De Jesús-Flores A, Guerrero-Martínez GA

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 423-427
PDF size: 151.44 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: Choledocholithiasis is one of the main complications of cholelithiasis with a prevalence in the Mexican population of 14%. The management through the guide proposed by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) in 2010 can support the surgeon for the timely resolution of the pathology. Objective: To determine that the guide proposed by ASGE for the management of choledocholithiasis in patients with “high risk” reduces the complications of this pathology. Methods: A comparative, retrospective case-control study was conducted from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2017. We included patients who were stratified at high risk of choledocholithiasis according to the ASGE guidelines. They were divided into 2 groups: the case group (diagnosis by ASGE guidelines) was submitted directly to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), the second group (no ASGE) followed the protocol of performing computed tomography, magnetic cholangioresonance, and finally ERCP. Results: Of 61 patients with choledocholithiasis, the following groups were compared: the appearance of cholangitis, the complications after ERCP, time of ERCP, days of hospital stay and mortality. Obtaining significant difference in: “complications post ERCP” group ASGE 3/35 (9%), group no ASGE 8/26 (30.7%) with OR of 0.2 (0.05 - 0.9 IC 95%) and a p = 0.03; “Cholangitis” group ASGE 2/35 (5.7%), group no ASGE 8/26 (30-7%) with ORP 0.13 (0.03-0.71 IC 95%) and p = 0.009. Conclusion: In our setting, the use of the ASGE guideline reduces the presence of cholangitis and post-ERCP complications.

REFERENCES

1. Cervantes J, Rojas G. El mito de los cálculos inocentes. Cir Cir. 2001;69:92-6.

2. Singhvi G, Ampara R, Baum J, Gumaste V. ASGE guidelines result in cost-saving in the management of choledocholithiasis. Ann Gastroenterol. 2016;29:85-90.

3. Fitzgerald J, White M, Lobo D. Couvoisier’s gallbladder: law or sign? World J Surg. 2009;33:886-9.

4. Maple J, Tamir B, Anderson M, Appalaneni V, Banerjee S, Cash BD, et al. The role of endoscopy in the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:1-9.

5. Hunt D. Common bile duct stones in non dilated bile ducts? An ultrasound study. Australas Radiol. 1996;40:221-2.

6. Urquhart P, Speer T, Gibson R. Challenging clinical paradigms of common bile duct diameter. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;74:378-9.

7. Prat F, Meduri B, Ducot B, Chiche R, Salimbeni-Bartolini R, Pelletier G. Prediction of common bile duct stones by noninvasive tests. Ann Surg. 1999;229:362-8.

8. Magalhaes J, Rosa B, Cotter J. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis: from guidelines to clinical practice. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;16:128-4.

9. Benites G, Palacios F, Asencios J. Rendimiento de los criterios predictivos ASGE en el diagnóstico de coledocolitiasis en el Hospital Edgardo Rebagliati Martins. Rev Gastroenterol Perú. 2017;37:111-9.

10. Sethi S, Wang F, Korson A, Krishnan S, Berzin T, Chuttani R, et al. Prospective assessment of consensus criteria for evaluation of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. Dig Endosc. 2016;28:75-82.

11. Rubin M, Thosani N, Tanikella R, Wolf D, Fallon M, Lukens F. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis: testing the current guidelines. Dig Liver Dis. 2013;45:744-9.

12. Adams M, Hosmer A. Predicting the likelihood of a persistent bile duct stone in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis: accuracy of existing guidelines and the impact of laboratory trends. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82:88-93.