Abstract No. 722 Disposable, single-use, digital endoscopes for percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy: technical success, advantages, and cost comparison

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. S311
Author(s):  
R. England ◽  
H. Singh ◽  
M. Thomas ◽  
K. Hong
2017 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 89-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osvaldo Ulises Garay ◽  
Garcia Elorrio Ezequiel ◽  
Viviana Rodríguez ◽  
Cintia Spira ◽  
Federico Augustovski ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (Supp1) ◽  
pp. S40-S45
Author(s):  
Eugenio Ventimiglia ◽  
◽  
Alvaro Jiménez Godínez ◽  
Olivier Traxer ◽  
Bhaskar K. Somani ◽  
...  

2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 512-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elliot Yung ◽  
Michel Gagner ◽  
Alfons Pomp ◽  
Gregory Dakin ◽  
Luca Milone ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Sohrt ◽  
Lars Ehlers ◽  
Flemming Witt Udsen ◽  
Anders Mærkedahl ◽  
Brendan A. McGrath

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichiro Tsutsumi ◽  
Hironari Kato ◽  
Shuntaro Yabe ◽  
Sho Mizukawa ◽  
Hiroyuki Seki ◽  
...  

Background: Bile duct stones after hepaticojejunostomy are considered a troublesome adverse event. Although percutaneous transhepatic procedures using a cholangioscopy is performed to treat these bile duct stones, a peroral endoscopic procedure using a short, double-balloon enteroscope (sDBE) is an alternative. This study aimed to compare the immediate and long-term outcomes of both treatments for bile duct stones in patients who underwent prior hepaticojejunostomy. Methods: Between October 2001 and May 2013, 40 consecutive patients were treated for bile duct stones after hepaticojejunostomy at a tertiary care hospital. Initial success with biliary access, biliary intervention-related technical success, clinical success, adverse events, hospitalization duration, and stone-free survival were retrospectively evaluated. Results: The initial success rates for biliary access were 100% (8/8) with percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy (PTCS) and 91% (29/32) with sDBE. In three patients in whom biliary access during initial sDBE failed, successful access with subsequent PTCS was achieved, and biliary intervention-related technical success and clinical success were eventually achieved in all 40 patients. The rate of adverse events was significantly lower with sDBE than with PTCS (10% versus 45%; p = 0.025). The median hospitalization duration for complete stone clearance was significantly shorter with sDBE than with PTCS (10 versus 35 days; p < 0.001). During the median 7.2 year or 3.1 year follow up, the probabilities of being stone-free at 1, 2, and 3 years were 100%, 73%, and 64% for PTCS and 85%, 65%, and 59% for sDBE, respectively ( p = 0.919). Conclusions: sDBE was useful, with few adverse events and short hospitalization; therefore, experienced endoscopists can consider it as first-line treatment for bile duct stones in patients with prior hepaticojejunostomy.


2020 ◽  
Vol 134 (9) ◽  
pp. 790-797
Author(s):  
R Mistry ◽  
R V Russell ◽  
N Walker ◽  
E Ofo

AbstractBackgroundThis study investigated whether the single-use rhinolaryngoscope is clinically and economically comparable to the conventional reusable rhinolaryngoscope within a tertiary otolaryngology centre in the UK.MethodsA non-blinded, prospective and single-arm evaluation was carried out over a 5-day period, in which micro-costing was used to compare single-use rhinolaryngoscopes with reusable rhinolaryngoscopes.ResultsOverall, 68 per cent of the investigators perceived the single-use rhinolaryngoscope to be ‘good’ or ‘very good’, while 85 per cent believed the single-use rhinolaryngoscope could replace the reusable rhinolaryngoscope (n = 59). The incremental costs of reusable rhinolaryngoscope eyepieces and videoscopes in the out-patient clinic, when compared to single-use rhinolaryngoscopes, were £30 and £11, respectively. The incremental costs of reusable rhinolaryngoscope eyepieces and videoscopes in the acute surgical assessment unit, when compared to single-use rhinolaryngoscopes, were −£4 and −£73, respectively.ConclusionThe single-use rhinolaryngoscope provides a clinically comparable, and potentially cost-minimising, alternative to the reusable rhinolaryngoscope for use in the acute surgical assessment unit of our hospital.


Endoscopy ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (11) ◽  
pp. 1054-1056 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lillian Du ◽  
Pernilla D’Souza ◽  
Aducio Thiesen ◽  
Safwat Girgis ◽  
Richard Owen ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document