Abstract:Introduction: Patients who are considered high-risk for choledocholithiasis after biochemical testing and abdominal ultrasound (AUS) are recommended to undergo endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with others to receive less invasive tests. The aim of the study is to determine whether high-risk patients by ASGE guidelines or other factors can accurately identify those with choledocholithiasis.Table 1: Diagnostic Performance of ASGE High-Risk Group and Other Test Characteristics in Patients with Suspected Choledocholithiasis ( N =2,726)Methods: Consecutive patients hospitalized (1/2011-12/2013) with suspected choledocholithiasis who received biochemical testing, AUS and definitive testing for choledocholithiasis (magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), ERCP, interventional radiology procedure and/or intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC)) at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital were retrospectively identified. Patients with choledocholithiasis on AUS, bilirubin >4mg/dL, bilirubin >1.8mg/dL + dilated common bile duct (CBD) (>8mm and >6mm with or without prior cholecystectomy) and/or suspected cholangitis (presenting fever and/or leukocytosis) were considered high-risk per ASGE guidelines. Final diagnosis was based on choledocholithiasis identified on definitive testing. Results: Mean age of 2,726 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis was 55+15 yrs, 1,179 (43%) were male and 216 (8%) had prior cholecystectomy. On definitive testing (MRCP in 2,441 (90%), EUS in 69 (3%), interventional radiology procedure in 2, ERCP in 643 (23%), IOC in 189 (7%)), 1,076 (39%) patients had choledocholithiasis. A higher proportion of patients meeting ASGE high-risk criteria compared to other groups (770/1,271 (61%) vs. 306/1,455 (21%); OR=5.8, 95%CI 4.9-6.8) had confirmed choledocholithiasis. Diagnostic performance of test characteristics is shown (Table). On multivariate analysis, choledocholithiasis on AUS (AOR=17.4, 95%CI 12.6-23.9), bilirubin >4mg/dL (AOR=3.0, 95%CI 2.2-4.1) and bilirubin 1.8-4mg/dL (AOR=1.8, 95%CI 1.4-2.4) compared to < 1.8mg/dL and CBD dilation (AOR=1.8, 95%CI 1.5-2.2) increased the likelihood of choledocholithiasis. Conclusion: In patients with suspected choledocholithiasis, the specificity of high-risk group categorized by ASGE guidelines was suboptimal. Combination of factors that include choledocholithiasis on AUS and bilirubin >4mg/dL with or without CBD dilation had high specificities of >90% and moderate to high positive likelihood ratios. A revised algorithm with more stringent criteria may improve patient selection and reduce the risk of diagnostic ERCP.

Comparison of EUS and ERCP in the investigation with suspected biliary obstruction caused by choledocholithiasis: a randomized study.

The comparative analysis between two methods for minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of cholecystolithiasis and choledocholithiasis

Accuracy of ASGE High-Risk Criteria in Evaluation of Patients with Suspected Common Bile Duct Stones

EUS vs MRCP for detection of choledocholithiasis

EUS- Versus ERCP-guided Biliary Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: Evidence from Randomized Controlled Studies

Comparison of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Combined with Intraoperative Endoscopic Sphincterotomy and Laparoscopic Exploration of the Common Bile Duct for Cholecystocholedocholithiasis

Intraoperative ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy combined with laparoscopic cholecystectomy for treatment of cholelithiasis with choledocholithiasis

Suboptimal Specificity of Asge High-Risk Group in Evaluation of Patients with Suspected Choledocholithiasis

EUS versus MRCP to perform ERCP in patients with intermediate likelihood of choledocholithiasis: a randomised controlled trial

EUS versus MRCP in patients with intermediate risk of choledocholithiasis: clinical and statistical viewpoint

Long term outcome of EUS-based strategy for suspected choledocholithiasis but negative CT finding

Comparison of radiation exposure and fluoroscopy time between minimally invasive common bile duct exploration and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for choledocholithiasis

Multicenter study comparing EUS‐guided hepaticogastrostomy and ERCP for malignant biliary obstruction in patients with accessible papillae

Application of ERCP Procedures in Choledocholithiasis with Duodenal Stenosis Patients

Comparison of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for retrieval of choledocholithiasis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Comparison on Two Minimally Invasive Procedures for Gallstones Combined with Common Bile Duct Stones:A Systematic Review

Tu1621 Single Session EUS-Rendezvous ERCP Versus Percutaneous Biliary Drainage in Patients with Failed Common Bile Duct Access after ERCP

Retrospective comparative analysis of choledochoscopic bile duct exploration versus ERCP for bile duct stones

A Comparative Study Between Combined and Separate EUS and ERCP under Anesthesia for Pancreaticobiliary Diseases

The additional value of the combined use of EUS and ERCP for the evaluation of unclear biliary strictures

Endoscopic ultrasound versus magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of computed tomography-negative common bile duct stone: Prospective randomized controlled trial