PTU-5 Efficacy of cholangioscopic delivered electrohydraulic lithotripsy in a tertiary referral unit

IntroductionCholangioscopy with electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) is an evolving service to treat choledocholithiasis refractory to standard ERCP and is included in the BSG guidelines. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy and implications of a new tertiary Spyglass EHL service for treatment of r...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gut 2021-11, Vol.70 (Suppl 4), p.A43-A44
Hauptverfasser: Caracostea, Andra, Lake, Luke, Kotha, Sreelakshmi, Warner, Ben, Wong, Terry, Berry, Philip
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page A44
container_issue Suppl 4
container_start_page A43
container_title Gut
container_volume 70
creator Caracostea, Andra
Lake, Luke
Kotha, Sreelakshmi
Warner, Ben
Wong, Terry
Berry, Philip
description IntroductionCholangioscopy with electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) is an evolving service to treat choledocholithiasis refractory to standard ERCP and is included in the BSG guidelines. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy and implications of a new tertiary Spyglass EHL service for treatment of refractory gallstone disease.MethodsA review of prospectively collected data was performed for all EHL Spyglass procedures performed from 01.12.2018 to 31.12.2019 at St Thomas’ Hospital. Procedural duration was determined by the time between first and last fluoroscopic image taken. Stone burden was assessed by examination of fluoroscopic images. ERCP Spyglass DS1 and Autolith Touch II EHL Generator was used for all procedures.Results57 Spyglass EHL procedures were performed between January 2018 and December 2019 on 40 patients (75% females, 25% males with a mean age of 65). All cases had failed stone clearance at standard ERCP prior to this. Mean diameter of the largest stone was 1.83cm with a range of 1-3.5cm. All stones were < 2cm in patients who achieved ductal clearance in 1 procedure.Out of 40 patients, 9 were excluded as they were awaiting further EHL for duct clearance. 31/31 (100%) achieved ductal clearance at the last procedure. Ductal clearance was achieved with 1 EHL session in 11/31(35.5%), 2 EHL sessions in 11/31(35.5%), 3 EHL sessions in 7/31(23%) and 4 sessions in 2/31(6%). There was no correlation between number of stones and number or duration of EHL sessions.The average number of shocks used in one EHL was 1600 shocks. Average time spent on one EHL was 78 minutes. In 2018, 37.1 hours were used for Spyglass EHL in total (this does not include diagnostic Spyglass procedures).Documented complications occurred in 2/57(3.5%) procedures; 1 peri-pancreatic abscess with necrotic nodes and 1 lingual haematoma secondary to intubation. There were no reported cases of pancreatitis or 30 day mortality.ConclusionsCholangioscopy with EHL is an effective treatment for refractory choledocolithiasis, achieving 100% ductal clearance, with a low rate of complications. However the procedural duration and number of repeat procedures required based on stones size/burden is difficult to predict. This data will be useful to centres planning to roll out a Spyglass-EHL service.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-BSG.78
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_bmj_j</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2594957208</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2594957208</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b1118-dec2a604cae513ac29b96c41aba6e64209ae37569b4fa95bba59a32a0060ede23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkEFLwzAcxYMoOKdfwFPAc2aSNmly1KFTGCi4ncu_abqlxGamqdCbF7-on8SNCZ7e4f14D34IXTM6YyyTt5shtZ0nnHJG7t8Ws0KdoAnLpSIZV-oUTShlBRFFrs_RRd-3lFKlNJug5nW1JuLn6_uhaZwBM-LQYLMNHrqNC70JO2dwbb37tNHW2HprUgzbsY4w-H3lXdqGFN2uH7HrMOBkY3IQRxxtY2MEj4fOpUt01oDv7dVfTtH68WE1fyLLl8Xz_G5JKsaYIrU1HCTNDVjBMjBcV1qanEEF0sqcUw02K4TUVd6AFlUFQkPGgVJJbW15NkU3x91dDB-D7VPZhiF2-8uSC51rUXCq9tTsSFXv7T_AaHlwWR5dlgeX5d5lWajsF_V0bDU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2594957208</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>PTU-5 Efficacy of cholangioscopic delivered electrohydraulic lithotripsy in a tertiary referral unit</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Caracostea, Andra ; Lake, Luke ; Kotha, Sreelakshmi ; Warner, Ben ; Wong, Terry ; Berry, Philip</creator><creatorcontrib>Caracostea, Andra ; Lake, Luke ; Kotha, Sreelakshmi ; Warner, Ben ; Wong, Terry ; Berry, Philip</creatorcontrib><description>IntroductionCholangioscopy with electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) is an evolving service to treat choledocholithiasis refractory to standard ERCP and is included in the BSG guidelines. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy and implications of a new tertiary Spyglass EHL service for treatment of refractory gallstone disease.MethodsA review of prospectively collected data was performed for all EHL Spyglass procedures performed from 01.12.2018 to 31.12.2019 at St Thomas’ Hospital. Procedural duration was determined by the time between first and last fluoroscopic image taken. Stone burden was assessed by examination of fluoroscopic images. ERCP Spyglass DS1 and Autolith Touch II EHL Generator was used for all procedures.Results57 Spyglass EHL procedures were performed between January 2018 and December 2019 on 40 patients (75% females, 25% males with a mean age of 65). All cases had failed stone clearance at standard ERCP prior to this. Mean diameter of the largest stone was 1.83cm with a range of 1-3.5cm. All stones were &lt; 2cm in patients who achieved ductal clearance in 1 procedure.Out of 40 patients, 9 were excluded as they were awaiting further EHL for duct clearance. 31/31 (100%) achieved ductal clearance at the last procedure. Ductal clearance was achieved with 1 EHL session in 11/31(35.5%), 2 EHL sessions in 11/31(35.5%), 3 EHL sessions in 7/31(23%) and 4 sessions in 2/31(6%). There was no correlation between number of stones and number or duration of EHL sessions.The average number of shocks used in one EHL was 1600 shocks. Average time spent on one EHL was 78 minutes. In 2018, 37.1 hours were used for Spyglass EHL in total (this does not include diagnostic Spyglass procedures).Documented complications occurred in 2/57(3.5%) procedures; 1 peri-pancreatic abscess with necrotic nodes and 1 lingual haematoma secondary to intubation. There were no reported cases of pancreatitis or 30 day mortality.ConclusionsCholangioscopy with EHL is an effective treatment for refractory choledocolithiasis, achieving 100% ductal clearance, with a low rate of complications. However the procedural duration and number of repeat procedures required based on stones size/burden is difficult to predict. This data will be useful to centres planning to roll out a Spyglass-EHL service.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0017-5749</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-3288</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2021-BSG.78</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology</publisher><subject>Cancer ; Cholangitis ; Colonoscopy ; COVID-19 ; Dysphagia ; Endoscopy ; Hematoma ; Intubation ; Lithotripsy ; Mortality ; Pancreatitis ; Patients ; Tumors</subject><ispartof>Gut, 2021-11, Vol.70 (Suppl 4), p.A43-A44</ispartof><rights>Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.</rights><rights>2021 Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Caracostea, Andra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lake, Luke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotha, Sreelakshmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warner, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Terry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berry, Philip</creatorcontrib><title>PTU-5 Efficacy of cholangioscopic delivered electrohydraulic lithotripsy in a tertiary referral unit</title><title>Gut</title><addtitle>Gut</addtitle><description>IntroductionCholangioscopy with electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) is an evolving service to treat choledocholithiasis refractory to standard ERCP and is included in the BSG guidelines. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy and implications of a new tertiary Spyglass EHL service for treatment of refractory gallstone disease.MethodsA review of prospectively collected data was performed for all EHL Spyglass procedures performed from 01.12.2018 to 31.12.2019 at St Thomas’ Hospital. Procedural duration was determined by the time between first and last fluoroscopic image taken. Stone burden was assessed by examination of fluoroscopic images. ERCP Spyglass DS1 and Autolith Touch II EHL Generator was used for all procedures.Results57 Spyglass EHL procedures were performed between January 2018 and December 2019 on 40 patients (75% females, 25% males with a mean age of 65). All cases had failed stone clearance at standard ERCP prior to this. Mean diameter of the largest stone was 1.83cm with a range of 1-3.5cm. All stones were &lt; 2cm in patients who achieved ductal clearance in 1 procedure.Out of 40 patients, 9 were excluded as they were awaiting further EHL for duct clearance. 31/31 (100%) achieved ductal clearance at the last procedure. Ductal clearance was achieved with 1 EHL session in 11/31(35.5%), 2 EHL sessions in 11/31(35.5%), 3 EHL sessions in 7/31(23%) and 4 sessions in 2/31(6%). There was no correlation between number of stones and number or duration of EHL sessions.The average number of shocks used in one EHL was 1600 shocks. Average time spent on one EHL was 78 minutes. In 2018, 37.1 hours were used for Spyglass EHL in total (this does not include diagnostic Spyglass procedures).Documented complications occurred in 2/57(3.5%) procedures; 1 peri-pancreatic abscess with necrotic nodes and 1 lingual haematoma secondary to intubation. There were no reported cases of pancreatitis or 30 day mortality.ConclusionsCholangioscopy with EHL is an effective treatment for refractory choledocolithiasis, achieving 100% ductal clearance, with a low rate of complications. However the procedural duration and number of repeat procedures required based on stones size/burden is difficult to predict. This data will be useful to centres planning to roll out a Spyglass-EHL service.</description><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Cholangitis</subject><subject>Colonoscopy</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>Dysphagia</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Hematoma</subject><subject>Intubation</subject><subject>Lithotripsy</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Pancreatitis</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><issn>0017-5749</issn><issn>1468-3288</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkEFLwzAcxYMoOKdfwFPAc2aSNmly1KFTGCi4ncu_abqlxGamqdCbF7-on8SNCZ7e4f14D34IXTM6YyyTt5shtZ0nnHJG7t8Ws0KdoAnLpSIZV-oUTShlBRFFrs_RRd-3lFKlNJug5nW1JuLn6_uhaZwBM-LQYLMNHrqNC70JO2dwbb37tNHW2HprUgzbsY4w-H3lXdqGFN2uH7HrMOBkY3IQRxxtY2MEj4fOpUt01oDv7dVfTtH68WE1fyLLl8Xz_G5JKsaYIrU1HCTNDVjBMjBcV1qanEEF0sqcUw02K4TUVd6AFlUFQkPGgVJJbW15NkU3x91dDB-D7VPZhiF2-8uSC51rUXCq9tTsSFXv7T_AaHlwWR5dlgeX5d5lWajsF_V0bDU</recordid><startdate>20211107</startdate><enddate>20211107</enddate><creator>Caracostea, Andra</creator><creator>Lake, Luke</creator><creator>Kotha, Sreelakshmi</creator><creator>Warner, Ben</creator><creator>Wong, Terry</creator><creator>Berry, Philip</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20211107</creationdate><title>PTU-5 Efficacy of cholangioscopic delivered electrohydraulic lithotripsy in a tertiary referral unit</title><author>Caracostea, Andra ; Lake, Luke ; Kotha, Sreelakshmi ; Warner, Ben ; Wong, Terry ; Berry, Philip</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b1118-dec2a604cae513ac29b96c41aba6e64209ae37569b4fa95bba59a32a0060ede23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Cholangitis</topic><topic>Colonoscopy</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>Dysphagia</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Hematoma</topic><topic>Intubation</topic><topic>Lithotripsy</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Pancreatitis</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Caracostea, Andra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lake, Luke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kotha, Sreelakshmi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Warner, Ben</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wong, Terry</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berry, Philip</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Gut</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Caracostea, Andra</au><au>Lake, Luke</au><au>Kotha, Sreelakshmi</au><au>Warner, Ben</au><au>Wong, Terry</au><au>Berry, Philip</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>PTU-5 Efficacy of cholangioscopic delivered electrohydraulic lithotripsy in a tertiary referral unit</atitle><jtitle>Gut</jtitle><stitle>Gut</stitle><date>2021-11-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>70</volume><issue>Suppl 4</issue><spage>A43</spage><epage>A44</epage><pages>A43-A44</pages><issn>0017-5749</issn><eissn>1468-3288</eissn><abstract>IntroductionCholangioscopy with electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) is an evolving service to treat choledocholithiasis refractory to standard ERCP and is included in the BSG guidelines. We aimed to assess the safety, efficacy and implications of a new tertiary Spyglass EHL service for treatment of refractory gallstone disease.MethodsA review of prospectively collected data was performed for all EHL Spyglass procedures performed from 01.12.2018 to 31.12.2019 at St Thomas’ Hospital. Procedural duration was determined by the time between first and last fluoroscopic image taken. Stone burden was assessed by examination of fluoroscopic images. ERCP Spyglass DS1 and Autolith Touch II EHL Generator was used for all procedures.Results57 Spyglass EHL procedures were performed between January 2018 and December 2019 on 40 patients (75% females, 25% males with a mean age of 65). All cases had failed stone clearance at standard ERCP prior to this. Mean diameter of the largest stone was 1.83cm with a range of 1-3.5cm. All stones were &lt; 2cm in patients who achieved ductal clearance in 1 procedure.Out of 40 patients, 9 were excluded as they were awaiting further EHL for duct clearance. 31/31 (100%) achieved ductal clearance at the last procedure. Ductal clearance was achieved with 1 EHL session in 11/31(35.5%), 2 EHL sessions in 11/31(35.5%), 3 EHL sessions in 7/31(23%) and 4 sessions in 2/31(6%). There was no correlation between number of stones and number or duration of EHL sessions.The average number of shocks used in one EHL was 1600 shocks. Average time spent on one EHL was 78 minutes. In 2018, 37.1 hours were used for Spyglass EHL in total (this does not include diagnostic Spyglass procedures).Documented complications occurred in 2/57(3.5%) procedures; 1 peri-pancreatic abscess with necrotic nodes and 1 lingual haematoma secondary to intubation. There were no reported cases of pancreatitis or 30 day mortality.ConclusionsCholangioscopy with EHL is an effective treatment for refractory choledocolithiasis, achieving 100% ductal clearance, with a low rate of complications. However the procedural duration and number of repeat procedures required based on stones size/burden is difficult to predict. This data will be useful to centres planning to roll out a Spyglass-EHL service.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Society of Gastroenterology</pub><doi>10.1136/gutjnl-2021-BSG.78</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0017-5749
ispartof Gut, 2021-11, Vol.70 (Suppl 4), p.A43-A44
issn 0017-5749
1468-3288
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2594957208
source PubMed Central
subjects Cancer
Cholangitis
Colonoscopy
COVID-19
Dysphagia
Endoscopy
Hematoma
Intubation
Lithotripsy
Mortality
Pancreatitis
Patients
Tumors
title PTU-5 Efficacy of cholangioscopic delivered electrohydraulic lithotripsy in a tertiary referral unit
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T06%3A17%3A09IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_bmj_j&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=PTU-5%E2%80%85Efficacy%20of%20cholangioscopic%20delivered%20electrohydraulic%20lithotripsy%20in%20a%20tertiary%20referral%20unit&rft.jtitle=Gut&rft.au=Caracostea,%20Andra&rft.date=2021-11-07&rft.volume=70&rft.issue=Suppl%204&rft.spage=A43&rft.epage=A44&rft.pages=A43-A44&rft.issn=0017-5749&rft.eissn=1468-3288&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/gutjnl-2021-BSG.78&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_bmj_j%3E2594957208%3C/proquest_bmj_j%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2594957208&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true