Explore the vast range of titles available.

The removal of large bile duct stones (>12 mm) after endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) remains a challenging issue in therapeutic endoscopy. The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled trial was to compare the effectiveness and complications of EST followed by large balloon dilation (LBD) with that of EST followed by mechanical lithotripsy (ML) for the management of large bile duct stones. A total of 90 patients with large bile duct stones (12-20 mm) were randomized to EST followed by LBD (n=45) or EST followed by ML (n=45). Success rate was determined with a final cholangiogram, whereas type and rate of post-procedure complications were assessed prospectively. Complete bile duct stone removal was accomplished in 97.7% of patients subjected to EST-LBD as compared with 91.1% of those subjected to EST-ML (P=0.36). Post-procedure complications were observed in two (4.4%) patients subjected to EST-LBD and in nine (20%) patients subjected to EST-ML (P=0.049). Rates of pancreatitis were similar between the two groups (one case in each), as was post-endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) hemorrhage (one case in each group). None of the patients subjected to EST-LBD developed cholangitis, while this was seen in six patients subjected to EST-ML (0.0 vs. 13.3%, P=0.026). One patient subjected to EST-ML developed perforation, which was successfully managed conservatively. None of our patients with complications died. EST followed by LBD is equally effective as EST followed by ML for the removal of large bile duct stones, although it is associated with fewer complications.

The last 30 years have seen major developments in the management of gallstone-related disease, which in the United States alone costs over 6 billion dollars per annum to treat. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) has become a widely available and routine procedure, whilst open cholecystectomy has largely been replaced by a laparoscopic approach, which may or may not include laparoscopic exploration of the common bile duct (LCBDE). In addition, new imaging techniques such as magnetic resonance cholangiography (MR) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) offer the opportunity to accurately visualise the biliary system without instrumentation of the ducts. As a consequence clinicians are now faced with a number of potentially valid options for managing patients with suspected CBDS. It is with this in mind that the following guidelines have been written.

Objectives To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the success and complication rate of percutaneous transhepatic fluoroscopy-guided management (PTFM) for the removal of common bile duct stones (CBDS). Methods A comprehensive literature search of multiple databases was conducted to identify original articles published between January 2010 and June 2022, reporting the success rate of PTFM for the removal of CBDS. A random-effect model was used to summarize the pooled rates of success and complications with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Eighteen studies involving 2554 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Failed or infeasible endoscopic management was the most common indication of PTFM. The meta-analytic summary estimates of PTFM for the removal of CBDS were as follows: rate of overall stone clearance 97.1% (95% CI, 95.7–98.5%); stone clearance at first attempt 80.5% (95% CI, 72.3–88.6%); overall complications 13.8% (95% CI, 9.7–18.0%); major complications 2.8% (95% CI, 1.4–4.2%); and minor complications 9.3% (95% CI, 5.7–12.8%). Egger’s tests showed the presence of publication bias with respect to the overall complications ( p  = 0.049). Transcholecystic management of CBDS had an 88.5% pooled rate for overall stone clearance (95% CI, 81.2–95.7%), with a 23.0% rate for complications (95% CI, 5.7–40.4%). Conclusion The systematic review and meta-analysis answer the questions of the overall stone clearance, clearance at first attempt, and complication rate of PTFM by summarizing the available literature. Percutaneous management could be considered in cases with failed or infeasible endoscopic management of CBDS. Clinical relevance statement This meta-analysis highlights the excellent stone clearance rate achieved through percutaneous transhepatic fluoroscopy-guided removal of common bile duct stones, potentially influencing clinical decision-making when endoscopic treatment is not feasible. Key Points • Percutaneous transhepatic fluoroscopy-guided management of common bile duct stones had a pooled rate of 97.1% for overall stone clearance and 80.5% for clearance at the first attempt . • Percutaneous transhepatic management of common bile duct stones had an overall complication rate of 13.8%, including a major complication rate of 2.8% . • Percutaneous transcholecystic management of common bile duct stones had an overall stone clearance rate of 88.5% and a complication rate of 23.0% .

Background Endoscopic gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy (EGPC) has become an alternative option for treating cholecystolithiasis. However, developing a new method of EGPC in which the gallbladder wall is not damaged remains a challenge. This study introduced a new EGPC method called endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) combined with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), which preserves the integrity of the gallbladder wall in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis complicated with choledocholithiasis. Methods In total, six patients (aged 23–72 years, 3 males and 3 females, Han ethnicity) who had large gallbladder stones (diameter ≥ 1 cm) complicated with common bile duct (CBD) stones and who underwent ERCP combined with ESWL at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from July 2022 to December 2022 were enrolled. The patients’ clinical characteristics, endoscopic treatment and follow-up data were analyzed. A paired t test was performed to compare the differences in the main serological indicators before and after EGPC. Results Of the six patients, five completed EGPC, and one failed due to intolerable abdominal pain during ESWL and was subsequently transferred to surgery. With respect to post-EGPC adverse events, one patient developed mild post-ERCP pancreatitis, and no other adverse events occurred. Both the technical success rate and clinical success rate of ERCP combined with ESWL were 83.3% and the incidence of adverse events was 16.7%. The six patients were followed up for an average of 24 months, during which only one patient experienced a recurrence of gallbladder stones at the 3-month follow-up, but no gallbladder stones were found at the 6-month follow-up after oral administration of ursodeoxycholic acid. Conclusions ERCP combined with ESWL is a potentially safe and effective treatment for large gallbladder stones. Trial registration This study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry site. [Registration number: ChiCTR2200060927 ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/ ); registration date: June 14, 2022].

Importance Choledocholithiasis, or bile duct gallstones, is effectively treated with surgery, which does not prevent relapse. A common adjuvant therapy is the stimulation of the Yanglingquan point (GB34). Acupoint catgut embedding (ACE), an acupoint stimulation therapy, may be a better treatment for choledocholithiasis. Objectives To investigate the effect of ACE in stimulating GB34 on bile metabolism and its possible mechanism via metabonomics. Methods In this study, we used ultrahigh performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) to analyze the changes in bile metabolites, metabolic pathways, and liver function indicators in 16 patients with choledocholithiasis before and after ACE stimulation. Results We identified 10 metabolites that exhibited significant differences in the bile before and after ACE, six of which significantly increased and four that significantly decreased. Moreover, six liver function indicators showed a downward trend. We identified related metabolic pathways as glycerophospholipid metabolism, steroid biosynthesis, and the citrate cycle (TCA cycle). Conclusions and Relevance This study shows that ACE stimulation of GB34 can effectively help treat choledocholithiasis, which may be clinically applicable to ACE.

Background Gallstone disease is common after bariatric surgery, and patients with bile duct stones in this cohort can be difficult to treat, due to the altered anatomy. This review aims to analyse the various management options available for choledocholithiasis in post-bariatric surgery patients. Methods A literature search of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane library databases was carried out for studies on this subject, between January 1970 and March 2017. After initial screening and further full text review, suitable studies were identified after applying the inclusion criteria. Results Twenty-nine studies were identified and analysed. Overtube-assisted endoscopy appears to be a popular technique, and 10 studies employing this technique were identified. Though there are minor variations between the three different types of overtube endoscopy, the success rate for ERCP with this approach is between 60 and 70%. Studies using a combination of radiological and endoscopic techniques report a success rate of 60–70%, though the endoscopic ultrasound-guided technique has been reported to have higher success rates (90–100%). Surgery-assisted ERCP also appears to be widely reported and has a consistently high ERCP success rate (80–100%), with an added advantage of the option to perform a concomitant cholecystectomy. There are very few reports on using surgery as the sole option in this scenario. Conclusion Both overtube-assisted endoscopy and laparoscopy-assisted ERCP appear to be safe, with good success rates. The other methods may be suitable for selected patients and centres with specific interest in such techniques.

Purpose of Review Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) has been proved to have better efficacy and safety in removing common bile duct stones. Conventional endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is usually performed before EPLBD. However, EPLBD without EST has recently reported short-term outcomes similar to those of EPLBD with EST. This article summarizes the latest research advances in EPLBD with or without EST for the treatment of large common bile duct stones (CBDS) as a way to provide further evidence to support the ERCP surgeon's choice of which technique to use for the treatment of large CBDS. Findings EPLBD alone is recommended in cases of anatomical abnormalities or bleeding tendencies. EPLBD with EST is recommended in patients with stenosis of the duodenal papilla or distal common bile duct or with periportal diverticula. Most clinical studies have shown that the clinical efficacy and incidence of adverse events associated with ESLBD are comparable to those of standalone EPLBD. However, further large-scale prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Background Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is the most frequently used technique for removal of stones from the bile duct. In recent years, endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) has been shown to be a safe and effective technique for the removal of large or difficult common bile duct stones. However, comparison of EPLBD and EST for effectiveness in bile duct stone removal has given inconsistent results. The present meta-analysis was carried out to compare the effect of EPLBD and EST in retrieval of choledocholithiasis. Methods A literature search was performed using Medline, PubMed, EMBase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for relevant articles published in English. A meta-analysis was performed on the retrieved studies. Results Seven randomized controlled trials and 790 patients were involved. EPLBD compared with EST resulted in similar outcomes for overall successful clearance rates of bile duct stones (97.35 vs. 96.35%, OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.58–2.82, P  = 0.54), stone clearance in the first ERCP session (87.87 vs. 84.15%, OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.81–2.11, P  = 0.21) and removal of large sized stones (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.21–5.64, P  = 0.49). EPLBD performed with either a short or a long ballooning time did not increase the bile duct stone clearance rate. EPLBD decreased overall usage of mechanical lithotripsy in the bile duct stone removal process (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30–0.86, P  = 0.01). However, no significant difference was found between EPLBD and EST in the use of mechanical lithotripsy for the removal of large sized stones (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.34–1.28, P  = 0.22). Compared with EST, EPLBD did not show a short ERCP duration (WMD −0.75, 95% CI −1.57 to 0.08, P  = 0.08). EPLBD was associated with fewer overall complications than EST (5.8 vs. 13.1%, OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24–0.68, P  = 0.0007). Hemorrhage occurred less frequently with EPLBD than with EST (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04–0.50, P  = 0.002). There was no significant difference in post-ERCP pancreatitis, perforation and cholangitis. Conclusions EPLBD is an effective and safe method for the removal of large or difficult common bile stones. EPLBD should be considered as an alternative to EST for patients in whom EST could not be routinely performed. Based on EPLBD causing fewer cases of hemorrhaging, EPLBD is also recommended for removal of large or difficult common bile duct stones in patients with an underlying coagulopathy or need for anticoagulation following ERCP. The long-term prognosis of EPLBD need to be further investigated.

We sought to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large balloon dilation (ESLBD) and to compare procedural time and fluoroscopy time of ESLBD with those of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) alone for patients with large bile duct stones. Retrospective analysis. A total of 101 patients with large bile duct stones were treated: 53 were treated by ESLBD and 48 with EST alone. ESLBD resulted in similar outcomes in overall successful stone removal (100% vs. 97%) and complications (4% vs. 6%); however, although the rate of complete stone removal in the first session using ESLBD tended to be higher than when EST alone was used, it was not statistically significant (96% vs. 85%, P=0.057). Mechanical lithotripsy was required significantly more often in the EST group compared to the ESLBD group (25% vs. 6%, P<0.01). Total procedure time in the ESLBD group was significantly shorter than that of the EST group (32 vs. 40 min, P<0.05). Total fluoroscopy time in the ESLBD group was significantly shorter in the EST group (13 vs. 22 min, P<0.05). ESLBD is an effective and safe treatment in patients with large bile duct stones. In addition, ESLBD appears to decrease procedure time and fluoroscopy time and reduce the need for mechanical lithotripsy as compared to EST alone.

Background Laparoscopic bile duct exploration (LBDE) is recommended in current treatment guidelines for the management of choledocholithiasis with gallbladder in situ. Failure of this technique is common as a consequence of large or impacted common bile duct (CBD) stones. In this series, we present our experience in using holmium laser lithotripsy as an adjunct to LBDE for the treatment of choledocholithiasis. Methods Between 2014 and 2016, eighteen laparoscopic bile duct explorations utilising holmium laser lithotripsy were performed after failure of standard retrieval techniques. Results Choledocholithiasis was successfully treated in 18 patients using laparoscopic holmium laser lithotripsy (transcystically in 14 patients). There was one failure where a CBD stricture prevented the scope reaching the stone. Two medical complications were recorded (Clavien–Dindo I and II). There were no mortalities or re-interventions. Conclusions LABEL technique is a successful and safe method to enhance LBDE in cases of impacted or large stones. In our experience, this approach increases the feasibility of the transcystic stone retrieval and may reduce overall operative time.