Brief Article
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 28, 2013; 19(16): 2501-2506
Published online Apr 28, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i16.2501
How do we manage post-OLT redundant bile duct?
Victor Torres, Nicholas Martinez, Gabriel Lee, Jose Almeda, Glenn Gross, Sandeep Patel, Laura Rosenkranz
Victor Torres, Nicholas Martinez, Gabriel Lee, Glenn Gross, Sandeep Patel, Laura Rosenkranz, Division of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229, United States
Jose Almeda, Department of Pancreatic and Hepatobiliary Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78229, United States
Author contributions: Torres V, Martinez N and Lee G wrote this paper, performed acquisition and analysis of data; Gross G Patel S and Rosenkranz L designed the research and were the primary endoscopist; Almeda J assisted in the scientific writing of the paper.
Correspondence to: Victor Torres, MD, Division of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Department of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr No. 209, San Antonio, TX 78229, United States. torresv5@uthscsa.edu
Telephone: +1-210-5674611 Fax: +1-210-5671976
Received: July 28, 2012
Revised: November 13, 2012
Accepted: November 14, 2012
Published online: April 28, 2013
Processing time: 23 Days and 16.9 Hours
Abstract

AIM: To address endoscopic outcomes of post-Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) patients diagnosed with a “redundant bile duct” (RBD).

METHODS: Medical records of patients who underwent OLT at the Liver Transplant Center, University Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio Texas were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with suspected biliary tract complications (BTC) underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). All ERCP were performed by experienced biliary endoscopist. RBD was defined as a looped, sigmoid-shaped bile duct on cholangiogram with associated cholestatic liver biomarkers. Patients with biliary T-tube placement, biliary anastomotic strictures, bile leaks, bile-duct stones-sludge and suspected sphincter of oddi dysfunction were excluded. Therapy included single or multiple biliary stents with or without sphincterotomy. The incidence of RBD, the number of ERCP corrective sessions, and the type of endoscopic interventions were recorded. Successful response to endoscopic therapy was defined as resolution of RBD with normalization of associated cholestasis. Laboratory data and pertinent radiographic imaging noted included the pre-ERCP period and a follow up period of 6-12 mo after the last ERCP intervention.

RESULTS: One thousand two hundred and eighty-two patient records who received OLT from 1992 through 2011 were reviewed. Two hundred and twenty-four patients underwent ERCP for suspected BTC. RBD was reported in each of the initial cholangiograms. Twenty-one out of 1282 (1.6%) were identified as having RBD. There were 12 men and 9 women, average age of 59.6 years. Primary indication for ERCP was cholestatic pattern of liver associated biomarkers. Nineteen out of 21 patients underwent endoscopic therapy and 2/21 required immediate surgical intervention. In the endoscopically managed group: 65 ERCP procedures were performed with an average of 3.4 per patient and 1.1 stent per session. Fifteen out of 19 (78.9%) patients were successfully managed with biliary stenting. All stents were plastic. Selection of stent size and length were based upon endoscopist preference. Stent size ranged from 7 to 11.5 Fr (average stent size 10 Fr); Stent length ranged from 6 to 15 cm (average length 9 cm). Concurrent biliary sphincterotomy was performed in 10/19 patients. Single ERCP session was sufficient in 6/15 (40.0%) patients, whereas 4/15 (26.7%) patients needed two ERCP sessions and 5/15 (33.3%) patients required more than two (average of 5.4 ERCP procedures). Single biliary stent was sufficient in 5 patients; the remaining patients required an average of 4.9 stents. Four out of 19 (21.1%) patients failed endotherapy (lack of resolution of RBD and recurrent cholestasis in the absence of biliary stent) and required either choledocojejunostomy (2/4) or percutaneous biliary drainage (2/4). Endoscopic complications included: 2/65 (3%) post-ERCP pancreatitis and 2/10 (20%) non-complicated post-sphincterotomy bleeding. No endoscopic related mortality was found. The medical records of the 15 successful endoscopically managed patients were reviewed for a period of one year after removal of all biliary stents. Eleven patients had continued resolution of cholestatic biomarkers (73%). One patient had recurrent hepatitis C, 2 patients suffered septic shock which was not associated with ERCP and 1 patient was transferred care to an outside provider and records were not available for our review.

CONCLUSION: Although surgical biliary reconstruction techniques have improved, RBD represents a post-OLT complication. This entity is rare however, endoscopic management of RBD represents a reasonable initial approach.

Keywords: Redundant bile duct; Orthotopic liver transplantation; Biliary complications; Biliary stent; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography