Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

ERCP and EUS pp 181–193Cite as

Acute Biliary Pancreatitis: Image, Intervene, or Observe?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 2225 Accesses

Abstract

Evaluation of patients with suspected acute biliary pancreatitis relies on biochemical testing and radiological imaging. No single parameter accurately predicts choledocholithiasis. Most predictive models focus on history, biochemical and radiological evaluations. The American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standards of Practice Committee proposed a risk-stratification scheme to evaluate patients with suspected biliary pancreatitis for choledocholithiasis. This chapter will focus on different case scenarios of biliary pancreatitis, asking specific questions related to each case presentation, and then followed by a discussion of the literature and recommended management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. van Geenen EJ, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG, van der Peet DL, van Erpecum KJ, Fockens P, et al. Lack of consensus on the role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiography in acute biliary pancreatitis in published meta-analyses and guidelines: a systematic review. Pancreas. 2013;42(5):774–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Maple JT, Ben-Menachem T, Anderson MA, Appalaneni V, Banerjee S, Cash BD, et al. The role of endoscopy in the evaluation of suspected choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71(1):1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Petrov MS. ERCP versus conservative treatment in acute pancreatitis: meta-analysis or meta-confusion? Dig Liver Dis. 2008;40(9):800–1; author reply 1–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Folsch UR, Nitsche R, Ludtke R, Hilgers RA, Creutzfeldt W. Early ERCP and papillotomy compared with conservative treatment for acute biliary pancreatitis. The German Study Group on acute biliary pancreatitis. N Engl J Med. 1997;336(4):237–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Tse F, Yuan Y. Early routine endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography strategy versus early conservative management strategy in acute gallstone pancreatitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;5:CD009779.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yang MH, Chen TH, Wang SE, Tsai YF, Su CH, Wu CW, et al. Biochemical predictors for absence of common bile duct stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc. 2008;22(7):1620–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Canto MI, Chak A, Stellato T, Sivak MV, Jr. Endoscopic ultrasonography versus cholangiography for the diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc. 1998;47(6):439–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chak A, Hawes RH, Cooper GS, Hoffman B, Catalano MF, Wong RC, et al. Prospective assessment of the utility of EUS in the evaluation of gallstone pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;49(5):599–604.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Petrov MS, Savides TJ. Systematic review of endoscopic ultrasonography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for suspected choledocholithiasis. Br J Surg. 2009;96(9):967–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Garrow D, Miller S, Sinha D, Conway J, Hoffman BJ, Hawes RH, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound: a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected biliary obstruction. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5(5):616–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tse F, Liu L, Barkun AN, Armstrong D, Moayyedi P. EUS: a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67(2):235–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Verma D, Kapadia A, Eisen GM, Adler DG. EUS vs MRCP for detection of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64(2):248–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Palmucci S, Mauro LA, La Scola S, Incarbone S, Bonanno G, Milone P, et al. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis of extrahepatic biliary pathology. Radiol Med. 2010;115(5):732–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Moon JH, Cho YD, Cha SW, Cheon YK, Ahn HC, Kim YS, et al. The detection of bile duct stones in suspected biliary pancreatitis: comparison of MRCP, ERCP, and intraductal US. Am J Gastroenterol. 2005;100(5):1051–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Varghese JC, Liddell RP, Farrell MA, Murray FE, Osborne DH, Lee MJ. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and ultrasound compared with direct cholangiography in the detection of choledocholithiasis. Clin Radiol. 2000;55(1):25–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Iranmanesh P, Frossard JL, Mugnier-Konrad B, Morel P, Majno P, Nguyen-Tang T, et al. Initial cholecystectomy vs sequential common duct endoscopic assessment and subsequent cholecystectomy for suspected gallstone migration: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;312(2):137–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Uhl W, Warshaw A, Imrie C, Bassi C, McKay CJ, Lankisch PG, et al. IAP Guidelines for the surgical management of acute pancreatitis. Pancreatology. 2002;2(6):565–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Banks PA, Freeman ML, Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology. Practice guidelines in acute pancreatitis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101(10):2379–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Overby DW, Apelgren KN, Richardson W, Fanelli R, Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons. SAGES guidelines for the clinical application of laparoscopic biliary tract surgery. Surg Endosc. 2010;24(10):2368–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ito K, Ito H, Whang EE. Timing of cholecystectomy for biliary pancreatitis: do the data support current guidelines? J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12(12):2164–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hernandez V, Pascual I, Almela P, Anon R, Herreros B, Sanchiz V, et al. Recurrence of acute gallstone pancreatitis and relationship with cholecystectomy or endoscopic sphincterotomy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99(12):2417–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van Baal MC, Besselink MG, Bakker OJ, van Santvoort HC, Schaapherder AF, Nieuwenhuijs VB, et al. Timing of cholecystectomy after mild biliary pancreatitis: a systematic review. Ann Surg. 2012;255(5):860–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kaw M, Al-Antably Y, Kaw P. Management of gallstone pancreatitis: cholecystectomy or ERCP and endoscopic sphincterotomy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56(1):61–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Davidson BR, Neoptolemos JP, Carr-Locke DL. Endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct calculi in patients with gall bladder in situ considered unfit for surgery. Gut. 1988;29(1):114–20.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hill J, Martin DF, Tweedle DE. Risks of leaving the gallbladder in situ after endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones. Br J Surg. 1991;78(5):554–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Working Party of the British Society of G, Association of Surgeons of Great B, Ireland, Pancreatic Society of Great B, Ireland, Association of Upper GISoGB. UK guidelines for the management of acute pancreatitis. Gut. 2005;54(Suppl 3):1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nagem RG, Lazaro-da-Silva A, de Oliveira RM, Morato VG. Gallstone-related complications after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a prospective study. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2012;11(6):630–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nagem R, Lazaro-da-Silva A. Cholecystolithiasis after gastric bypass: a clinical, biochemical, and ultrasonographic 3-year follow-up study. Obes Surg. 2012;22(10):1594–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Warschkow R, Tarantino I, Ukegjini K, Beutner U, Guller U, Schmied BM, et al. Concomitant cholecystectomy during laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in obese patients is not justified: a meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2013;23(3):397–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kohn GP, Galanko JA, Overby DW, Farrell TM. Recent trends in bariatric surgery case volume in the United States. Surgery. 2009;146(2):375–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Choi EK, Chiorean MV, Cote GA, El Hajj I, Ballard D, Fogel EL, et al. ERCP via gastrostomy vs. double balloon enteroscopy in patients with prior bariatric Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(8):2894–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shah RJ, Smolkin M, Yen R, Ross A, Kozarek RA, Howell DA, et al. A multicenter, U.S. experience of single-balloon, double-balloon, and rotational overtube-assisted enteroscopy ERCP in patients with surgically altered pancreaticobiliary anatomy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2013;77(4):593–600.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Schreiner MA, Chang L, Gluck M, Irani S, Gan SI, Brandabur JJ, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted versus balloon enteroscopy-assisted ERCP in bariatric post-Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75(4):748–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bennion RS, Wyatt LE, Thompson JE, Jr. Effect of intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy on outcome after gallstone pancreatitis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2002;6(4):575–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sheffield KM, Han Y, Kuo YF, Townsend CM, Jr, Goodwin JS, Riall TS. Variation in the use of intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214(4):668–79; discussion 679–81.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ford JA, Soop M, Du J, Loveday BP, Rodgers M. Systematic review of intraoperative cholangiography in cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 2012;99(2):160–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Horwood J, Akbar F, Davis K, Morgan R. Prospective evaluation of a selective approach to cholangiography for suspected common bile duct stones. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2010;92(3):206–10.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Lu J, Cheng Y, Xiong XZ, Lin YX, Wu SJ, Cheng NS. Two-stage vs single-stage management for concomitant gallstones and common bile duct stones. World J Gastroenterol. 2012;18(24):3156–66.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Rogers SJ, Cello JP, Horn JK, Siperstein AE, Schecter WP, Campbell AR, et al. Prospective randomized trial of LC + LCBDE vs ERCP/S + LC for common bile duct stone disease. Arch Surg. 2010;145(1):28–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Eddy JJ, Gideonsen MD, Song JY, Grobman WA, O’Halloran P. Pancreatitis in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(5):1075–81.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Pandey R, Jacob A, Brooks H. Acute pancreatitis in pregnancy: review of three cases and anaesthetic management. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2012;21(4):360–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ramin KD, Ramin SM, Richey SD, Cunningham FG. Acute pancreatitis in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;173(1):187–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Papadakis EP, Sarigianni M, Mikhailidis DP, Mamopoulos A, Karagiannis V. Acute pancreatitis in pregnancy: an overview. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;159(2):261–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Webb JA, Thomsen HS, Morcos SK, Members of Contrast Media Safety Committee of European Society of Urogenital Radiology. The use of iodinated and gadolinium contrast media during pregnancy and lactation. Eur Radiol. 2005;15(6):1234–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Ducarme G, Maire F, Chatel P, Luton D, Hammel P. Acute pancreatitis during pregnancy: a review. J Perinatol. 2014;34(2):87–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Tham TC, Vandervoort J, Wong RC, Montes H, Roston AD, Slivka A, et al. Safety of ERCP during pregnancy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98(2):308–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Washington University, St. Louis 660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8124, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA

    Asst. Prof. Faris M. Murad MD & Steve Edmundowicz MD

Authors
  1. Asst. Prof. Faris M. Murad MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steve Edmundowicz MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Faris M. Murad MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

    Linda S. Lee

Electronic supplementary material

Video Caption

Video 11.1 This video demonstrates a native major papilla. Selective biliary cannulation is achieved with a sphincterotome and guidewire. The cholangiogram demonstrates filling defects in the distal extrahepatic bile duct. A biliary sphincterotomy is performed. Multiple balloon sweeps initially yield stone fragments. Eventually, a large 10 × 12 mm gallstone is extracted from the extrahepatic bile duct

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Murad, F., Edmundowicz, S. (2015). Acute Biliary Pancreatitis: Image, Intervene, or Observe?. In: Lee, L. (eds) ERCP and EUS. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2320-5_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2320-5_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2319-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2320-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation