ANZ Journal of SurgeryVolume 78, Issue 7 p. 530-530 GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF BILE DUCT STONES Richard J. Cade FRACS, Richard J. Cade FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorSimon Banting FRACS, Simon Banting FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorSayed A. Hassen FRACS, Sayed A. Hassen FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorSean Mackay FRACS, Sean Mackay FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author Richard J. Cade FRACS, Richard J. Cade FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorSimon Banting FRACS, Simon Banting FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorSayed A. Hassen FRACS, Sayed A. Hassen FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorSean Mackay FRACS, Sean Mackay FRACS * Box Hill and St. Vincent’s Hospitals and † Box Hill and Alfred Hospitals Melbourne, Victoria, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 28 June 2008 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04564.xCitations: 3Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article.Citing Literature Volume78, Issue7July 2008Pages 530-530 RelatedInformation

BACKGROUND:The management of recurrent choledocholithiasis today remains as challenging as in the pre-endoscopic era. Between 2 and 7% of affected patients have historically required surgical intervention for the treatment of recurrent or retained choledocholithiasis and of these, as many as 24% develop biliary complications. To avoid surgery, repeated endoscopic management of the problem has been suggested. In this study, we evaluate our policy of repeated endoscopic management of recurrent primary bile duct stones.METHODS:This study examined a cohort of nine patients identified from a prospective database with recurrent choledocholithiasis. Demographic, clinical and investigative details were recorded and data were analysed. Complications were determined from a review of the patient's file.RESULTS:There were nine patients and 66 procedures were carried out. Mean age at time of first endoscopy was 70.1 years (36-91 years). Three patients were of male sex (33.3%). The mean number of endoscopies carried out per patient was 7.3 (3-13). Failure to completely clear the duct occurred in 36.4% of all endoscopies. There were no periprocedural complications.CONCLUSION:Repeated endoscopic stone extraction by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography when required is a safe policy. However, this technique will only provide temporary relief from primary duct stones and repeated endoscopic treatment, again safe, will be required.