Peroral Cholangioscopy-guided Electrohydraulic Lithotripsy with a SpyGlass DS Versus a Conventional Digital Cholangioscope for Difficult Bile Duct Stones

• Published in: Internal Medicine Vol. 59; no. 16; pp. 1925 - 1930
• Main Authors: Murabayashi, Toji, Ogawa, Takahisa, Koshita, Shinsuke, Kanno, Yoshihide, Kusunose, Hiroaki, Sakai, Toshitaka, Masu, Kaori, Yonamine, Keisuke, Miyamoto, Kazuaki, Kozakai, Fumisato, Endo, Kazuki, Noda, Yutaka, Ito, Kei
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Japan The Japanese Society of Internal Medicine 15.08.2020; Japan Science and Technology Agency
• Subjects: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bile; Bile ducts; Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde - methods; cholangiopancreatoscopy; difficult stone; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; Endoscopy; Female; Gallstones - surgery; Humans; Internal medicine; Lithotripsy; Lithotripsy - methods; Male; Middle Aged; Operative Time; Original; Retrospective Studies; single-operator; Treatment Outcome; endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; cholangiopancreatoscopy; single-operator; difficult stone
• ISSN: 0918-2918; 1349-7235
• DOI: 10.2169/internalmedicine.4463-20

Objective Recently, a new digital peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) system, the SpyGlass DS (SpyDS), has been used for POCS-guided lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stones (DBDSs). The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the efficacy of SpyDS-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL) for DBDS with that of a conventional digital cholangioscope. Methods Seventeen consecutive patients who had undergone POCS-guided EHL for DBDS with the SpyDS between October 2015 and January 2019 were enrolled in this study group (SpyDS group) using a prospectively maintained database. Fifteen other consecutive patients who had undergone POCS-guided EHL with a conventional digital cholangioscope (CHF-B260) just prior to the introduction of the SpyDS between December 2006 and September 2015 were analyzed as a control group (CHF group). The main outcome measurement was the total procedure time to complete stone removal. Results The rate of complete stone removal was 100% for both groups. The mean total procedure time for the SpyDS group was significantly shorter than that for the CHF group (67±30 minutes vs. 107±64 minutes, p=0.038). The mean number of endoscopic sessions for the SpyDS group was significantly lower than that for the CHF group (1.35±0.49 vs. 2.00±0.85, p=0.037). There were no significant differences in the rate of adverse events between the two groups. Conclusion The SpyDS appears useful for decreasing the procedure time and number of endoscopic sessions for complete stone removal in POCS-guided EHL for DBDS compared with a conventional digital cholangioscope.