 0.99, 95% CI: -1.59 to 3.57, P = 0.45), total operative time (MD = 12.14, 95% CI: -1.83 to 26.10, P = 0.09). Two-stage (LC + ERCP/EST) management clearly required more procedures per patient than single-stage (LC + LCBDE) management.

CONCLUSION: Single-stage management is equivalent to two-stage management but requires fewer procedures. However, patient’s condition, operator’s expertise and local resources should be taken into account in making treatment decisions.

Update on pathogenesis and clinical management of acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis (AP), defined as the acute nonbacterial inflammatory condition of the pancreas, is derived from the early activation of digestive enzymes found inside the acinar cells, with variable compromise of the gland itself, nearby tissues and other organs. So, it is an event that begins with pancreatic injury, elicits an acute inflammatory response, encompasses a variety of complications and generally resolves over time. Different conditions are known to induce this disorder, although the innermost mechanisms and how they act to develop the disease are still unknown. We summarize some well established aspects. A phase sequence has been proposed: etiology factors generate other conditions inside acinar cells that favor the AP development with some systemic events; genetic factors could be involved as susceptibility and modifying elements. AP is a disease with extremely different clinical expressions. Most patients suffer a mild and limited disease, but about one fifth of cases develop multi organ failure, accompanied by high mortality. This great variability in presentation, clinical course and complications has given rise to the confusion related to AP related terminology. However, consensus meetings have provided uniform definitions, including the severity of the illness. The clinical management is mainly based on the disease´s severity and must be directed to correct the underlying predisposing factors and control the inflammatory process itself. The first step is to determine if it is mild or severe. We review the principal aspects to be considered in this treatment, as reflected in several clinical practice guidelines. For the last 25 years, there has been a global increase in incidence of AP, along with many advances in diagnosis and treatment. However, progress in knowledge of its pathogenesis is scarce.

Early routine endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography strategy versus early conservative management strategy in acute gallstone pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The role and timing of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in acute gallstone pancreatitis remains controversial. A number of clinical trials and meta-analyses have provided conflicting evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the clinical effectiveness and safety of the early routine ERCP strategy compared to the early conservative management with or without selective use of ERCP strategy, based on all important, clinically relevant and standardized outcomes including mortality, local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (Bradley 1993) and by authors of the primary study, and ERCP-related complications in unselected patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS databases and major conference proceedings up to January 2012, using the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model with no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs comparing the early routine ERCP strategy versus the early conservative management with or without selective use of ERCP strategy in patients with suspected acute gallstone pancreatitis. We included studies in which the population with acute gallstone pancreatitis was a subgroup within a larger group of patients. We only included studies involving only a selected subgroup of patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis (actual severe pancreatitis) in subgroup analyses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors conducted study selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment independently. Using intention-to-treat analysis with random-effects models, we combined dichotomous data to obtain risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed heterogeneity using the Chi² test and I² statistic. To explore sources of heterogeneity, we conducted a priori subgroup analyses according to predicted severity of pancreatitis, cholangitis, biliary obstruction, time to ERCP in routine ERCP strategy, use of selective ERCP in conservative management strategy, and risk of bias. To assess the robustness of our results, we carried out sensitivity analyses using different summary statistics (RR versus odds ratio (OR)) and meta-analytic models (fixed versus random-effects), and per-protocol analysis. We performed influence analysis by exclusion of each study.

MAIN RESULTS

Five RCTs comprising 644 participants were included in the main analyses. Two additional RCTs, comprising only patients with actual severe acute gallstone pancreatitis, were included only in subgroup analyses. There was statistical heterogeneity among trials for mortality, but not for other outcomes. In unselected patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis, there were no statistically significant differences between the two strategies in mortality (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.18 to 3.03), local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.43; and RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.11 respectively) and by authors of the primary study (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.26; and RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.09 respectively). The results were robust to sensitivity and influence analyses except for systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification. There was no evidence to suggest that the results were dependent on predicted severity of pancreatitis. Among trials that included patients with cholangitis, the early routine ERCP strategy significantly reduced mortality (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.68), local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.99; and RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.78 respectively) and by authors of the primary study (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.87; and RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.82 respectively). Among trials that included patients with biliary obstruction, the early routine ERCP strategy was associated with a significant reduction in local complications as defined by authors of the primary study (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.91), and a non-significant trend towards reduction of local and systemic complications as defined by the Atlanta Classification (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.07; and RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.02 respectively) and systemic complications as defined by authors of the primary study (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.01). ERCP complications were infrequent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis, there is no evidence that early routine ERCP significantly affects mortality, and local or systemic complications of pancreatitis, regardless of predicted severity. Our results, however, provide support for current recommendations that early ERCP should be considered in patients with co-existing cholangitis or biliary obstruction.

Laparoendoscopic rendezvous versus preoperative ERCP and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis: interim analysis of a controlled randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Although the ideal management of cholecysto-choledocholi-thiasis is controversial, the 2-stage approach [endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), sphincterotomy, and common bile duct (CBD) clearance followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy] remains the standard way of management worldwide. One-stage approach using the so-called laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV) technique offers some advantages, mainly by reducing the hospital stay and the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the LERV 1-stage approach with the standard 2-stage approach consisting of preoperative ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis.

SETTING

Controlled randomized trial, University/Teaching Hospital.

METHODS

: Patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiasis were randomized either to LERV or to the 2-stage approach. Both elective and emergency cases were included in the study. Primary endpoint was to detect difference in overall hospital stay, whereas secondary endpoints were (i) to detect differences in morbidity (especially post-ERCP pancreatitis) and (ii) success of CBD clearance. This is an interim analysis of the first 100 randomized patients.

RESULTS

Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LERV group; median 4 (2-19) days versus 5.5 (3-22) days, P = 0.0004. There was no difference in morbidity and success of CBD clearance between the 2 groups. Post-ERCP amylase value was found significantly lower in the LERV group: median 65 (16-1159) versus 91 (30-1846), P = 0.02.

CONCLUSIONS

Interim analysis of the results suggests the superiority of the LERV technique in terms of hospital stay and post-ERCP hyperamylasemia.

To 'gram or not'? Indications for intraoperative cholangiogram

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current practice patterns and results for use of intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent LC between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2009. Data variables included: preoperative laboratory and radiographic studies, indication for and findings of IOC, and perioperative management of choledocholithiasis and retained common bile duct (CBD) stones.

RESULTS

There were 1,308 patients who underwent LC by 23 surgeons, of whom 266 also had an IOC (20%) performed. The majority had ultrasonography performed, 242 had an abdominal compute tomography (CT) scan, and 129 patients had a hepatobiliary iminodiacetic acid (HIDA) scan. Indications for an IOC included: diagnosis of choledocholithiasis or gallstone pancreatitis (n = 116), abnormal liver function tests (n = 187), and a dilated CBD ≥ 10 mm (n = 182). Of the 266 IOCs, 36 patients (13.5%) had a CBD stone with the majority (n = 26; 72%) having normal preoperative imaging studies. Only 6 patients (17%) with a CBD calculi on IOC underwent successful clearance of the calculi at the time of LC. Twenty-nine of the remaining 30 patients with a retained calculus on IOC underwent postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with extraction of the calculi. Of the 1,042 LCs performed without an IOC, 31 patients (3%) were diagnosed with a retained stone managed successfully by ERCP.

CONCLUSION

Our data reveals that the selective use of IOC is helpful in diagnosing and clearing CBD calculi, that the use of preoperative CBD size aids in selecting patients for IOC, and that choledocholithiasis identified with IOC or after discharge can be managed successfully with ERCP.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of intraoperative versus preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with gallbladder and suspected common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Most patients with gallbladder and common bile duct stones are treated by preoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (POES) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Recently, intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy (IOES) during laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been suggested as an alternative treatment.

METHODS

Data from randomized clinical trials related to safety and effectiveness of IOES versus POES were extracted by two independent reviewers. Risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences were calculated with 95 per cent confidence intervals based on intention-to-treat analysis whenever possible.

RESULTS

Four trials with 532 patients comparing IOES with POES were included. There were no deaths. There was no significant difference in rates of ampullary cannulation (RR 1·01, 0·97 to 1·04; P = 0·70) or stone clearance by ES (RR 0·99, 0·96 to 1·02; P = 0·58) between the groups. The proportion of patients with at least one post-ES complication, including pancreatitis, bleeding, perforation, cholangitis, cholecystitis or gastric ulcer, was significantly lower in the IOES group (RR 0·37, 0·18 to 0·78; P = 0·009). There was no significant difference in morbidity after laparoscopic cholecystectomy or requirement for open operation between the groups. Mean hospital stay was 3 days shorter in the IOES group: mean difference - 2·83 (-3·66 to - 2·00) days (P < 0·001).

CONCLUSION

In patients with gallbladder and common bile duct stones, IOES is as effective and safe as POES and results in a significantly shorter hospital stay.

Selective use of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in clinical practice may miss choledocholithiasis in gallstone pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Gallstone pancreatitis is a consequence of ampullary obstruction by common bile duct (CBD) calculi. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) has been advocated for routine use to diagnose choledocholithiasis. However, the selective use of MRCP in clinically equivocal situations has not been explored until now. This study examines the diagnostic value of selective MRCP in gallstone pancreatitis.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective audit of all presentations of gallstone pancreatitis between January 2001 and December 2007 at Middlemore Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand. Demographic data, clinical presentation, biochemical and radiological findings and outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

There were 339 cases of gallstone pancreatitis during the study period; 236 patients were women and the mean age was 52 years. Overall, choledocholithiasis was diagnosed in 95 patients. A total of 117 patients underwent MRCP within a median of 4 days of admission, with 15 (13.7%) showing choledocholithiasis. There was no significant difference in time to MRCP between positive and negative groups. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)/intraoperative cholangiography (IOC) confirmed 13 of 15 stones within a median of 2.5 days. However, MRCP missed 8 cases of choledocholithiasis subsequently demonstrated on ERCP/IOC, where clinical suspicion remained after a negative MRCP. Its sensitivity was 62% and specificity 98%. The positive likelihood ratio was 6.5 and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.1. In all, 222 patients followed different clinical pathways with 82 CBD stones diagnosed by ERCP/IOC.

CONCLUSION

Selective MRCP is highly specific in gallstone pancreatitis but may not be sensitive enough to exclude choledocholithiasis in this context.

Cholecystectomy for Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis: Early Vs Delayed Approach

Background and Aims:

The management of gallstone pancreatitis, in particular timing of cholecystectomy, has evolved substantially over the last decade. The trend has been toward earlier cholecystectomy. We review current literature regarding the timing of cholecystectomy in the context of gallstone pancreatitis.

Materials and Methods:

The authors performed a literature search in PubMed for relevant articles in the English language with greatest weight given to prospective trials compared to observational studies and previous reviews.

Results:

The literature search yielded 59 articles discussing cholecystectomy in the context of gallstone pancreatitis. Most were retrospective studies or reviews, but there were nine prospective observational studies and two randomized control trials. For mild gallstone pancreatitis, laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 48 hours of presentation (without normalization of pancreatic enzymes or absence of abdominal pain) has been shown to shorten hospital stay without increased morbidity or mortality. Routine preoperative ERCP is unnecessary for patients with mild disease. For more severe disease, timing of cholecystectomy is governed by clinical status. Interval cholecystectomy (>2 weeks after index admission) can be safely done with low risk of recurrence if the patient has had ERCP and sphincterotomy at index admission.

Conclusion:

Patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis should have cholecystectomy during index admission within 48 hours of arrival, but patients with more severe disease will require cholecystectomy at a later time, depending on the clinical circumstances. Sphincterotomy should be done as soon as possible if cholecystectomy is not feasible early in course.

Early cholecystectomy safely decreases hospital stay in patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis: a randomized prospective study

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed within 48 hours of admission for mild gallstone pancreatitis, regardless of resolution of abdominal pain or abnormal laboratory values, would result in a shorter hospital stay.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although there is consensus among surgeons that patients with gallstone pancreatitis should undergo cholecystectomy to prevent recurrence, the precise timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for mild disease remains controversial.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with mild pancreatitis (Ranson score <or=3) were prospectively randomized to either an early laparoscopic cholecystectomy group (within 48 hours of admission) versus a control laparoscopic cholecystectomy group (performed after resolution of abdominal pain and normalizing trend of laboratory enzymes). The primary end point was hospital length of stay. Secondary end point was a composite of rates of conversion to an open procedure, perioperative complications, and need for endoscopic retrograde cholangiography. The study was designed to enroll 100 patients with an interim analysis after 50 patients.

RESULTS

At interim analysis, 50 patients were enrolled at a single university-affiliated public hospital. Of them, 25 patients were randomized to the early group and 25 patients to the control group. Patient age ranged from 18 to 74 years with a median duration of symptoms of 2 days upon presentation and a median Ranson score of 1. There were no baseline differences between the groups with regards to demographics, clinical presentation, or the presence of comorbidities. The hospital length of stay was shorter for the early cholecystectomy group (mean: 3.5 [95% CI, 2.7-4.3], median: 3 [IQR, 2-4]) compared with the control group (mean: 5.8 [95% CI, 3.8-7.9], median: 4 [IQR, 4-6] [P = 0.0016]). Six patients from the early group required endoscopic retrograde cholangiography, compared with 4 in the control group (P = 0.72). There was no statistically significant difference in the need for conversion to an open procedure or in perioperative complication rates between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

In mild gallstone pancreatitis, laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed within 48 hours of admission, regardless of the resolution of abdominal pain or laboratory abnormalities, results in a shorter hospital length of stay with no apparent impact on the technical difficulty of the procedure or perioperative complication rate.

Gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis

In the care of acute pancreatitis, a prompt search for the etiologic condition of the disease should be conducted. A differentiation of gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis should be given top priority in its etiologic diagnosis because it is related to the decision of treatment policy. Examinations necessary for diagnosing gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis include blood tests and ultrasonography. Early ERCP/ES should be performed in patients with gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis if a complication of cholangitis and a prolonged passage disorder of the biliary tract are suspected. The treatment for bile duct stones with the use of ERCP/ES alone is not recommended in cases of gallstone-induced pancreatitis with gallbladder stones. Cholecystectomy for gallstone-induced acute pancreatitis should be performed using a laparoscopic procedure as the first option as soon as the disease has subsided.

Acute biliary pancreatitis: diagnosis and treatment

Gallstones are the commonest cause of acute pancreatitis (AP), a potentially life-threatening condition, worldwide. The pathogenesis of acute pancreatitis has not been fully understood. Laboratory and radiological investigations are critical for diagnosis as well prognosis prediction. Scoring systems based on radiological findings and serologic inflammatory markers have been proposed as better predictors of disease severity. Early endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is beneficial in a group of patients with gallstone pancreatitis. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with preoperative endoscopic common bile duct clearance is recommended as a treatment of choice for acute biliary pancreatitis. The timing of cholecystectomy, following ERCP, for biliary pancreatitis can vary markedly depending on the severity of pancreatitis.