Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Jan 13;58(1):120.
doi: 10.3390/medicina58010120.

Difficult Biliary Stones: A Comprehensive Review of New and Old Lithotripsy Techniques

Affiliations
Review

Difficult Biliary Stones: A Comprehensive Review of New and Old Lithotripsy Techniques

Edoardo Troncone et al. Medicina (Kaunas). .

Abstract

Biliary stones represent the most common indication for therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Many cases are successfully managed with biliary sphincterotomy and stone extraction with balloon or basket catheters. However, more complex conditions secondary to the specific features of stones, the biliary tract, or patient's needs could make the stone extraction with the standard techniques difficult. Traditionally, mechanical lithotripsy with baskets has been reported as a safe and effective technique to achieve stone clearance. More recently, the increasing use of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation and the diffusion of single-operator cholangioscopy with laser or electrohydraulic lithotripsy have brought new, safe, and effective therapeutic possibilities to the management of such challenging cases. We here summarize the available evidence about the endoscopic management of difficult common bile duct stones and discuss current indications of different lithotripsy techniques.

Keywords: ERCP; ESWL; cholangioscopy; choledocholithiasis; electro-hydraulic lithotripsy; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; hepatolithiasis; laser lithotripsy; spyglass.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cases of difficult biliary stones not amenable to conventional ERCP treatment. (A,B) Magnetic Resonance Images showing complex bile duct stones with large signal defects extending to the hilum and intrahepatics; (C) cholangiogram showing a very large common bile duct stone. All cases were successfully managed with single-operator cholangioscopy-assisted electrohydraulic lithotripsy.
Figure 2
Figure 2
(A,B) cholangiograms showing multiple and large common bile duct stones; (C,D) fluoroscopy showing mechanical lithotripsy with basket of the largest stones; (E,F) final occlusive cholangiograms showing complete clearance of the bile duct after lithotripsy and extraction of fragments.
Figure 3
Figure 3
(A) cholangiogram showing a large common bile duct stone; (B) fluoroscopic image of the cholangioscope in the common bile duct during lithotripsy; (C) cholangioscopic view of intraductal lithotripsy with electro-hydraulic probe; (D) final cholangiogram showing clearance of the bile duct after lithotripsy and extraction of fragments; (E) cholangioscopy showing clearance of the bile duct.
Figure 4
Figure 4
(A) cholangiogram showing a large stone impacted at the cystic duct insertion, obstructing the common bile duct; (B) fluoroscopic image of the cholangioscope approaching the impacted stone; (C) direct visualization of the impacted stone and inflamed biliary mucosa during cholangioscopy; (D) fluoroscopic image of the fragmented stone after electrohydraulic lithotripsy.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Flowchart for management of biliary stones. EPLBD, Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilation. * risk factors for failure of EPLBD or mechanical lithotripsy: stone impaction, size above 30 mm, stone size/extrahepatic bile duct ratio > 1, tapered bile duct.

References

    1. Peery A.F., Crockett S.D., Murphy C.C., Jensen E.T., Kim H.P., Egberg M.D., Lund J.L., Moon A.M., Pate V., Barnes E.L., et al. Burden and Cost of Gastrointestinal, Liver, and Pancreatic Diseases in the United States: Update 2021. Gastroenterology. 2021. ahead of print . - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stinton L.M., Myers R.P., Shaffer E.A. Epidemiology of gallstones. Gastroenterol. Clin. N. Am. 2010;39:157–169. doi: 10.1016/j.gtc.2010.02.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gracie W.A., Ransohoff D.F. The natural history of silent gallstones: The innocent gallstone is not a myth. N. Engl. J. Med. 1982;307:798–800. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198209233071305. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mcsherry C.K., Ferstenberg H., Calhoun W.F., Lahman E., Virshup M. The natural history of diagnosed gallstone disease in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Ann. Surg. 1985;202:59–63. doi: 10.1097/00000658-198507000-00009. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shabanzadeh D.M., Sørensen L.T., Jørgensen T. A Prediction Rule for Risk Stratification of Incidentally Discovered Gallstones: Results From a Large Cohort Study. Gastroenterology. 2016;150:156–167.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2015.09.002. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources