Direct peroral cholangioscopy in the management of difficult biliary stones: a new tool to confirm common bile duct clearance. Results of a preliminary study

Background and aims: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) with stone extraction is the standard treatment for choledocholithiasis. After stone retrieval, balloon-occluded cholangiography is generally performed to confirm bile duct clearance but can miss residual stones particularly in patients with residual small-sized stones, a large bile duct or pneumobilia. In addition, difficult common bile duct (CBD) stones requiring advanced endoscopic techniques for retrieval are a potential risk factor for choledocholithiasis recurrence. Methods: We performed a retrospective evaluation of a prospectively maintained procedures database. From July 2016 to December 2017, all patients with difficult CBD stones who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with papillary balloon dilation-assisted stone retrieval and subsequent direct per-oral cholangioscopy (DPOC) using standard gastroscopes to confirm CBD clearance were analyzed. Results: Thirty-six patients who underwent ERCP and DPOC were included. Technical success, defined as deep intubation of CBD with hepatic hilum visualization, was achieved in 31 of 36 patients (86%). During DPOC, residual CBD stones were visualized and removed in 7 of 31 patients (22.5%). After a mean of 241 +/- 56 days of follow-up post-DPOC, no serious adverse events were reported, and there was no evidence or suspicion of recurrent choledocholithiasis. Conclusions: Direct per-oral cholangioscopy immediately following difficult CBD stone removal was safe, feasible and accurate. In this setting, DPOC at the time of ERCP appears to be a very useful tool to achieve complete clearance of choledocholithiasis.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Efficacy of lumen-apposing metal stents or self-expandable metal stents for endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage is becoming an option for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are replacing self-expandable metal stents (SEMS). The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LAMS and SEMS for EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS). Methods A meta-analysis was performed using PRISMA protocols. Electronic databases were searched for studies on EUS-CDS. The primary outcome was clinical success. Secondary outcomes were technical success, reintervention, and adverse events. We used the random effects model with the DerSimonian-Laird estimation, and the results were depicted using forest plots. Subgroup analyses were also performed with data stratified by selected variable. Results Overall, 31 studies (820 patients) were included. The pooled rates of clinical and technical success were 93.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.6%-96.5%) and 94.8% (95%CI 90.2%-97.3%) for LAMS, and 91.7% (95%CI 88.1%-94.2%) and 92.7% (95%CI 89.9%-94.9%) for SEMS, respectively. The pooled rates of adverse events were 17.1% (95%CI 12.5%-22.8%) for LAMS and 18.3% (95%CI 14.3%-23.0%) for SEMS. The pooled rates of reintervention were 10.9% (95%CI 7.7%-15.3%) for LAMS and 13.9% (95%CI 9.6%-19.7%) for SEMS.Subgroup analyses confirmed these results. Conclusions This meta-analysis showed that LAMS and SEMS are comparable in terms of efficacy for EUS-CDS. Clinical and technical success, post-procedure adverse events, and reintervention rates were similar between LAMS and SEMS use; however, adverse events require further investigation

Using pharmacokinetics for tailoring prophylaxis in people with hemophilia switching between clotting factor products: A scoping review

The objective of this scoping review is to summarize the current use of pharmacokinetics for tailoring prophylaxis in hemophilia patients switching between clotting factor products. Patients with hemophilia may require switching of clotting factor concentrates due to a variety of factors, but there have been perceived risks associated with switching, such as inhibitor development or suboptimal protection due to inadequate dosing while titrating treatment. Studies that look at patients switching from one clotting factor concentrate to another are categorized in terms of their primary and/or secondary objectives, notably biosimilarity and comparative pharmacokinetic studies and inhibitor development studies. Research on how best to switch concentrates with respect to dosing regimen are lacking, and currently a trial-and-error approach is used for dosing the new factor concentrate. In the future, studies looking at the predictability of pharmacokinetics (PK) of a new factor concentrate based on individual PK knowledge of the original factor concentrate may offer clinical benefit by providing a safer switching approach and protocol