Advertisement

Stone Fragmentation Technologies and the Approach to Impacted Stones

  • Leslie K. Nathanson
Chapter

Abstract

Impacted bile duct stones may complicate operative or endoscopic removal. Sometimes, these stones require fragmentation before they can be accessed and/or retrieved. Fragmentation technologies and techniques are described in detail, including potential risks and complications.

Keywords

Impacted stones Lithotripsy Fragmentation Gallstone composition 

Supplementary material

Video 8.1a

Images of a large solitary stone within the bile duct with marked mismatch to cystic duct diameter. It appeared to be a secondary bile duct stone which had enlarged over time after passage down the cystic duct. Semirigid curved choledochoscope (Storz, Germany) access facilitated pneumatic fragmentation and trans-cystic stone removal (MOV 192594 kb)

Video 8.1b

Heavily edited images of trans-cystic exploration of bile duct with initial stone clearance with Nathanson basket (Wilson Cook, America) delivered by the cholangiogram clamp, followed by short semirigid ureteroscopic pneumatic fragmentation of impacted stone (MOV 485478 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Nagaraja V, Cox MR, Eslick GD. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the minimally invasive techniques for the management of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. J Hepatobil Pancreat Sci. 2014;21:896–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moody F, Amerson J, Berci G, Bland KL, Cotton PB, Graham JB, et al. Lithotripsy for bile duct stones. Am J Surg. 1989;158:241–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blind PJ, Lundmark M. Management of bile duct stones: lithotripsy by laser, electrohydraulic, and ultrasonic techniques. Eur J Surg. 1998;164:403–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Quadri S, Khan M, Khan N. Use of pneumatic lithotripsy for managing difficult CBD calculi. Int J Surg. 2011;9:59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chander J, Vindal A, Lal P, Gupta N, Ramteke VK. Laparoscopic management of CBD stones: an Indian experience. Surg Endosc. 2011;25:172–81.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sandzén B, Haapamäki MM, Nilsson E, Stenlund HC, Oman M. Treatment of common bile duct stones in Sweden 1989-2006: an observational nationwide study of a paradigm shift. World J Surg. 2012;36(9):2146–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim HJ, Choi HS, Park JH, Park DI, Cho YK, Sohn CI, et al. Factors influencing the technical difficulty of endoscopic clearance of bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;66:1154–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Watanabe Y, Sato M, Tokui K, Nezu K, Shiraishi S, Sato K, et al. Painless lithotripsy by flashlamp-excited dye laser for impacted biliary stones: an experimental and clinical study. Eur J Surg. 2000;166:455–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cannavale A, Bezzi M, Ceratti F, Lucatelli P, Fanello G, Salvatori FM, et al. Combined radiological-endoscopic management of difficult bile duct stones: 18-year single center experience. Ther Adv Gastroenterol. 2015;8(6):340–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sackman M, Holl J, Sauter GH, Pauletzki J, von Ritter C, Paumgartner G. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for clearance of duct stones resistant to endoscopic extraction. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001;53(1):27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leslie K. Nathanson
    • 1
  1. 1.Wesley HospitalBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations