George Paroutoglou

BACKGROUND: Ingested foreign bodies and food bolus impaction are frequently seen in endoscopic practice. Successful foreign body and food bolus removal may depend on the method used, the choice of device, and the experience level of the endoscopist, although few papers report experience and outcome of tertiary centers. AIM: To investigate the effectiveness of our protocol designed for removal of ingested foreign bodies and food boluses. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with a diagnosis of foreign body ingestion and food bolus impaction from 1994 to 2005 identified by computer search. Patients were excluded if medical record was incomplete. RESULTS: The analysis included 171 patients. Foreign bodies and impacted food boluses were found in 77 and 62 patients, respectively. In 32 cases (23%), the foreign bodies passed spontaneously through the gastrointestinal tract. The overall success rate for endoscopic management was obtained in 137 patients (98.6%). Surgical removal of a foreign body was required in only 2 cases (1.4%). According to the type and location of the foreign object and food bolus we used Dormia baskets, retrieval forceps, polypectomy snares, and all sizes of Roth net. No complications relating to the endoscopic procedure were observed; 50 patients (35.2%) had an underlying esophageal disease. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic removal of upper gastrointestinal tract foreign bodies and food bolus impaction is efficacious and safe. Especially the Roth net is the best device for safe retrieval of food boluses and button disc batteries.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Deep cannulation of the common bile duct (CBD) is paramount for the success of endoscopic biliary intervention. The aim of the present study was to compare standard ERCP catheter and hydrophilic guide wire (HGW) in the selective cannulation of the CBD. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 332 patients were randomly assigned to cannulation with a standard catheter (n = 165) or a HGW (n = 167). If cannulation had not succeeded after 10 minutes with the technique assigned at randomization, a further attempt was made for an additional 10 minutes using the alternative technique. The following were assessed: primary and overall selective cannulation, time to cholangiography, number of pancreatic opacifications and guide-wire pancreatic duct insertions, and complication rates. RESULTS: The primary success rate of selective CBD cannulation was higher in the HGW (81.4 %) than in the standard catheter group (53.9 %; P < 0.001). The overall cannulation rate after crossover was comparable between the two groups (standard catheter 84 % vs. HGW 83.8 %; P = 0.19). Time required for primary selective CBD cannulation was 3.53 +/- 0.32 minutes in the standard catheter vs. 4.48 +/- 0.32 minutes in the HGW group ( P = 0.04), and the number of insertions of the guide wire into the pancreatic duct was 3.29 +/- 0.47 in the standard catheter vs. 2.7 +/- 0.21 in the HGW group ( P = 0.22). Pancreatic opacifications occurred 3.19 +/- 0.20 times in the standard catheter vs. 1.50 +/- 0.22 times in the HGW group ( P < 0.001). Precut techniques were used in 56 patients (16.9 %) (n = 31 in the standard catheter vs. n = 25 in the HGW group; P = 0.07). The frequency of postinterventional pancreatitis and hemorrhage did not differ between the two groups. A young woman developed post-ERCP hemolytic crisis due to glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency. There was no procedure-related mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The use of HGW, as primary technique or as a secondary technique after failure of cannulation with a standard catheter, achieves a high rate of selective CBD cannulation.

BACKGROUND: Although the ideal management of cholecysto-choledocholi-thiasis is controversial, the 2-stage approach [endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), sphincterotomy, and common bile duct (CBD) clearance followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy] remains the standard way of management worldwide. One-stage approach using the so-called laparoendoscopic rendezvous (LERV) technique offers some advantages, mainly by reducing the hospital stay and the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis. OBJECTIVE: To compare the LERV 1-stage approach with the standard 2-stage approach consisting of preoperative ERCP followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy for the treatment of cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. SETTING: Controlled randomized trial, University/Teaching Hospital. METHODS: : Patients with cholecysto-choledocholithiasis were randomized either to LERV or to the 2-stage approach. Both elective and emergency cases were included in the study. Primary endpoint was to detect difference in overall hospital stay, whereas secondary endpoints were (i) to detect differences in morbidity (especially post-ERCP pancreatitis) and (ii) success of CBD clearance. This is an interim analysis of the first 100 randomized patients. RESULTS: Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LERV group; median 4 (2-19) days versus 5.5 (3-22) days, P = 0.0004. There was no difference in morbidity and success of CBD clearance between the 2 groups. Post-ERCP amylase value was found significantly lower in the LERV group: median 65 (16-1159) versus 91 (30-1846), P = 0.02. CONCLUSIONS: Interim analysis of the results suggests the superiority of the LERV technique in terms of hospital stay and post-ERCP hyperamylasemia.