X线监视下激光碎石治疗难治性胆总管结石的效果研究

目的 探讨X线监视下激光碎石治疗难治性胆总管结石的效果和安全性.方法 将40例难治性胆总管结石患者分为两组,分别在子镜监视下（子镜监视组,21例）及X线监视下（X线监视组,19例）进行激光碎石治疗,比较两组间结石取净率、并发症发生率.结果 子镜监视组共取净结石19例（90.5%）,X线监视组取净17例（89.5%）,两组间结石取净率差异无统计学意义（P=0.658） 两组间并发症发生率差异无统计学意义（19.0%比15.8% P=0.559）.结论 治疗难治性胆总管结石X线监视与子镜监视两种方法是同样安全有效.     

X线监视下激光碎石治疗难治性胆总管结石的效果研究

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluoroscopy guided frequency-doubled double-pulsed laser lithotripsy for removing difficult bile duct stones. Methods From March 2008 to December 2009, patients with difficult bile duct stones were divided into cholangioscopy guided group ( n = 21 )and fluoroscopy guided group ( n = 19) to receive corresponding treatments. The success rate of complete stone removal and the complication rate related to the procedure were compared between the two groups.Results There are no significant differences between 2 groups in regarding of either success rate of complete stone removal ( 19/21, 90. 5% in cholangioscopy guided group vs. 17/19, 89. 5% in fluoroscopy guided group, P ＞0. 05 ) or rate of procedure related complication (4/21, 19. 0% in cholangioscopy guided group vs. 3/19, 15. 8% in fluoroscopic guided group, P = 0. 559 ). Conclusion Frequency-doubled doublepulsed laser lithotripsy guided by cholangioscopy or fluoroscopy are both safe and effective.     

X线监视下激光碎石治疗难治性胆总管结石的效果研究

Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluoroscopy guided frequency-doubled double-pulsed laser lithotripsy for removing difficult bile duct stones. Methods From March 2008 to December 2009, patients with difficult bile duct stones were divided into cholangioscopy guided group ( n = 21 )and fluoroscopy guided group ( n = 19) to receive corresponding treatments. The success rate of complete stone removal and the complication rate related to the procedure were compared between the two groups.Results There are no significant differences between 2 groups in regarding of either success rate of complete stone removal ( 19/21, 90. 5% in cholangioscopy guided group vs. 17/19, 89. 5% in fluoroscopy guided group, P ＞0. 05 ) or rate of procedure related complication (4/21, 19. 0% in cholangioscopy guided group vs. 3/19, 15. 8% in fluoroscopic guided group, P = 0. 559 ). Conclusion Frequency-doubled doublepulsed laser lithotripsy guided by cholangioscopy or fluoroscopy are both safe and effective.     

Residual common bile duct stones on direct peroral cholangioscopy using ultraslim endoscope

AIM:To detect and manage residual common bile duct(CBD)stones using ultraslim endoscopic peroral cholangioscopy(POC)after a negative balloon-occluded cholangiography.METHODS:From March 2011 to December 2011,a cohort of 22 patients with CBD stones who underwent both endoscopic retrograde cholangiography(ERC)and direct POC were prospectively enrolled in this study.Those patients who were younger than 20 years of age,pregnant,critically ill,or unable to provide informed consent for direct POC,as well as those with concomitant gallbladder stones or CBD with diameters less than 10 mm were excluded.Direct POC using an ultraslim endoscope with an overtube balloon-assisted technique was carried out immediately after a negative balloon-occluded cholangiography was obtained.RESULTS:The ultraslim endoscope was able to be advanced to the hepatic hilum or the intrahepatic bile duct(IHD)in 8 patients(36.4%),to the extrahepatic bile duct where the hilum could be visualized in 10 patients(45.5%),and to the distal CBD where the hilum could not be visualized in 4 patients(18.2%).The procedure time of the diagnostic POC was 8.2 ± 2.9 min(range,5-18 min).Residual CBD stones were found in 5(22.7%)of the patients.There was one residual stone each in 3 of the patients,three in 1 patient,and more than five in 1 patient.The diameter of the residual stones ranged from 2-5 mm.In 2 of the patients,the residual stones were successfully extracted using either a retrieval balloon catheter(n = 1)or a basket catheter(n = 1)under direct endoscopic control.In the remaining 3 patients,the residual stones were removed using an irrigation and suction method under direct endoscopic visualization.There were no serious procedure-related complications,such as bleeding,pancreatitis,biliary tract infection,or perforation,in this study.CONCLUSION:Direct POC using an ultraslim endoscope appears to be a useful tool for both detecting and treating residual CBD stones after conventional ERC.     

Difficult bile duct stones

Opinion statement Bile duct stones are routinely removed at time of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) after biliary sphincterotomy with standard balloon or basket extraction techniques. However, in approximately 10% to 15% of patients, bile duct stones may be difficult to remove due to challenging access to the bile duct (periampullary diverticulum, Billroth II anatomy, Roux-en-Y gastrojejunostomy), large (> 15 mm in diameter) bile duct stones, intrahepatic stones, or impacted stones in the bile duct or cystic duct. The initial approach to the removal of the difficult bile duct stone is to ensure adequate biliary sphincter orifice diameter with extension of biliary sphincterotomy or balloon dilation of the orifice. Mechanical lithotripsy is a readily available adjunct to standard stone extraction techniques and should be available in all ERCP units. If stone extraction fails with these maneuvers, two or more bile duct stents should be inserted, and ursodiol added to aid in duct decompression, stone fragmentation, and stone dissolution. Follow-up ERCP attempts to remove the difficult bile duct stones may be performed locally if expertise is available or alternatively referred to a tertiary center for advanced extracorporeal or intracorporeal fragmentation (mother-baby laser or electrohydraulic lithotripsy) techniques. Nearly all patients with bile duct stones can be treated endoscopically if advanced techniques are utilized. For the rare patient who fails despite these efforts, surgical bile duct exploration, percutaneous approach to the bile duct, or long-term bile duct stenting should be discussed with the patient and family to identify the most appropriate therapeutic option. A thoughtful approach to each patient with difficult bile duct stones and a healthy awareness of the operator/endoscopy unit limitations is necessary to ensure the best patient outcomes. Consultation with a dedicated tertiary ERCP specialty center may be necessary.     

Common bile duct stones

Opinion statement  

ESWL experience in the therapy of difficult bile duct stones

In recent years, alternatives to surgery for difficult bile duct stones have been developed. Routine endoscopy fails in about 10% of patients. To verify the role of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in residual CBD stones, we treated 32 patients by HM4 or MPL 9000 Dornier lithotripters. Ten (34.4%) patients needed two extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy sessions, and 3 (10.3%) patients three. Complete clearance was achieved in 29 patients (90.6%) after one or more sessions either by endoscopic (20 pts) or percutaneous (9 pts) extraction of the debris; of the remaining 3 patients, in 2 a bilioduodenal stent was placed and in 1 electrohydraulic lithotripsy was performed. Eighteen and seven-tenths percent transient mild hemobilia, 12.5% microhematuria, and no mortality were observed. It is possible to state that in site- or size-related difficult biliary stones, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy is a rapid, safe, and highly effective treatment as an additional nonoperative option to resolve the failure of routine endoscopic measures.     

Endoscopy for bile duct stones

In the era of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and advanced non-invasive imaging studies, pre-operative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for bile duct stones should be reserved for selected patients. ERCP remains the therapy of choice for removal of bile duct stones in the post-cholecystectomy patient and in patients with intact gallbladders. Bile duct stones can be cleared in nearly all patients using endoscopic techniques of sphincterotomy and mechanical lithotripsy. Difficult or complex bile duct stones can be endoscopically removed in the majority of patients with additional techniques such as extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, intraductal lithotripsy and/or stent placement. In non-operative patients in whom stone clearance cannot be achieved, long-term stent placement is a potential option in patients who are not candidates for further therapy. Endoscopic therapy may be effective in selected patients with intrahepatic biliary stones.     

Asymptomatic common bile duct stones

Patients with asymptomatic bile duct stones exhibit typical signs, such as elevated liver function tests, dilated bile ducts on ultrasound, a history of jaundice, or pancreatitis. The incidence of asymptomatic bile duct stones is about 10%, but up to 2% of patients show no signs of the disease. Bile duct stones can be diagnosed by using clinical judgement, scoring systems, or discriminant function tests. Which diagnostic modality is most reliable, cost-effective and safe, varies with different hospitals. Which therapy is most effective, safe and the cheapest also varies with different departments, but in the future an increasing number of departments will use the one-stage laparoscopic approach.     

Influence of night duty on endoscopic therapy for bile duct stones

AIM To examine the influence of night duty(ND) on endoscopic therapy for biliary duct stones.METHODS The subjects consisted of 133 patients who received initial endoscopic therapy for biliary duct stones performed by eight endoscopists after they had been on(ND group, n = 34 patients) or not [day duty(DD) group, n = 99 patients]. Patient characteristics(age, gender, history of abdominal surgery, transverse diameter of the largest stone, number of stones), years of experience of the endoscopists, endoscopic procedures [sphincterotomy, papillary balloon dilation(EPBD), papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)], and outcomes of initial endoscopy(procedure time; rate of stone removal by the first endoscopist; proceduresuccess rate by the first endoscopist: removal of stones or endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage; rate of final stone removal; final procedure success rate; complications; hospitalization after the procedure) were compared retrospectively between the two groups. History of abdominal surgery and treatment outcomes were also compared between the groups for each of the four endoscopists who performed most of the procedures in the ND group.RESULTS There were no significant differences regarding the number of treatments performed by each endoscopist or the years of experience between the ND and DD groups. The frequency of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography procedures did not differ significantly between the groups. There were also no significant differences regarding patient characteristics: age, gender, history of abdominal surgery(ND 7: Billroth II 4, R-Y 3; DD 18: double tract reconstruction 1, Billroth I 3, Billroth II 6, R-Y 7, duodenoduodenostomy for annular pancreas 1), transverse diameter of largest stone, and number of stones between the two groups. Among the treatment procedures, the endoscopic s p h i n c t e r o t o m y a n d E P B D r a t e s d i d n o t d i f f e r significantly between the groups. However, EPLBD was performed more frequently in the ND group [47.1%(16/34) v s 19.2%(19/99)]. Regarding outcomes, there were no significant differences in the rate of stone removal, procedure success rate, complications(ND: pancreatitis 1; DD: pancreatitis 6, duodenal bleeding 1, decreased blood pressure 1, hypoxia 2), or hospitalization after the procedure. However, the procedure time was significantly longer in the ND group(71.5 ± 44.7 vs 54.2 ± 28.8). Among the four endoscopists, there were no significant differences in patient history of abdominal surgery, removal of stones, or procedure success rate. However, the procedure time for one endoscopist was significantly longer in the ND group.CONCLUSION The time required for endoscopic therapy for bile duct stones might be influenced by ND.     

���ܽ�ʯ��Ӱ��ѧ��ϼ���չ

胆管结石的影像学检查方法很多,就术前诊断而言,以超声为首选检查方法,但其容易受肠气干扰,显示胆总管结石的效果较差.对超声诊断效果不佳者,可进一步进行CT或MRI检查.CT检出高密度、低密度及部分混合密度结石的效果很好,但是容易漏诊等密度结石;而磁共振胰胆管成像能较全面显示胆管系统的解剖和结石,尤其对肝外胆管结石的诊断准确率很高,为其主要优点.     

Endoscopic management of bile duct stones

The surgical risk of common duct exploration for the treatment of biliary calculi is considerably higher than that of cholecystectomy. Therefore, introduction of endoscopic sphincterotomy in 1974 was a major advance. It has become the therapy of choice in cholecystectomized patients or in those with an increased operative risk. Endoscopic sphincterotomy has a mortality rate of around 1% and a morbidity rate of 7%. These figures compare favourably with open surgery, especially in old patients. The procedure fails in about 10% of all patients referred for endoscopic removal of their calculi. However, several techniques have been described or are currently under evaluation to overcome these failures: intracorporeal or extracorporeal lithotripsy, long-term stenting of the bile duct, or direct application of solvents. Long-term follow-up studies show that between 2% and 20% of successfully managed patients may develop recurrent stones, mainly caused by bile stasis and infection. Patients with a functioning gall-bladder and no concomitant gall-bladder stones probably do not require cholecystectomy after successful endoscopic treatment of their choledochal stones. While endoscopic stone removal has replaced surgery in the elderly frail patients it has no major advantages in the young and fit patients, especially when the gall-bladder is still in situ.     

高龄患者胆总管巨大结石的内镜治疗

目的探讨内镜对高龄患者胆总管巨大结石的可行性和疗效。方法 29例高龄胆总管巨大结石患者完善术前准备,在密切监护下经十二指肠镜先行内镜下逆行胰胆管造影术(ERCP),胆总管显影发现结石,均给予内镜下括约肌切开术(EST)和机械碎石术(EML)取石。根据具体情况,留置鼻胆管引流。结果 28例取石成功,取石成功率96.6%,有11例行鼻胆管引流。乳头肌切口创面轻度渗血3例,一过性高淀粉酶血症8例,未发生严重并发症和死亡。结论 EST联合EML治疗高龄患者胆总管巨大结石安全有效,但娴熟的内镜操作技术、精心的术前准备及术中的仔细监护和处理是保证操作成功的重要条件。     

Endoscopic management of bile duct stones

The advantages of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) over open surgery make it the predominant method of treating choledocholithiasis. Today, technologic advances such as magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and laparoscopic surgery are challenging ERCP's primacy in the management of common bile duct (CBD) stones. This article reviews the current status of endoscopic treatment of biliary stones and examines this in relation to laparoscopic management. The techniques and safety of endoscopic sphincterotomy and balloon sphincteroplasty are reviewed. Balloon sphincteroplasty should be limited to study protocols because of safety questions and inherent limitations. After sphincterotomy, 85% to 90% of CBD stones can be removed with a Dormia basket or balloon catheter. These techniques are described as having both advantages and disadvantages. Methods for managing "difficult stones" include mechanical lithotripsy, intraductal shock wave lithotripsy, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, chemical dissolution, and biliary stenting. These approaches are presented along with data supporting their use in specific situations. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy has emerged as the preferred alternative to open cholecystectomy. Parallel advances in the endoscopic and laparoscopic management of CBD stones have made the issue regarding the optimal treatment strategy complex. Three approaches to the management of choledocholithiasis in the laparoscopic era are presented as follows: strict therapeutic splitting, flexible therapeutic splitting, and strict laparoscopic management. The optimal approach needs to be defined in prospective comparative trials. For now, preoperative endoscopic stone extraction should still be recommended as the approach of choice in patients suspected to have CBD stones based on clinical, biochemical, and imaging parameters. Primary laparoscopic evaluation and management is reasonable in patients who have a low-to-moderate probability of having CBD stones.     

Methyl tert butyl ether dissolution therapy for common bile duct stones

Methyl tert butyl ether (MTBE) is a potent cholesterol solvent. We have used MTBE in twelve patients with 19 large radiolucent common bile duct stones which could not be removed endoscopically. MTBE was instilled directly into the common bile duct via a nasobiliary or percutaneous catheter. Successful clearance of the duct was achieved in ten patients. The stones disappeared completely in three patients with MTBE alone; in the remaining seven, it was possible to extract the stones endoscopically after MTBE, even though there was no change in the cholangiographic appearance. MTBE may have a role in the management of large retained common bile duct calculi but, given the practical difficulties of administration, its use should only be considered when other methods have failed and a non-surgical approach is desired.