Background and Study Aims: It seems rational to perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) if the probability of endoscopic therapy is high, but to carry out magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) first if this probability is moderate or low. The aim of the present study was to develop a model describing the probability of endoscopic therapy in patients without previous biliary imaging. Patients and Methods: The development of the model was based on stepwise multiple logistic regression applied to 2470 prospectively registered first-time ERCP procedures. The model was evaluated by application to 442 prospectively registered first-time ERCP procedures entered in the database in the following 2 years. Results: Predictors selected were: age, gender, p-amylase ≥ 400 U/l, ln(s-bilirubin), ln(s-alkaline phosphatase), common bile duct (CBD) stone seen on transabdominal ultrasonography, gallbladder stone seen on transabdominal ultrasonography, interaction of dilated bile ducts seen on transabdominal ultrasonography with ln(s-bilirubin), and interaction between age and male gender. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.875 and there was good fit of the model. A test with a probability cutoff value of 80 % had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 92.8 %. Specificity was 87.1 % and, using this test, 52.4 % of patients would have been selected for primary ERCP. In the application cohort, the frequency of therapy was higher than in the development cohort. The area under the ROC curve was 78.7 %. When used in the evaluation cohort, with a cutoff probability of 80 %, the test had sensitivity 84.0 %, specificity 49.5 %, negative predictive value (NPV) 46.6 % and PPV 85.6 %. Of the patients, 76.7 % would have been selected for ERCP. This would have identified 85.5 % of individuals needing therapeutic ERCP without use first of MRCP or EUS. Test-positive cases constituted 90.3 % of stent insertions and 86.3 % of stone extractions. Conclusions: The model is useful for selection of patients for ERCP at our center.
References
-
1
Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G. et al .
Major early complications from diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study.
Gastrointest Endosc.
1998;
48
1-10
-
2
Masci E, Toti G, Mariani A. et al .
Complications of diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter study.
Am J Gastroenterol.
2001;
96
417-23
-
3
Trap R, Adamsen S, Hart-Hansen O, Henriksen M.
Severe and fatal complications after diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP: a prospective series of claims to insurance covering public hospitals.
Endoscopy.
1999;
31
125-130
-
4 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality .Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancrestography. Summary. Evidence report/technologyassessment: number 50. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. http://www.ahrqgov/clinic/ercpsums/ercpsums.htm 2002
-
5 Nathan T, Pedersen F M, Schaffalitzky de Muckadell O B. MRCP or ERCP: a randomised study of the initial approach to the patient with suspected obstructive biliary disease [abstract]. 10th United European Gastroenterology Week (UEGW) Geneva; 19-23 October 2002
-
6
Coakley F V, Qayyum A.
Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography.
Gastrointest Endosc.
2002;
55
2-12
-
7
Macdonald G A, Peduto A J.
Magnetic resonance imaging and diseases of the liver and biliary tract. Part 2. Magnetic resonance cholangiography and angiography and conclusions.
J Gastroenterol Hepatol.
2000;
15
992-999
-
8
Schofl R.
Diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
Endoscopy.
2001;
33
147-157
-
9
Calvo MM, Bujanda L, Calderon A. et al .
Role of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in patients with suspected choledocholithiasis.
Mayo Clin Proc.
2002;
77
422-428
-
10
Mark D H, Carole R F, Aronson N.
Evidence-based assessment of diagnostic modalities for common bile duct stones.
Gastrointest Endosc.
2003;
56
190-194
-
11
Schofl R, Haefner M.
Diagnostic cholangiopancreatography.
Endoscopy.
2003;
35
145-55
-
12
Cotton P B.
Evaluating ERCP is important but difficult.
Gut.
2002;
51
287-289
-
13
Andersen J R, Sorensen S M, Kruse A. et al .
Randomised trial of endoscopic endoprosthesis versus operative bypass in malignant obstructive jaundice.
Gut.
1989;
30
1132-1135
-
14
Shepherd H A, Royle G, Ross A P. et al .
Endoscopic biliary endoprosthesis in the palliation of malignant obstruction of the distal common bile duct: a randomized trial.
Br J Surg.
1988;
75
1166-1168
-
15
Smith A C, Dowsett J F, Russell R C. et al .
Randomised trial of endoscopic stenting versus surgical bypass in malignant low bile duct obstruction.
Lancet.
1994;
344
1655-1660
-
16
Davids P H, Groen A K, Rauws E A. et al .
Randomised trial of self-expanding metal stents versus polyethylene stents for distal malignant biliary obstruction.
Lancet.
1992;
340
1488-1492
-
17 Ostroff J W, LaBerge J M. Endoscopic and radiologic treatment of biliary disease. In: Feldman M, Scharschmidt BF, Sleisenger MH, (eds) Sleisenger and Fordtran’s gastrointestinal and liver disease. New York; Saunders 1997: 1033-1055
-
18
Lai E C, Mok F P, Tan E S. et al .
Endoscopic biliary drainage for severe acute cholangitis.
N Engl J Med.
1992;
326
1582-1586
-
19
Leese T, Neoptolemos J P, Baker A R, Carr-Locke D L.
Management of acute cholangitis and the impact of endoscopic sphincterotomy.
Br J Surg.
1986;
73
988-992
-
20
Neoptolemos J P, Carr-Locke D L, London N J. et al .
Controlled trial of urgent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic sphincterotomy versus conservative treatment for acute pancreatitis due to gallstones.
Lancet.
1988;
2
979-983
-
21
Cuschieri A, Croce E, Faggioni A. et al .
EAES ductal stone study. Preliminary findings of multi-center prospective randomized trial comparing two-stage vs single-stage management.
Surg Endosc.
1996;
10
1130-1135
-
22
Rhodes M, Sussman L, Cohen L, Lewis M P.
Randomised trial of laparoscopic exploration of common bile duct versus postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for common bile duct stones.
Lancet.
1998;
351
159-161
-
23
Neoptolemos J P, Davidson B R, Shaw D E. et al .
Study of common bile duct exploration and endoscopic sphincterotomy in a consecutive series of 438 patients.
Br J Surg.
1987;
74
916-921
-
24
Tham T C, Carr-Locke D L.
Endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones in elderly people.
BMJ.
1999;
318
617-618
-
25
Targarona E M, Ayuso R M, Bordas J M. et al .
Randomised trial of endoscopic sphincterotomy with gallbladder left in situ versus open surgery for common bile duct calculi in high-risk patients.
Lancet.
1996;
347
926-929
-
26
Hauer-Jensen M, Karesen R, Nygaard K. et al .
Prospective randomized study of routine intraoperative cholangiography during open cholecystectomy: long-term follow-up and multivariate analysis of predictors of choledocholithiasis.
Surgery.
1993;
113
318-323
-
27
Huguier M, Bornet P, Charpak Y. et al .
Selective contraindications based on multivariate analysis for operative cholangiography in biliary lithiasis.
Surg Gynecol Obstet.
1991;
172
470-474
-
28
Robertson G S, Jagger C, Johnson P R. et al .
Selection criteria for preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the laparoscopic era.
Arch Surg.
1996;
131
89-94
-
29
Stain S C, Marsri L S, Froes E T.
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy: laboratory predictors of choledocholithiasis.
Am Surg.
1994;
60
767-771
-
30
Alponat A, Kum C K, Rajnakova A. et al .
Predictive factors for synchronous common bile duct stones in patients with cholelithiasis.
Surg Endosc.
1997;
11
928-932
-
31
Barkun A N, Barkun J S, Fried G M. et al .
Useful predictors of bile duct stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. McGill Gallstone Treatment Group.
Ann Surg.
1994;
220
32-39
-
32
Chan A C, Chung S C, Wyman A. et al .
Selective use of preoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
Gastrointest Endosc.
1996;
43
212-215
-
33
Houdart R, Perniceni T, Darne B. et al .
Predicting common bile duct lithiasis: determination and prospective validation of a model predicting low risk.
Am J Surg.
1995;
170
38-43
-
34
Taylor T V, Armstrong C P, Rimmer S. et al .
Prediction of choledocholithiasis using a pocket microcomputer.
Br J Surg.
1988;
75
138-140
-
35
Frossard J L, Hadengue A, Amouyal G. et al .
Choledocholithiasis: a prospective study of spontaneous common bile duct stone migration.
Gastrointest Endosc.
2000;
51
175-179
-
36 Hosmer D W, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. Philadelphia; Wiley Interscience 1989
-
37 Lidofsky S, Scharschmidt B F. Jaundice. In: Feldman M, Scharschmidt BF, Sleisenger MH, (eds) Sleisenger and Fordtran’s gastrointestinal and liver disease. New York; Saunders 1997: 220-232
-
38
Jensen K H, Jorgensen T.
Incidence of gallstones in a Danish population.
Gastroenterology.
1991;
100
790-794
-
39
Lowenfels A B, Velema J P.
Estimating gallstone incidence from prevalence data.
Scand J Gastroenterol.
1992;
27
984-986
-
40
Haddock G, Carter D C.
Aetiology of pancreatic cancer.
Br J Surg.
1990;
77
1159-1166
-
41 Kew M C. Hepatic tumors and cysts. In: Feldman M, Scharschmidt BF, Sleisenger MH, (eds) Sleisenger and Fordtran’s gastrointestinal and liver disease. New York; Saunders 1997: 1364-1387
-
42
Golub R, Cantu R Jr., Tan M.
The prediction of common bile duct stones using a neural network.
J Am Coll Surg.
1998;
187
584-590
-
43
Trondsen E, Edwin B, Reiertsen O. et al .
Prediction of common bile duct stones prior to cholecystectomy: a prospective validation of a discriminant analysis function.
Arch Surg.
1998;
133
162-166
T. Nathan, M. D.
Department of Gastroenterology and Internal Medicine
Vejle Hospital · 7100 Vejle · Denmark
Fax: +45-79406860
Email: Torben@Nathan.dk
