Electrohydraulic Lithotripsy for Difficult Bile Duct Stones under Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Peroral Transluminal Cholangioscopy Guidance

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) under endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) guidance can be an option to treat difficult stones. Recently, a digital, single-operator cholangioscope (SPY-DS) has become available. Peroral transluminal cholangioscopy (PTLC) using SPY-DS has also been reported. In this retrospective study, the technical feasibility and clinical effectiveness of EHL for difficult bile duct stones under ERCP guidance and under PTLC guidance was examined. METHODS: In this pilot study, patients with difficult bile duct stones between July 2016 and July 2017 were retrospectively enrolled. RESULTS: Forty-two consecutive patients underwent EHL using a SPY-DS; 34 patients underwent EHL under ERCP guidance, and the other 8 patients underwent EHL under PTLC guidance. Median procedure time was 31 minutes (range, 19 to 66 minutes). The median number of EHL sessions was 1 (range, 1 to 2), and that of ERCP sessions was also 1 (range, 1 to 3). The rate of complete stone clearance was 98% (41/42). Adverse events such as cholangitis and acute pancreatitis were seen in 14% (6/42), which could be treated conservatively. CONCLUSIONS: EHL using SPY-DS was technically feasible, not only under ERCP guidance, but also PTLC guidance. A prospective clinical study of EHL using SPY-DS is needed.

Clinical Outcome of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Abscess Drainage Using Self-Expandable Covered Metallic Stent (with Video).

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous drainage (PCD) is now the first-line drainage method for liver abscess because of its minimal invasiveness and high technical success rate. However, this procedure has several disadvantages, such as extra-drainage and self-tube removal. Recently, EUS-guided liver abscess drainage (EUS-AD) has been developed. However, only a few reports of EUS-AD have been reported. In addition, the clinical benefits of PCD and EUS-AD have not been reported. AIMS: In the present study, the safety and feasibility of EUS-AD using fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) and the clinical outcomes of EUS-AD and PCD were examined retrospectively. METHODS: Twenty-seven consecutive patients who underwent PCD or EUS-AD between April 2012 and April 2015 were included in this study. EUS-AD was performed using FCSEMS. In addition, to prevent stent migration, 7-Fr pig tail plastic stent was placed within FCSEMS. RESULTS: Technical success was achieved in all patients of both groups. Clinical success was 100 % in the EUS-AD group although it was 89 % in PCD group (P = 034). Three adverse events were seen in the PCD group (self-tube removal n = 1, tube migration n = 2), but no adverse events were seen in the EUS-AD group. The median hospital stay was significantly shorter in the EUS-AD group than in the PCD group (21 vs 41 days, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Because of the short hospital stay, the high clinical success rate, and the low adverse event rate compared to PCD, EUS-AD has potential as a first-line treatment for liver abscess.