COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

EUS versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for patients with intermediate probability of bile duct stones: a prospective randomized trial

Tarkan Karakan, Mehmet Cindoruk, Hakan Alagozlu, Meltem Ergun, Sukru Dumlu, Selahattin Unal
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2009, 69 (2): 244-52
19019364

BACKGROUND: Factors affecting diagnostic accuracy and comparison of patients in the follow-up period for negative outcomes are not thoroughly investigated in a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare diagnostic accuracy, complications, and number of interventions.

DESIGN: Prospective, unicentric, single-blind, randomized study.

SETTING: Single tertiary referral university hospital.

PATIENTS: One hundred twenty patients with intermediate risk for common bile duct (CBD) stones were randomized to either an EUS-first, endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC)-second (n = 60) versus an ERC-only (n = 60) procedure.

INTERVENTIONS: EUS, ERC, sphincterotomy, and balloon sweeping of CBD when needed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Sensitivity of EUS versus ERC, factors affecting diagnostic capability, complications, total number of endoscopic procedures.

RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of ERC were 75% (95% CI, 42%-93%) and 100% (95% CI, 95%-100%), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of EUS were 91% (95% CI, 59%-99%) and 100% (95% CI, 95%-100%), respectively. EUS is more sensitive than ERC in detecting stones smaller than 4 mm (90% vs 23%, P < .01). Although not significant, there was a trend for an increased number of endoscopic procedures in the ERC group compared with the EUS group (98 vs 83). The post-ERC pancreatitis rate was 6 in 120 (5%) in all study patients, and the post-ERC pancreatitis rate in patients with an undilated CBD was 5 of 53 (9.43%). The independent factors for post-ERC pancreatitis are undilated CBD (risk ratio [RR] 6.320; 95% CI, 1.703-11.524, P = .009), allocation into the ERC group (RR 2.107; 95% CI, 1.330-3.339, P = .02), female sex (RR 1.803; 95% CI, 1.155-2.813, P = .03), and age less than 40 years (RR 1.888; 95% CI, 1.245-2.863, P = .01). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed higher rate of negative outcome in the ERC group than in the EUS group (P = .049, log-rank test).

CONCLUSION: The EUS-first approach is not associated with further risk for subsequent endoscopic procedures. Patients with an undilated CBD should be investigated by the EUS-first approach to prevent post-ERC pancreatitis.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Trending Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
19019364
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"