Evaluating the Revised American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Guidelines for Common Bile Duct Stone Diagnosis

Endoscopic ultrasound avoids diagnostic ERCP among the ASGE high-risk group - Experience in an Asian population

BACKGROUND

A prediction system for common bile duct (CBD) stones was originally published by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) in 2010 and was last revised in 2019. We wanted to investigate its application in an Asian population, who have different etiologies of bile duct stone formation and accessibility to medical service compared to the West.

METHODS

This is a single center retrospective study. Patients who received endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for suspected CBD stones were collected from our endoscopic record system over a 10-year period. The accuracy of the revised ASGE criteria was estimated according to the results of EUS. A minimum follow-up of 6 months was required to detect false negative results.

RESULTS

142 patients were enrolled, 87 (61%) patients had CBD stones. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of the revised ASGE criteria for high-risk patients were 69%, 38%, 64%, 44%, and 57%. 36% of the ASGE-defined high-risk patients negative for CBD stones on EUS. The two significant predictors for CBD stone were CBD dilatation (adjusted OR 3.06, 95% C.I. 1.31-7.17, p = 0.010) and ascending cholangitis (adjusted OR 2.28, 95% C.I. 1.01-5.15, p = 0.047).

CONCLUSION

ASGE recommends that patients defined as high-risk for choledocholithiasis be considered for direct ERCP without prior need for confirmation imaging. However, our findings indicate a high rate (36%) of patients in that group negative for CBD stones on EUS. Hence, EUS is still be suggested first in selective high-risk patients so that diagnostic ERCP can be avoided in our Asian society.

ERCP findings provide further justification for a "surgery-first" mindset in choledocholithiasis

INTRODUCTION

Choledocholithiasis is most often managed in a two-procedure pathway including endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). In contrast, a single-stage, surgery-first approach consisting of LC, cholangiogram, and laparoscopic common bile duct exploration (LCBDE) is associated with reduced hospital stays and equivalent morbidity. Despite this, nationwide referral patterns heavily favor ERCP, obscuring those undergoing ERCP with obstructions amenable to simple intraoperative interventions. We hypothesized that most patients had endoscopic findings consistent with simple sludge or small-to-medium stones, which could have been cleared by basic LCBDE maneuvers.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 294 patients > 18 years old who underwent preoperative ERCP for the management of suspected choledocholithiasis. Exclusion criteria included: failed ERCP, cholangitis, prior cholecystectomy, patient refusal of surgery, or medical conditions precluding surgical candidacy. Stone size was categorized as small (0-4 mm), medium (5-7 mm), and large (≥ 8 mm).

RESULTS

At the time of ERCP, 37 (20.1%) patients had sludge only, 96 (52.2%) had stones only, 42 (22.8%) had sludge and stones, and 9 (4.8%) had no stones. Of the 138 patients with any stones, 37 (26.8%) had small stones, 41 (29.7%) medium, 43 (31.2%) large, and 17 (12.3%) had uncharacterizable stones. Overall, 74.3% of patients had findings of sludge, stones (0-7 mm), or negative ERCP.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients who underwent preoperative ERCP for suspected choledocholithiasis had findings that are amenable to simple intraoperative interventions. In fact, over a quarter of the patients had a negative ERCP, sludge, or small stones which would likely be cleared by flushing/glucagon precluding any further instrumentation. While large stones may require more advanced techniques, this represents a small percentage of patients. Surgery-first management for suspected choledocholithiasis can offer an efficient alternative for the majority of patients.

Effect of Frailty on the Management of Suspected Choledocholithiasis

INTRODUCTION

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (ASGE-SAGES) guidelines for managing choledocholithiasis (CDL) omit patient-specific factors like frailty. We evaluated how frail patients with CDL undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy were managed within ASGE-SAGES guidelines.

METHODS

We analyzed patients undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy for CDL and/or acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) from 2016 to 2019 at 12 US academic medical centers. Patients were grouped by Charlson comorbidity index into non-frail (NF), moderately frail (MF), and severely frail (SF). ASGE-SAGES guidelines stratified likelihood of CDL and were used to compare actual to suggested management. Rate of guideline deviation was our primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included rates of surgical site infections (SSIs), biliary leaks, and 30-day surgical readmissions. Rates are presented as NF, MF, and SF.

RESULTS

Among 844 patients, 43.3% (n = 365) were NF, 25.4% (n = 214) were MF, and 31.4% (n = 265) were SF. Frail patients were older (33y vs 56.7y vs 73.5y, P < .0001) and more likely to have ABP (32.6% vs 47.7% vs 43.8%, P = .0005). As frailty increased, guideline deviation increased (41.1% vs 43.5% vs 53.6%, P < .006). Severe frailty was predictive of guideline deviation compared to MF (aOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.02-2.12, P = .04) and NF (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.01-2.12, P = .04). There was no difference in SSIs (P = .2), biliary leaks (P = .7), or 30-day surgical readmission (P = .7).

CONCLUSION

Frail patients with common bile duct stones had more management deviating from guidelines yet no difference in complications. Future guidelines should consider including frailty to optimize detection and management of CDL in this population.

Prospective assessment of the accuracy of ASGE and ESGE guidelines for choledocholithiasis

Background and study aims American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines recommend categorizing patients by risk for choledocholithiasis to determine management. The goal of our study was to compare the accuracy of criteria proposed in these guidelines. Patients and methods All patients with suspected choledocholithiasis at our institution were prospectively identified. Based upon initial test results, patients were categorized as low, intermediate, and high risk for choledocholithiasis per ASGE 2010 and 2019, and ESGE criteria. Patients were followed until 30 days post-discharge. Results of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERCP), endoscopic ultrasound, and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography were used as criteria standard for choledocholithiasis. The accuracy of each criterion for choledocholithiasis was computed. Results During the study period, 359 consecutive patients with suspected choledocholithiasis were identified, of whom 225 had choledocholithiasis. Median patient age was 69 years and 55.3% were women. ESGE criteria categorized 47.9% as high-risk, lower than ASGE 2010 (62.7%, P <0.01), and 2019 criteria (54.6%, P =0.07). In high-risk patients, choledocholithiasis was noted in 83.1% for ESGE criteria, similar for ASGE 2019 (81.6%, P =0.7) and 2010 criteria (79.1%, P =0.3). The percentage of patients who underwent unnecessary ERCP was 8.1% per ESGE criteria, lower than ASGE 2010 (13.1%, P =0.03), but similar to 2019 criteria (10%, P =0.4). No difference in accuracy for choledocholithiasis was noted among the three criteria. No 30-day readmissions for choledocholithiasis were noted in the low-risk category. Conclusions ESGE and ASGE guidelines have similar accuracy for diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. However, ESGE criteria result in more patients needing additional testing, but also a smaller proportion of patients undergoing unnecessary ERCP.

Suspected common bile duct stones: reduction of unnecessary ERCP by pre-procedural imaging and timing of ERCP

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the procedure of choice to remove sludge/stones from the common bile duct (CBD). In a small but clinically important proportion of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis ERCP is negative. This is undesirable because of ERCP associated morbidity. We aimed to map the diagnostic pathway leading up to ERCP and evaluate ERCP outcome.

METHODS

We established a prospective multicenter cohort of patients with suspected CBD stones. We assessed the determinants that were associated with CBD sludge or stone detection upon ERCP.

RESULTS

We established a cohort of 707 patients with suspected CBD sludge or stones (62% female, median age 59 years). ERCP was negative for CBD sludge or stones in 155 patients (22%). Patients with positive ERCPs frequently had pre-procedural endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) imaging (44% vs. 35%; P = 0.045). The likelihood of ERCP sludge and stones detection was higher when the time interval between EUS or MRCP and ERCP was less than 2 days (odds ratio 2.35; 95% CI 1.25-4.44; P = 0.008; number needed to harm 7.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Even in the current era of society guidelines and use of advanced imaging CBD sludge or stones are absent in one out of five ERCPs performed for suspected CBD stones. The proportion of unnecessary ERCPs is lower in case of pre-procedural EUS or MRCP. A shorter time interval between EUS or MRCP increases the yield of ERCP for suspected CBD stones and should, therefore, preferably be performed within 2 days before ERCP.

Dynamic changes in liver function tests do not correctly reclassify patients at risk of choledocholithiasis beyond ASGE 2019 criteria

Introduction

Dynamic changes in liver function tests have been proposed to correctly reclassify the risk of choledocholithiasis; however, information is scarce and insufficient to recommend its use.

Methods

Retrospective cohort of patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) due to moderate and high risk of choledocholithiasis according to the 2019 American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines. We evaluated whether significant changes in liver function tests (bilirubin, transaminases, or alkaline phosphatase), defined as an increase or a reduction ⩾30 or ⩾50% between two measurements taken with a difference of 24-72 h can correctly reclassify the risk of choledocholithiasis beyond the ASGE guidelines. The net reclassification index (NRI) was calculated for patients with and without choledocholithiasis.

Results

Among 1175 patients who underwent ERCP, 170 patients were included in the analysis (59.4% women, median 59.5 years). Among patients without a diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, the number of patients correctly reclassified by transaminases was slightly higher than those incorrectly reclassified (NRI = 0.24 for aspartate amino transaminase and 0.20 for alanine amino transaminase). However, among patients with a diagnosis of choledocholithiasis, it led to incorrect reclassification in a greater number of cases (NRI = -0.21 and -0.14, respectively). The benefits of reclassification were minimal for bilirubin and alkaline phosphatase, or for value changes >50%. A subgroup analysis showed similar findings in patients without a history of cholecystectomy and in those with normal bile duct.

Conclusion

Dynamic changes in liver function tests do not improve choledocholithiasis risk classification beyond the 2019 ASGE criteria. New criteria should continue to be sought to optimize risk stratification.

Evaluation of ASGE Criteria for Prediction of Choledocholithiasis: Can Early Endoscopic Ultrasound Utilization Make the Prediction More Accurate?

Background

ASGE predictive model for the detection of choledocholithiasis is a reasonable approach for the management of patients with cholelithiasis. Surgeons do not pursue cholecystectomy without evaluation of the biliary system when laboratory tests and diagnostic imaging evidence show biliary duct involvement. Literature revisions reveal that the prediction of choledocholithiasis based on ASGE criteria suffers from poor accuracy which results in unnecessary ERCPs. We decided to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of the ASGE predictive model for the detection of choledocholithiasis with the hope that early EUS would obviate the need for unnecessary ERCPs among highly probable patients for choledocholithiasis based on ASGE criteria.

Methods

This is a prospective intervention and control study on the accuracy of ASGE criteria for the prediction of choledocholithiasis. To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of ASGE criteria, patients were followed in two groups of controls who were treated based on ASGE guidelines and cases who underwent primary EUS. The clinical relevance of the ASGE criteria was estimated by sensitivity and specificity using SPSS Statistics 28 software. Then, absolute risk reduction utilizing primary EUS was also calculated.

Results

The sensitivity and specificity of the ASGE predictive guideline for choledocholithiasis were estimated to be 62.31% and 51.85%, respectively. Evaluation of the ASGE guideline also revealed that patients in the intermediate probability group who finally required ERCP based on EUS results (false-negatives) were estimated to be 49.1% and patients who were predicted to require ERCP but finally did not need ERCP (false positives) were estimated to be 37.68%. The comparison of the two groups revealed the need for ERCP in about 55.56% of the primary EUS group and 77.42% in the ASGE group. Utilization of primary EUS reduced the need for ERCP by an absolute risk reduction of 0.299. (Primary Endpoint).

Conclusion

ASGE guideline is associated with the overestimation of ERCP in cholelithiasis. The usage of primary EUS will reduce the need for ERCP.

Low Detection Rates of Bile Duct Stones During Endoscopic Treatment for Highly Suspected Bile Duct Stones with No Imaging Evidence of Stones

BACKGROUND

The revised American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guideline 2019 provides the high-risk criteria for suspected common bile duct stones (CBDSs).

AIMS

To evaluate CBDS detection rates during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in high-risk patients with suspected CBDSs based on the ASGE guideline 2019.

METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study included 1100 consecutive patients who underwent ERCP for suspected CBDSs with any high-risk criteria based on the revised ASGE guideline 2019: Criterion 1, CBDSs on imaging; Criterion 2, clinical ascending cholangitis; and Criterion 3, total bilirubin exceeding 4 mg/dL and dilated common bile duct on imaging. We compared CBDS detection rates during ERCP based on individual and combined high-risk criteria.

RESULTS

The CBDS detection rates of patients who met any of the criteria, only Criterion 1, and Criteria 2 or 3 were 86.0% (946/1100), 93.4% (113/121), and 50.0% (106/212), respectively. In patients who met Criteria 1 and 2, 1 and 3, 2 and 3, and all criteria, CBDSs were confirmed during ERCP in 95.1% (490/515), 96.2% (25/26), 55.3% (26/47), and 98.4% (186/189), respectively. The CBDS detection rate during ERCP of patients with at least Criterion 1 significantly exceeded that of patients without at least Criterion 1 [95.7% (814/851) vs. 51.0% (132/259), respectively, P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CBDS visualization on imaging have very high CBDS detection rates during ERCP. However, performing ERCP on patients with only clinical predictors, such as cholangitis and dilated CBD with total bilirubin exceeding 4 mg/dL, often results in unnecessary ERCP.

Test Performance Characteristics of Dynamic Liver Enzyme Trends in the Prediction of Choledocholithiasis

(1) Background: Various methods to predict the presence or absence of choledocholithiasis (CDL) have been proposed. We aimed to assess the performance characteristics of dynamic liver enzyme trends in the prediction of CDL. (2) Methods: This was a single-center retrospective cohort study. All adult in-patients undergoing endoscopy for suspected CDL between 1 January 2012 and 7 October 2018 were identified, with patients with prior cholecystectomy, prior sphincterotomy, or indwelling biliary prostheses were excluded. Available laboratory parameters within 72 h preceding the procedure were recorded, allowing for the assessment of trends. Dynamic enzyme trends were defined as any increase or decrease by 30% and 50% within 72 h of the index procedure. (3) Results: A total of 878 patients were included. Mean age was 61.8 years, with 58.6% female. Increases in alkaline phosphatase (ALP) of at least 30% or 50% were both specific for the presence of CDL, with specificities of 82.7% (95% CI 69.7–91.8%) and 88.5% (95% CI 76.6–95.6%), respectively. Decreases in bilirubin or ALP of at least 50% were highly specific for the absence of CDL, with specificities of 91.7% (95% CI 85.7–95.8%) and 100.0% (97.2–100.0%), respectively. (4) Conclusions: Several liver enzyme trends appear to be specific for the absence or presence of stones; in particular, significant decreases in total bilirubin or ALP of at least 30–50% over the prior 72 h appear to be especially predictive of an absence of intraductal findings during endoscopy.

Evaluation of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2019 and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines' performances for choledocholithiasis prediction in clinically suspected patients: A retrospective cohort study

Background and Aim

The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) have published guidelines for choledocholithiasis. However, the guidelines were formulated using data from a large number of patients with no to low risk of common bile duct (CBD) stones. This study aimed to assess the guidelines' predictive performance in a population with a high frequency of stones.

Methods

Data for three choledocholithiasis standard reference tests were retrospectively reviewed from January 2019 to June 2021. Clinical parameters were used to categorize patients into risk groups according to the guidelines, and then the guidelines' predictive abilities were calculated.

Results

Among 1185 patients, 521 were included. The stone prevalence was 61.0% (n = 318). Twelve (2.3%), 146 (28.0%), and 363 (69.7%) patients were classified into low‐, intermediate‐, and high‐risk groups according to the ASGE guidelines, and 30 (5.8%), 149 (28.6%), and 342 (65.6%) according to the ESGE guidelines. Focusing on the high‐risk group, the ASGE guidelines had a positive predictive value of 73.6 and a positive likelihood ratio of 1.78. The ESGE guidelines had a positive predictive value of 73.7 and positive likelihood ratio of 1.79. Both guidelines had equivalent areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65–0.73) and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.64–0.72), respectively.

Conclusion

In the high‐risk group, the guidelines increased the chance of detecting choledocholithiasis by approximately 10% (61.0% prevalence to 73.6 and 73.7% positive predictive value). However, statistically, the guidelines had marginal discriminative performance in a population with high stone prevalence.

Accuracy of SAGES, ASGE, and ESGE criteria in predicting choledocholithiasis

BACKGROUND

Patients with suspected choledocholithiasis (CDL) are stratified as high-risk (HR), intermediate-risk (IR), and low-risk (LR) according to the guidelines of Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE), and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). Although these approaches are invaluable, paucity of validation studies are currently available. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the above risk stratification criteria in predicting CDL.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 280 patients with suspected CDL. All patients were stratified according to above professional societies as HR, IR, and LR, and diagnostic performance was evaluated.

RESULTS

In the HR group, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were 0.77 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.70-0.84], 0.75 (95% CI, 0.68-0.81), and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.68-0.81) for SAGES, ASGE, and ESGE criteria, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy were 78.93% (81.13% sensitivity, 72.06% specificity), 75% (75.47% sensitivity, 73.53% specificity), and 70% (66.04% sensitivity, 82.35% specificity) for SAGES, ASGE, and ESGE criteria, respectively. Regarding the IR group, the diagnostic accuracy were 22.50% (16.98% sensitivity, 39.71% specificity), 25% (24.53% sensitivity, 26.47% specificity), and 30.00% (33.49% sensitivity, 19.12% specificity) for SAGES, ASGE, and ESGE criteria, respectively. The common bile duct stone (CBDS) visualized on imaging has the highest risk for CDL [odds ratio (OR), 13.59 (95% CI, 5.26-35.12)], followed by CBDS plus dilated common bile duct [OR, 13.33 (95% CI, 5.16-34.47)], CBDS plus cholangitis [OR, 13.33 (95% CI, 3.17-56.15)], and CBDS plus total bilirubin level > 1.7 mg/dL [OR, 9.89 (95% CI, 3.47-28.20)].

CONCLUSIONS

The current SAGES, ASGE, and ESGE criteria have acceptable diagnostic accuracy for CDL. The patients with visualized CBDS on imaging have the highest risk for CDL.

National adherence to the ASGE-SAGES guidelines for managing suspected choledocholithiasis: An EAST multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons provide guidelines for managing suspected common bile duct (CBD) stones. We sought to evaluate adherence to the guidelines among patients with choledocholithiasis and/or acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP) and to evaluate the ability of these guidelines to predict choledocholithiasis.

METHODS

We prospectively identified patients undergoing same-admission cholecystectomy for choledocholithiasis and/or ABP from 2016 to 2019 at 12 United States medical centers. Predictors of suspected CBD stones were very strong (CBD stone on ultrasound; bilirubin >4 mg/dL), strong (CBD > 6 mm; bilirubin ≥1.8 to ≤4 mg/dL), or moderate (abnormal liver function tests other than bilirubin; age >55 years; ABP). Patients were grouped by probability of CBD stones: high (any very strong or both strong predictors), low (no predictors), or intermediate (any other predictor combination). The management of each probability group was compared with the recommended management in the guidelines.

RESULTS

The cohort was comprised of 844 patients. High-probability patients had 64.3% (n = 238/370) deviation from guidelines, intermediate-probability patients had 29% (n = 132/455) deviation, and low-probability patients had 78.9% (n = 15/19) deviation. Acute biliary pancreatitis increased the odds of deviation for the high- (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-2.8; p = 0.03) and intermediate-probability groups (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.07-2.42; p = 0.02). Age older than 55 years (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.4-3.43; p < 0.001) also increased the odds of deviation for the intermediate group. A CBD greater than 6 mm predicted choledocholithiasis in the high (adjusted OR (aOR), 2.16; 95% CI, 1.17-3.97; p = 0.01) and intermediate group (aOR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.59-4.86; p < 0.001). Any very strong predictor (aOR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.76-3.37; p < 0.0001) and both strong predictors predicted choledocholithiasis (aOR, 2; 95% CI, 1.35-2.96; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Almost 45% of patients with suspected CBD stones were managed discordantly from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons guidelines. We believe these guidelines warrant revision to better reflect the ability of the clinical variables at predicting choledocholithiasis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Predicting common bile duct stones: Comparison of SAGES, ASGE and ESGE criteria for accuracy

OBJECTIVE

To determine accuracy of SAGES, ASGE and ESGE criteria for predicting presence of common bile duct (CBD) stones.

METHODS

In a prospective study at Jinnah Hospital Lahore from March 2021 to February 2022, patients with suspected CBD stone were stratified in High risk (HR), intermediate risk (IR) and low risk (LR) for SAGES, ASGE and ESGE criteria. All patients underwent ERCP and risk strata were analyzed using SPSS 22® for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy.

RESULTS

In 90 patients with mean age 45.18(±14.87) and male/female ratio 0.64(35/55), area Under Curve (AUC) for predicting CBD stones was 0.75, 0.81and 0.83 for HR and 0.28, 0.52 and 0.52 for IR group while it was 0.53, 0.81 and 0.53 for absence of stone in LR group of SAGES, ASGE and ESGE criteria respectively. HR groups had accuracy of 81.1%, 86.7% and 87.8% in predicting CBD stone while LR criteria had 68.8%, 86.7% and 68.1% accuracy in predicting absence of CBD stone for SAGES, ASGE and ESGE respectively.

CONCLUSION

HR strata of SAGES, ASGE and ESGE scores have excellent accuracy in predicting CBD stones whereas IR and LR criteria are suboptimal for excluding CBD stones.