Gen Surg SAQs · endoscopy
Proving the stone, protecting the pancreas, and staging duct plus gallbladder
Fellowship SAQ on pre-ERCP stone confirmation, PEP prophylaxis with early precut rescue, and single-versus-two-stage duct clearance with cholecystectomy timing.
On this page
Study tools
Target exams
Write your answer
Saved on this device. No marking — you are the marker.
(A) Refuse diagnostic ERCP: even high-risk criteria leave 12.9% without stones, and tandem EUS first let 15.2% of non-cholangitic high-risk patients avoid a diagnostic scope — since diagnostic ERCP should be avoided outright.[6] Confirm with either test: Cochrane pooling gives EUS 0.95/0.97 against MRCP 0.93/0.96 with no difference, and the intermediate-likelihood randomisation found both 92 to 98% sensitive — so scope only the test-positive duct.[7][9]
(B) Protect every pancreas with rectal NSAID 100 mg and add a 5-Fr stent at high risk — repeated pancreatic entries qualify — since indomethacin alone failed non-inferiority against the combination (14.9% against 11.3% pancreatitis).[2][10] Rescue the difficult papilla with early precut: cannulation equals persistence at 90%, yet pancreatitis halves to 2.5% against 5.3% — cut early in experienced hands rather than persisting.[13]
(C) Offer either stage honestly: 14 studies with 1,849 patients tie single-stage exploration against ERCP-plus-cholecystectomy on success, retained stones, mortality, morbidity and stay — so choose by unit expertise, not dogma.[16] Then book the gallbladder within 72 hours: early operation probably cuts conversion and recurrent biliary events with moderate certainty — delay is what brings the patient back septic.[18]
References8ShowHide
- [6]Sirinawasatien A, et al. The use of endoscopic ultrasound in tandem with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the 2019 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline for patients at high risk of choledocholithiasis can help to avoid diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in individuals without ascending cholangitis. DEN Open, 2025.PMID 39845698
- [7]Giljaca V, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound versus magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography for common bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2015.PMID 25719224
- [9]Jagtap N, et al. EUS versus MRCP to perform ERCP in patients with intermediate likelihood of choledocholithiasis: a randomised controlled trial. Gut, 2022.PMID 35144973
- [2]Dumonceau JM, et al. Prophylaxis of post-ERCP pancreatitis: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - updated June 2014. Endoscopy, 2014.PMID 25148137
- [10]Elmunzer BJ, et al. Indomethacin with or without prophylactic pancreatic stent placement to prevent pancreatitis after ERCP: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet, 2024.PMID 38219767
- [13]Cennamo V, et al. Can early precut implementation reduce endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related complication risk? Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Endoscopy, 2010.PMID 20306386
- [16]Chaouch MA, et al. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing single-stage laparoscopic versus two-stage endoscopic management followed by laparoscopic cholecystectomy of preoperatively diagnosed common bile duct stones. Medicine (Baltimore), 2025.PMID 40101031
- [18]Khan QI, et al. Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for choledocholithiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Surg Endosc, 2026.PMID 42414771