File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Retained common bile duct stones: A comparison between biliary stenting and complete clearance of stones by electrohydraulic lithotripsy

TitleRetained common bile duct stones: A comparison between biliary stenting and complete clearance of stones by electrohydraulic lithotripsy
Authors
Issue Date2003
PublisherBlackwell Publishing Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/APT
Citation
Alimentary Pharmacology And Therapeutics, 2003, v. 17 n. 2, p. 289-296 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: There is some uncertainty as to whether high-risk patients with difficult common bile duct stones should be subjected to a further endoscopic procedure for the complete removal of stones by electrohydraulic lithotripsy or whether permanent biliary stenting should be performed. Aim: To compare the outcome of permanent biliary stenting with electrohydraulic lithotripsy in this group of patients. Methods: In a prospective study, 36 patients with difficult common bile duct stones were investigated: 19 underwent double pigtail insertion (stent group), whereas 17 underwent complete clearance of stones (electrohydraulic lithotripsy). Results: In the electrohydraulic lithotripsy group, successful stone clearance was achieved in 76.5%, whereas, in the stent group, the success of stenting was 94.7%. A significant difference was detected in the actuarial incidence of recurrent acute cholangitis when the electrohydraulic lithotripsy group was compared with the stent group [one patient (7.7%) vs. 12 patients (63.2%), respectively; P = 0.002, log rank test]. A significant difference was detected in the actuarial frequency of mortality between the electrohydraulic lithotripsy and stent groups [seven patients (41.2%) vs. 14 patients (73.7%), respectively; P = 0.01, log rank test]. Conclusions: The removal of difficult common bile duct stones by electrohydraulic lithotripsy and further endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography has a high success rate and a low complication rate even in the elderly.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/76743
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 6.32
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.833
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHui, CKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLai, KCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorNg, Men_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, WMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorYuen, MFen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLam, SKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLai, CLen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, BCYen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T07:24:27Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T07:24:27Z-
dc.date.issued2003en_HK
dc.identifier.citationAlimentary Pharmacology And Therapeutics, 2003, v. 17 n. 2, p. 289-296en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0269-2813en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/76743-
dc.description.abstractBackground: There is some uncertainty as to whether high-risk patients with difficult common bile duct stones should be subjected to a further endoscopic procedure for the complete removal of stones by electrohydraulic lithotripsy or whether permanent biliary stenting should be performed. Aim: To compare the outcome of permanent biliary stenting with electrohydraulic lithotripsy in this group of patients. Methods: In a prospective study, 36 patients with difficult common bile duct stones were investigated: 19 underwent double pigtail insertion (stent group), whereas 17 underwent complete clearance of stones (electrohydraulic lithotripsy). Results: In the electrohydraulic lithotripsy group, successful stone clearance was achieved in 76.5%, whereas, in the stent group, the success of stenting was 94.7%. A significant difference was detected in the actuarial incidence of recurrent acute cholangitis when the electrohydraulic lithotripsy group was compared with the stent group [one patient (7.7%) vs. 12 patients (63.2%), respectively; P = 0.002, log rank test]. A significant difference was detected in the actuarial frequency of mortality between the electrohydraulic lithotripsy and stent groups [seven patients (41.2%) vs. 14 patients (73.7%), respectively; P = 0.01, log rank test]. Conclusions: The removal of difficult common bile duct stones by electrohydraulic lithotripsy and further endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography has a high success rate and a low complication rate even in the elderly.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/APTen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofAlimentary Pharmacology and Therapeuticsen_HK
dc.rightsAlimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. Copyright © Blackwell Publishing Ltd.en_HK
dc.subject.meshAgeden_HK
dc.subject.meshAged, 80 and overen_HK
dc.subject.meshCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde - adverse effects - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshCholangitis - etiologyen_HK
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshFollow-Up Studiesen_HK
dc.subject.meshGallstones - therapyen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshLithotripsy - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshRecurrenceen_HK
dc.subject.meshStents - adverse effectsen_HK
dc.titleRetained common bile duct stones: A comparison between biliary stenting and complete clearance of stones by electrohydraulic lithotripsyen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0269-2813&volume=17&spage=289&epage=296&date=2003&atitle=Retained+Common+Bile+Duct+Stones:+A+Comparison+between+Biliary+Stenting+and+Complete+Clearance+of+Stones+by+Electrohydraulic+Lithotripsyen_HK
dc.identifier.emailYuen, MF:mfyuen@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailLai, CL:hrmelcl@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailWong, BCY:bcywong@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityYuen, MF=rp00479en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLai, CL=rp00314en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityWong, BCY=rp00429en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1046/j.1365-2036.2003.01415.xen_HK
dc.identifier.pmid12534415-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0037314926en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros80389en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0037314926&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume17en_HK
dc.identifier.issue2en_HK
dc.identifier.spage289en_HK
dc.identifier.epage296en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000180480900015-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHui, CK=7202876933en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLai, KC=7402135595en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNg, M=7202076310en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, WM=7403972413en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYuen, MF=7102031955en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLam, SK=7402279473en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLai, CL=7403086396en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, BCY=7402023340en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats