Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Item TypeItem Type
-
SubjectSubject
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersSourceLanguage
Done
Filters
Reset
12,234
result(s) for
"Gallstones"
Sort by:
Risk Factors for Symptomatic Gallstone Disease and Gallstone Formation After Bariatric Surgery
by
Guman, Maimoena S. S.
,
Dijkgraaf, Marcel G. W.
,
Haal, Sylke
in
Asymptomatic
,
Bariatric Surgery - adverse effects
,
Disease prevention
2022
Purpose
Patients who undergo bariatric surgery are at risk for developing cholesterol gallstones. We aimed to identify risk factors that are associated with symptomatic gallstone disease and gallstone formation after bariatric surgery.
Materials and Methods
We included participants of the UPGRADE trial, a multicenter randomized placebo-controlled trial on the prevention of symptomatic gallstone disease with ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) after bariatric surgery. The association between patient characteristics and symptomatic gallstone disease, and gallstone formation was evaluated using logistic regression analysis.
Results
Of 959 patients, 78 (8%) developed symptomatic gallstone disease within 24 months. Risk factors were the presence of a pain syndrome (OR 2.07; 95% CI 1.03 to 4.17) and asymptomatic gallstones before surgery (OR 3.15; 95% CI 1.87 to 5.33). Advanced age (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97) was protective, and UDCA prophylaxis did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.39 to 1.03). No risk factors were identified for gallstone formation, whereas advanced age (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.96 to 1.00), statin use (OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.90), and UDCA prophylaxis (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.73) all reduced the risk.
Conclusion
Young patients with a preoperative pain syndrome and/or asymptomatic gallstones before bariatric surgery are at increased risk for symptomatic gallstone disease after surgery. Whether statins, either alone or in combination with UDCA prophylaxis, can further reduce the burden of gallstones after bariatric surgery should be investigated prospectively.
Graphical abstract
Journal Article
Urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment in predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis (APEC): a multicentre randomised controlled trial
by
Erler, Nicole S
,
van Eijck, Casper H J
,
Smeets, Xavier J N M
in
Acute Disease
,
Aged
,
Bacteremia
2020
It remains unclear whether urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with biliary sphincterotomy improves the outcome of patients with gallstone pancreatitis without concomitant cholangitis. We did a randomised trial to compare urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment in patients with predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis.
In this multicentre, parallel-group, assessor-masked, randomised controlled superiority trial, patients with predicted severe (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score ≥8, Imrie score ≥3, or C-reactive protein concentration >150 mg/L) gallstone pancreatitis without cholangitis were assessed for eligibility in 26 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based randomisation module with randomly varying block sizes to urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy (within 24 h after hospital presentation) or conservative treatment. The primary endpoint was a composite of mortality or major complications (new-onset persistent organ failure, cholangitis, bacteraemia, pneumonia, pancreatic necrosis, or pancreatic insufficiency) within 6 months of randomisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN97372133.
Between Feb 28, 2013, and March 1, 2017, 232 patients were randomly assigned to urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy (n=118) or conservative treatment (n=114). One patient from each group was excluded from the final analysis because of cholangitis (urgent ERCP group) and chronic pancreatitis (conservative treatment group) at admission. The primary endpoint occurred in 45 (38%) of 117 patients in the urgent ERCP group and in 50 (44%) of 113 patients in the conservative treatment group (risk ratio [RR] 0·87, 95% CI 0·64–1·18; p=0·37). No relevant differences in the individual components of the primary endpoint were recorded between groups, apart from the occurrence of cholangitis (two [2%] of 117 in the urgent ERCP group vs 11 [10%] of 113 in the conservative treatment group; RR 0·18, 95% CI 0·04–0·78; p=0·010). Adverse events were reported in 87 (74%) of 118 patients in the urgent ERCP group versus 91 (80%) of 114 patients in the conservative treatment group.
In patients with predicted severe gallstone pancreatitis but without cholangitis, urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy did not reduce the composite endpoint of major complications or mortality, compared with conservative treatment. Our findings support a conservative strategy in patients with predicted severe acute gallstone pancreatitis with an ERCP indicated only in patients with cholangitis or persistent cholestasis.
The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, Fonds NutsOhra, and the Dutch Patient Organization for Pancreatic Diseases.
Journal Article
Updated guideline on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS)
2017
Common bile duct stones (CBDS) are estimated to be present in 10–20% of individuals with symptomatic gallstones. They can result in a number of health problems, including pain, jaundice, infection and acute pancreatitis. A variety of imaging modalities can be employed to identify the condition, while management of confirmed cases of CBDS may involve endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, surgery and radiological methods of stone extraction. Clinicians are therefore confronted with a number of potentially valid options to diagnose and treat individuals with suspected CBDS. The British Society of Gastroenterology first published a guideline on the management of CBDS in 2008. Since then a number of developments in management have occurred along with further systematic reviews of the available evidence. The following recommendations reflect these changes and provide updated guidance to healthcare professionals who are involved in the care of adult patients with suspected or proven CBDS. It is not a protocol and the recommendations contained within should not replace individual clinical judgement.
Journal Article
Patient selection for urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography by endoscopic ultrasound in predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis (APEC-2): a multicentre prospective study
by
Erler, Nicole S
,
van Eijck, Casper H J
,
Hazen, Wouter L
in
Acute Disease
,
acute pancreatitis
,
Bile ducts
2023
ObjectiveRoutine urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (ES) does not improve outcome in patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis. Improved patient selection for ERCP by means of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for stone/sludge detection may challenge these findings.DesignA multicentre, prospective cohort study included patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis. Patients underwent urgent EUS, followed by ERCP with ES in case of common bile duct stones/sludge, within 24 hours after hospital presentation and within 72 hours after symptom onset. The primary endpoint was a composite of major complications or mortality within 6 months after inclusion. The historical control group was the conservative treatment arm (n=113) of the randomised APEC trial (Acute biliary Pancreatitis: urgent ERCP with sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment, patient inclusion 2013–2017) applying the same study design.ResultsOverall, 83 patients underwent urgent EUS at a median of 21 hours (IQR 17–23) after hospital presentation and at a median of 29 hours (IQR 23–41) after start of symptoms. Gallstones/sludge in the bile ducts were detected by EUS in 48/83 patients (58%), all of whom underwent immediate ERCP with ES. The primary endpoint occurred in 34/83 patients (41%) in the urgent EUS-guided ERCP group. This was not different from the 44% rate (50/113 patients) in the historical conservative treatment group (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.29; p=0.65). Sensitivity analysis to correct for baseline differences using a logistic regression model also showed no significant beneficial effect of the intervention on the primary outcome (adjusted OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.90, p=0.92).ConclusionIn patients with predicted severe acute biliary pancreatitis without cholangitis, urgent EUS-guided ERCP with ES did not reduce the composite endpoint of major complications or mortality, as compared with conservative treatment in a historical control group.Trial registration number ISRCTN15545919.
Journal Article
Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct stones: a randomized controlled trial
by
Subramaniam, Rajeshwari
,
Bansal, Virinder Kumar
,
Kumar, Atin
in
Abdominal Surgery
,
Adolescent
,
Adult
2014
Background
The ideal method for managing concomitant gallbladder stones and common bile duct (CBD) stones is debatable. The currently preferred method is two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). This prospective randomized trial compared the success and cost effectiveness of single- and two-stage management of patients with concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones.
Methods
Consecutive patients with concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones were randomized to either single-stage laparoscopic CBD exploration and cholecystectomy (group 1) or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for endoscopic extraction of CBD stones followed by LC (group 2). Success was defined as complete clearance of CBD and cholecystectomy by the intended method. Cost effectiveness was measured using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed to compare outcomes.
Results
From February 2009 to October 2012, 168 patients were randomized: 84 to the single-stage procedure (group 1) and 84 to the two-stage procedure (group 2). Both groups were matched with regard to demographic and clinical parameters. The success rates of laparoscopic CBD exploration and ERCP for clearance of CBD were similar (91.7 vs. 88.1 %). The overall success rate also was comparable: 88.1 % in group 1 and 79.8 % in group 2 (
p
= 0.20). Direct choledochotomy was performed in 83 of the 84 patients. The mean operative time was significantly longer in group 1 (135.7 ± 36.6 vs. 72.4 ± 27.6 min;
p
≤ 0.001), but the overall hospital stay was significantly shorter (4.6 ± 2.4 vs. 5.3 ± 6.2 days;
p
= 0.03). Group 2 had a significantly greater number of procedures per patient (
p
< 0.001) and a higher cost (
p
= 0.002). The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of postoperative wound infection rates or major complications.
Conclusions
Single- and two-stage management for uncomplicated concomitant gallbladder and CBD stones had similar success and complication rates, but the single-stage strategy was better in terms of shorter hospital stay, need for fewer procedures, and cost effectiveness.
Journal Article
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
by
Alemi Faezeh
,
Sivandzadeh, Gholam Reza
,
Eshraghi Mohsen
in
Bile ducts
,
Cholecystectomy
,
Gallstones
2022
BackgroundIn 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.MethodsTo 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionCBD stenting in patients with biliary pancreatitis and gallstone could reduce the risk of recurrence and remigration of gallstones in delayed cholecystectomy cases.
Journal Article
Same-admission versus interval cholecystectomy for mild gallstone pancreatitis (PONCHO): a multicentre randomised controlled trial
2015
In patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis, cholecystectomy during the same hospital admission might reduce the risk of recurrent gallstone-related complications, compared with the more commonly used strategy of interval cholecystectomy. However, evidence to support same-admission cholecystectomy is poor, and concerns exist about an increased risk of cholecystectomy-related complications with this approach. In this study, we aimed to compare same-admission and interval cholecystectomy, with the hypothesis that same-admission cholecystectomy would reduce the risk of recurrent gallstone-related complications without increasing the difficulty of surgery.
For this multicentre, parallel-group, assessor-masked, randomised controlled superiority trial, inpatients recovering from mild gallstone pancreatitis at 23 hospitals in the Netherlands (with hospital discharge foreseen within 48 h) were assessed for eligibility. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) were eligible for randomisation if they had a serum C-reactive protein concentration less than 100 mg/L, no need for opioid analgesics, and could tolerate a normal oral diet. Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class III physical status who were older than 75 years of age, all ASA class IV patients, those with chronic pancreatitis, and those with ongoing alcohol misuse were excluded. A central study coordinator randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) by computer-based randomisation, with varying block sizes of two and four patients, to cholecystectomy within 3 days of randomisation (same-admission cholecystectomy) or to discharge and cholecystectomy 25–30 days after randomisation (interval cholecystectomy). Randomisation was stratified by centre and by whether or not endoscopic sphincterotomy had been done. Neither investigators nor participants were masked to group assignment. The primary endpoint was a composite of readmission for recurrent gallstone-related complications (pancreatitis, cholangitis, cholecystitis, choledocholithiasis needing endoscopic intervention, or gallstone colic) or mortality within 6 months after randomisation, analysed by intention to treat. The trial was designed to reduce the incidence of the primary endpoint from 8% in the interval group to 1% in the same-admission group. Safety endpoints included bile duct leakage and other complications necessitating re-intervention. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN72764151, and is complete.
Between Dec 22, 2010, and Aug 19, 2013, 266 inpatients from 23 hospitals in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to interval cholecystectomy (n=137) or same-admission cholecystectomy (n=129). One patient from each group was excluded from the final analyses, because of an incorrect diagnosis of pancreatitis in one patient (in the interval group) and discontinued follow-up in the other (in the same-admission group). The primary endpoint occurred in 23 (17%) of 136 patients in the interval group and in six (5%) of 128 patients in the same-admission group (risk ratio 0·28, 95% CI 0·12–0·66; p=0·002). Safety endpoints occurred in four patients: one case of bile duct leakage and one case of postoperative bleeding in each group. All of these were serious adverse events and were judged to be treatment related, but none led to death.
Compared with interval cholecystectomy, same-admission cholecystectomy reduced the rate of recurrent gallstone-related complications in patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis, with a very low risk of cholecystectomy-related complications.
Dutch Digestive Disease Foundation.
Journal Article