Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

ERCP and Endoscopic Sphincterotomy (ES): A Safe and Definitive Management of Gallstone Pancreatitis with the Gallbladder Left In Situ

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Aims and scope

Abstract

Background and Aims

UK guidelines recommend that patients with gallstone pancreatitis have cholecystectomy within 2 weeks of their pancreatitis. A proportion of these are elderly with significant comorbidities rendering them high risk for general anaesthesia and surgery. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) may offer a safe alternative to cholecystectomy as definitive treatment in these patients.

Patients and Methods

A retrospective review of all cases of gallstone pancreatitis presenting between 1999 and 2009 was undertaken.

Results

One hundred one patients underwent ERCP and ES as a definitive treatment for gallstone pancreatitis with a median age of 78 years (range, 43–96 years) and a median American Society of Anesthesiologists grade of 2. Three patients died from pancreatitis despite successful ERCP. Eighty-nine patients were successfully treated with an ERCP alone, and 84 patients (94%) had no recurrence of pancreatitis with a mean follow-up of 41 months (±32 months, range 4–118 months). The total patient follow-up was 3,260 months. Twenty-seven patients (33%) died within the follow-up period of unrelated causes, explaining the lower than expected median follow-up. Five patients had a recurrence of pancreatitis during follow-up (6%).

Conclusion

ERCP with ES is a safe alternative to laparoscopic cholecystectomy to prevent further attacks of gallstone pancreatitis in high-risk surgical patients and the elderly.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yadav D and Lowenfels A. Trends in the epidemiology of the first attack of pancreatitis: A systematic review. Pancreas. 2006; 33(4):323–330.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Opie EL. The aetiology of acute haemorrhagic pancreatitis. Bulletin of John Hopkins Hospital. 1901; 12:182–8.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Acosta J, and Ledesma C. Gallstone migration as a cause of acute pancreatitis. New England Journal of medicine. 1974; 290:484–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kelly TR. Gallstone pancreatitis: pathophysiology. Surgery. 1976; 80:488–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kelly TR. Gallstone pancreatitis: The timing of surgery. Surgery. 1980; 88:345–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Armstrong C, Taylor T, Jeacock J, and Lucas S. The biliary tract in patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis. British Journal of Surgery. 1985; 72:551–555.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Acosta J, Rubio Galli O, Rossi R, Chinellato A, and Pellegrini C. Effect of duration of ampullary gallstone obstruction on severity of lesion of acute pancreatitis. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. 1997; 184:499–504

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Neoptolemos JP, Carr-Locke DL, London NJ et al. Controlled trial of urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment for acute pancreatitis secondary to gallstones. Lancet. 1988; 2:979–83

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fan ST, Lai EC, Mok FP et al. Early treatment of acute biliary pancreatitis by endoscopic papillotomy. New England Journal of Medicine. 1993; 328:228–232.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sanjay P, Yeeting S, Whigham C et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy and interval cholecystectomy are reasonable alternatives to index cholecystectomy in severe acute gallstone pancreatitis. Surgical Endoscopy. 2008; 22:1832–1837.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hammarstrom LE, Stridbeck H and Ihse I. Effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy and interval cholecystectomy on late outcome after gallstone pancreatitis. British Journal of Surgery. 1998; 85:333–336.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. UK guideline for the management of acute pancreatitis. UK working party on acute pancreatitis. Gut. 2005; 54(suppl III): iii1–iii9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Vazquez-Lglesias J, Gonzalez-Conde B, Lopez-Roses L et al. Endoscopic sphincterotomy for prevention of the recurrence of acute biliary pancreatitis in patients with gallbladder in situ. Long-term follow-up of 88 patients. Surgical Endoscopy. 2004; 18:1442–1446

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Welbourn C, Beckly D and Eyre-Brook I. Endoscopic sphincterotomy without cholecystectomy for gallstone pancreatitis. Gut. 1995; 37:119–120

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lee J, Ryu J, Park J, et al. Roles of endoscopic sphincterotomy and cholecystectomy in acute biliary pancreatitis. Hepatogastroenterology. 2008; 55:1981–1985

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Johnson A and Hosking S. Appraisal of the management of bile duct stones. British Journal of Surgery. 1987; 74:555–560.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Napolitano G et al. Incidence rates of post-ERCP complications: A systematic survey of prospective studies. American journal of Gastroenterology. 2007; 102:1781–1788.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Salminen P, Laine S and Gullichsen R. Severe and fatal complications after ERCP: Analysis of 2555 procedures in a single experienced center. Surgical Endoscopy. 2008; 22:1965–1970.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Data from Norfolk County Council. http://www.norfolkinsight.org.uk/population.asp. Accessed Jan 2011

  20. Targarona E, Ayuso R, Bordas J et al. Randomised trial of endoscopic sphincterotomy with gallbladder left in situ verus open surgery for common bile duct calculi in high-risk patients. The Lancet. 1996; 347:926–29

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Boerma D, Rauws E, Keulemans C et al. Wait-and-see policy or laparoscopic cholecystectomy after endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile-duct stones: a randomised trial. The Lancet. 2002; 360:761–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zacks S, Sandler R, Rutledge R et al. A population-based cohort study comparing laparoscopic cholecystectomy and open cholecystectomy. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2002; 97:334–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. McMahon A, Fischbacher C, Frame S, et al. Impact of laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A population-based study. Lancet 2000; 356:1632–37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. A prospective analysis of 1518 laparoscopic cholecystectomies. The Southern Surgeons Club. New England Journal of Medicine. 1991; 324:1073–1078

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sandzen B, Haapamaki M, Nilsson E et al. Cholecystectomy and sphincterotomy in patients with mild acute biliary pancreatitis in Sweden 1988 – 2003: a nationwide register study. BMC Gastroenterology. 2009; 9:80–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Brunt L, Quasebarth D, Dunnegan et al. Outcome analysis of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the extremely elderly. Surgical Endoscopy. 2001; 15:700–705

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hazzan D, Geron N, Golijanin D et al. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in octogenarians. Surgical Endoscopy. 2003; 17:773–776

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Gloor B, Stahel P, Muller et al. Incidence and management of biliary pancreatitis in cholecystectomized patients. Results of a 7-year study. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. 2003; 7:372–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None of the authors have any conflict of interests or disclosures to make.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, Norwich, UK

    Mark Bignell, Matthew Dearing, Andrew Hindmarsh & Michael Rhodes

Authors
  1. Mark Bignell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew Dearing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew Hindmarsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Rhodes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Rhodes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bignell, M., Dearing, M., Hindmarsh, A. et al. ERCP and Endoscopic Sphincterotomy (ES): A Safe and Definitive Management of Gallstone Pancreatitis with the Gallbladder Left In Situ. J Gastrointest Surg 15, 2205–2210 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-011-1729-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-011-1729-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation