Successfully reported this slideshow.

Acs0503 Jaundice 2006


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

Acs0503 Jaundice 2006

  1. 1. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 1 3 JAUNDICE Jeffrey S. Barkun, M.D., F.A.C.S., Prosanto Chaudhury, M.D., and Alan N. Barkun, M.D. Approach to the Jaundiced Patient The term jaundice refers to the yellowish discoloration of skin, which are also known, respectively, as direct and indirect fractions sclerae, and mucous membranes that results from excessive depo- on the basis of their behavior in the van den Bergh (diazo) reac- sition of bilirubin in tissues. It usually is unmistakable but on occa- tion.3 If the patient has normal-colored urine and stools, unconju- sion may manifest itself subtly. It is generally held that jaundice gated bilirubin [see Sidebar Unconjugated (Indirect) Bilirubin] is develops when serum bilirubin levels rise above 34.2 μmol/L (2 predominant [see Table 1]. If the patient has dark urine, pale stools, mg/dl)1; however, the appearance of jaundice also depends on or any other signs or symptoms of a cholestatic syndrome (see whether it is conjugated or unconjugated bilirubin that is elevated below), the serum bilirubin fractionation usually indicates that and on how long the episode of jaundice lasts. conjugated bilirubin is predominant. Rarely, the clinical picture In what follows, we outline a problem-based approach to the may be secondary to a massive increase in both direct and indirect jaundiced patient that involves assessing the incremental informa- bilirubin production after the latter has overcome the ability of the tion provided by successive clinical and laboratory investigations, hepatocytes to secrete conjugated bilirubin. as well as the information obtained by means of modern imaging It is nearly always possible to distinguish between direct and modalities.We also propose a classification of jaundice that stress- indirect hyperbilirubinemia on clinical grounds alone.4 Our es the therapeutic options most pertinent to surgeons.We have not emphasis here is on direct hyperbilirubinemia, which is the type attempted a detailed review of bilirubin metabolism and the vari- that is more relevant to general surgeons. ous pediatric disorders that cause jaundice; such issues are beyond the scope of this chapter. Finally, we emphasize that modern deci- Cholestatic Syndrome sion making in the approach to the jaundiced patient includes not The term cholestasis refers to decreased delivery of bilirubin only careful evaluation of anatomic issues but also close attention into the intestine (and subsequent accumulation in the hepato- to patient morbidity and quality-of-life concerns, as well as a focus on working up the patient in a cost-effective fashion. For optimal treatment, in our view, an integrated approach that involves the surgeon, the gastroenterologist, and the radiologist is essential. Unconjugated (Indirect) Bilirubin The breakdown of heme leads to the production of unconjugated Clinical Evaluation and bilirubin, which is water insoluble, is tightly bound to albumin, and Investigative Studies does not pass into the urine. Excessive production of unconjugated bilirubin typically follows an episode of hemolysis. In the absence of concomitant liver disease or biliary obstruction, the liver can usually HISTORY AND PHYSICAL EXAMI- handle the extra bilirubin, and only a modest rise in serum levels is NATION observed. There is a substantial increase in bile pigment excretion, When a patient presents with a leading to large quantities of stercobilinogen in the stool. A patient skin discoloration suggestive of with hemolysis may therefore be slightly jaundiced with normal-col- ored urine and stools. Blood tests reveal that 60% to 85% of bili- jaundice, the first step is to con- rubin is indirect.124 firm that icterus is indeed present. To this end, the mucous mem- Possible causes of indirect hyperbilirubinemia include a variety of branes of the mouth, the palms, the soles, and the sclerae should be disorders that result in significant hemolysis or ineffective erythro- examined in natural light. Because such areas are protected from poiesis. The diagnosis of indirect hyperbilirubinemia attributable to the sun, photodegradation of bile is minimized; thus, the yellowish hemolysis is confirmed by an elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase discoloration of elastic tissues may be more easily detected. (LDH) level, a decreased serum haptoglobin level, and evidence of hemolysis on microscopic examination of the blood smear. Occasionally, deposition of a yellowish pigment on skin may mimic Disorders associated with defects in hepatic bilirubin uptake or jaundice but may in fact be related to the consumption of large conjugation can also produce unconjugated hyperbilirubinemia. The quantities of food containing lycopene or carotene or drugs such as most common of these, Gilbert syndrome, is a benign condition rifampin or quinacrine. In these cases, the skin is usually the only affecting up to 7% of the general population.125,126 It is not a single site of coloration, and careful inspection of sclerae and mucous disease but a heterogeneous group of disorders, all of which are membranes generally reveals no icteric pigmentation. In certain characterized by a homozygosity for a defect in the promoter controlling the transcription of the UDP glucuronyl transferase I cultures, long-term application of tea bags to the eyes may lead to gene.127 The consequent impairment of bilirubin glucuronidation a brownish discoloration of the sclerae that can mimic jaundice.2 presents as a mild unconjugated hyperbilirubinemia. The elevated bilirubin level is usually detected on routine blood testing, and affected DIRECT VERSUS INDIRECT HYPERBILIRUBINEMIA patients may report that their skin turns yellow when they are Once the presence of jaundice has been confirmed, further clin- fatigued or at stressful times (e.g., after missing meals, after vomiting, ical assessment determines whether the hyperbilirubinemia is pre- or in the presence of an infection). Other causes of an unconju- dominantly direct or indirect.This distinction is based on the divi- gated hyperbilirubinemia are beyond the scope of this chapter. sion of bilirubin into conjugated and unconjugated fractions,
  2. 2. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 2 Approach to the Jaundiced Patient Patient has presumed posthepatic jaundice Patient has confirmed hepatic jaundice Obtain ultrasonogram to confirm posthepatic jaundice [See Sidebar Hepatic Jaundice.] and identify level of biliary obstruction. In some unusual clinical situations, ultrasonography may not detect the posthepatic cause of jaundice, and MRCP, ERCP, PTC, repeat ultrasonography, or EUS may be necessary. If all these situations are ruled out, seek a hepatic cause and consider liver biopsy. Patient has confirmed posthepatic jaundice Proceed according to clinical scenario present. Suspected cholangitis Suspected choledocholithiasis Choledocholithiasis is the most likely diagnosis. Perform preoperative MRCP or ERCP and laparoscopic Resuscitate, correct any coagulopathy, and give cholecystectomy. appropriate antibiotics. Alternatively, perform laparoscopic cholecystectomy Perform ERCP for definitive diagnosis and with intraoperative cholangiography. treatment. If ERCP cannot be done, consider transhepatic drainage or surgery.
  3. 3. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 3 Patient presents with Perform clinical assessment skin discoloration suggestive of jaundice Perform physical exam and obtain history. Patient has indirect hyperbilirubinemia Confirm icterus by examining oral mucous membranes, palms, soles, [See Sidebar Unconjugated (Indirect) and sclerae in natural light. Bilirubin.] Distinguish indirect (unconjugated) from direct (conjugated) hyperbilirubinemia: • Normal-colored urine and stools suggest indirect hyperbilirubinemia Patient has direct hyperbilirubinemia • Dark urine, pale stools, and signs or symptoms of a cholestatic syndrome Distinguish hepatic (“medical”) jaundice from suggest direct hyperbilirubinemia posthepatic (“surgical”) jaundice. • Acute hepatitis, alcohol abuse, and physical Measure total serum bilirubin and • evidence of cirrhosis or portal hypertension percentage of conjugated bilirubin. • suggest hepatic jaundice • Abdominal pain, rigors, itching, and a • palpable liver > 2 cm below costal margin • suggest posthepatic jaundice Patient has presumed hepatic jaundice [See Sidebar Hepatic Jaundice.] Lesion appears unresectable, and surgical Suspected lesion other than choledocholithiasis palliation is not indicated The most common single cause is pancreatic cancer; Treat with ERCP or PTC and drainage. For many of the other possible causes also involve malignancy. advanced malignant disease, supportive care Perform spiral CT or MRI with MRCP to diagnose lesion alone may be indicated. and assess resectability. Consider EUS with biopsy for distal-third obstruction. Perform Doppler ultrasonography to stage lesion further; Lesion appears resectable, or surgical CT angiography or MRA may be considered if ultrasonogram palliation is indicated is abnormal. Perform MRCP to assess intrahepatic biliary system in Treat with surgical bypass or resection as patients with middle-third or upper-third obstruction. appropriate for level of obstruction. Perform laparoscopy to confirm resectability before laparotomy. Middle-third obstruction Lower-third obstruction Upper-third obstruction Palliation: bypass with left (segment III) Palliation: bypass with hepaticojejunostomy. Palliation: bypass with Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy. Resection for cure: resection of tumor and choledochojejunostomy. Resection for cure: resection of tumor, reconstruction with hepaticojejunostomy. Resection for cure: resection of tumor possibly with hepatectomy or with pancreaticoduodenectomy or segmentectomy, and reconstruction local ampullary excision. with hepaticojejunostomy or cholangiojejunostomy.
  4. 4. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 4 This model, however, despite its 96% sensitivity (greater than that of any single radiologic diagnostic modality), could not accurately Table 1 Causes of Unconjugated predict the level of a biliary obstruction. Other investigators have Hyperbilirubinemia reported similar findings,8,12,13 and most agree that strategies that omit ultrasonography are clearly inferior.17 Increased RBC breakdown In summary, a clinical approach supported by simple biochem- Acute hemolysis ical evaluation displays good predictive ability to distinguish hepat- Chronic hemolytic disorders ic from posthepatic jaundice; however, a clinical approach alone Large hematoma resorption, multiple blood transfusions does not accurately identify the level of biliary obstruction in a Gilbert syndrome patient with posthepatic jaundice. Decreased hepatic bilirubin conjugation The remainder of this chapter focuses primarily on manage- Gilbert syndrome ment of posthepatic jaundice; hepatic jaundice is less often seen Crigler-Najjar syndrome types I and II and dealt with by general surgeons [see Table 2 and Sidebar Hepatic Familial unconjugated hyperbilirubinemia Jaundice]. IMAGING Once the history has been cytes and in blood), irrespective of the underlying cause. When obtained and bedside and labora- cholestasis is mild, it may not be associated with clinical jaundice. tory assessments have been com- As it worsens, a conjugated hyperbilirubinemia develops that pre- pleted, the next step is imaging, sents as jaundice. The conjugated hyperbilirubinemia may derive the goals of which are (1) to con- either from a defect in hepatocellular function (hepatic jaundice, firm the presence of an extrahep- also referred to as nonobstructive or medical jaundice) or from a atic obstruction (i.e., to verify that blockage somewhere in the biliary tree (posthepatic jaundice, also the jaundice is indeed posthepatic rather than hepatic), (2) to referred to as obstructive or surgical jaundice). In this chapter, we determine the level of the obstruction, (3) to identify the specific refer to hepatic and posthepatic causes of jaundice, reserving the cause of the obstruction, and (4) to provide complementary infor- term cholestasis for the specific clinical syndrome that is attribut- mation relating to the underlying diagnosis (e.g., staging informa- able to a chronic lack of delivery of bile into the intestine.This syn- tion in cases of malignancy). drome is characterized by signs and symptoms that are related Of the many imaging methods available today, the gold stan- either to the conjugated hyperbilirubinemia or to chronic malab- dard for defining the level of a biliary obstruction before operation sorption of fat-soluble vitamins (i.e., vitamins A, D, E, and K): in a jaundiced patient remains direct cholangiography, which can jaundice, dark urine, pale stools, pruritus, bruising, steatorrhea, be performed either via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancre- night blindness, osteomalacia, and neuromuscular weakness.5 atography (ERCP) [see 5:18 Gastrointestinal Endoscopy] or via per- HEPATIC VERSUS POSTHEPATIC cutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC). Unlike other JAUNDICE imaging modalities, direct cholangiography poses significant risks to the patient: there is a 4% to 7% incidence of pancreatitis or Once the presence of direct cholangitis after ERCP,18,19 and there is a 4% incidence of bile hyperbilirubinemia is confirmed, leakage, cholangitis, or bleeding after PTC.20 There are also sever- the next step is to determine al risks that are particular to the manipulation of an obstructed bil- whether the jaundice is hepatic or iary system (see below). For these reasons, the role of ERCP and posthepatic. A number of authors PTC is increasingly a therapeutic one: therefore, it is important to have studied the reliability of clin- ical assessment for making this determination.6-17 The sensitivities of history, physical examination, and blood tests alone range from 70% to 95%,6-11 whereas the specificities are approximately 75%.10,11 The overall accuracy of clinical assessment of hepatic Table 2 Causes of Hepatic Jaundice133 and posthepatic causes of jaundice ranges from 87% to 97%.8,12 Clinically, hepatic jaundice is most often signaled by acute hepati- Hepatitis tis, a history of alcohol abuse, or physical findings reflecting cir- Viral rhosis or portal hypertension13; posthepatic jaundice is most often Autoimmune signaled by abdominal pain, rigors, itching, or a palpable liver Alcoholic more than 2 cm below the costal margin.14 Drugs and hormones By using discriminant analysis in a pediatric patient population, Diseases of intrahepatic bile ducts two investigators were able to isolate three biochemical tests that Liver infiltration and storage disorders differentiated between biliary atresia and intrahepatic cholestasis Systemic infections with an accuracy of 95%: total serum bilirubin concentration, alka- Total parenteral nutrition line phosphatase level, and γ-glutamyltranspeptidase level.15 Serum Postoperative intrahepatic cholestasis transaminase levels added no independent information of signifi- Cholestasis of pregnancy cance to the model. Another multivariate analysis model demon- Benign recurrent intrahepatic cholestasis strated that patients with posthepatic jaundice were younger, had Infantile cholestatic syndromes a longer history of jaundice, were more likely to present with fever, Inherited metabolic defects and had greater elevations of serum protein concentrations and No identifiable cause (idiopathic hepatic jaundice) shorter coagulation times than patients with hepatic jaundice.16
  5. 5. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 5 Hepatic Jaundice Child-Pugh classification (see below), which correlates with individual Hepatic jaundice may be either acute or chronic and may be caused survival and has been shown to predict operative risk.131 Liver trans- by a variety of conditions [see Table 2 ]. plantation is the treatment of choice in most cases of end-stage liver Acute hepatic jaundice may arise de novo or in the setting of ongo- disease. ing liver disease. Historical clues may suggest a particular cause, such as medications or viral hepatitis. Physical examination usually The Child-Pugh Classification131 reveals little. In the presence of preexisting chronic liver disease, bed- Numerical Score (points) side stigmata (e.g., ascites, spider nevi, caput medusae, palmar ery- thema, gynecomastia, or Dupuytren contracture) may be present. Although specific therapies exist for certain clinical problems (e.g., Variable 1 2 3 acetylcysteine for acetaminophen ingestion and penicillin plus silib- inin for Amanita phalloides poisoning), treatment in most cases Encephalopathy Nil (0) Slight to mod- Moderate to remains supportive. Patients in whom encephalopathy develops with- erate (1, 2) severe (3–5) in 2 to 8 weeks of the onset of jaundice are usually classified as hav- Ascites Nil Slight Moderate to ing fulminant hepatic failure [see 8:9 Hepatic Failure]. Evidence of severe encephalopathy, renal failure, or a severe coagulopathy is predictive of poor outcome in this setting.128 The most common causes of fulmi- Bilirubin, mg/dl < 2 (< 34) 2–3 (34–51) > 3 (> 51) nant hepatic failure are viral hepatitis and drug toxicity. The mortality (μmol/L*) from fulminant hepatic failure remains high even though liver trans- plantation has favorably affected the prognosis.129 Albumin, g/dl > 3.5 (> 35) 2.8–3.5 < 2.8 (< 28) (g/L*) (28–35) In cases of chronic hepatic jaundice, the patient may have chronic hepatitis or cholestasis, with or without cirrhosis. The cause usually is Prothrombin > 70% 40%–70% < 40% determined on the basis of the history in conjunction with the results of index serology, biochemistry, viral DNA analysis, and, occasionally, histol- ogy. Causes include viral infection, drug-induced chronic hepatitis, Modified Child’s risk grade (depending on total score): 5 or 6 points, grade A; 7 to 9 points, grade B; 10 to 15 points, grade C. autoimmune liver disease, genetic disorders (e.g., Wilson disease and *Système International d’Unités, or Sl units. α1-antitrypsin deficiency), chronic cholestatic disorders, alcoholic liver disease, and steatohepatitis.130 Physical examination reveals the stig- mata of chronic liver disease and occasionally suggests a specific The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score is now used to cause (e.g., Kayser-Fleischer rings on slit-lamp examination in Wilson prioritize the allocation of organs for liver transplantation by the Unit- disease). Treatment, once again, is usually supportive, depending on ed Network for Organ Sharing.132 This score is based on the serum the clinical presentation; whether more specific therapy is needed and bilirubin and creatinine concentrations, the international normalized what form it takes depend on the cause of liver disease. Although ratio (INR), and the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma; it does physiologic tests have been developed to quantify hepatic reserve, not make use of some of the more subjective components of the the most widely used and best-validated prognostic index remains the Child-Pugh score (e.g., ascites and encephalopathy). gather as much imaging information as possible on the likely cause choledocholithiasis and some biliary tumors. In a patient with gall- of the jaundice before performing either investigation.21 We have stones, transient liver test abnormalities by themselves may suggest found the following approach to be an efficacious, cost-effective,22 an intermediate to high likelihood of common bile duct (CBD) and safe way of obtaining such information in a patient with pre- stones, even if there is no biliary ductal dilatation.25,26 If one of sumed posthepatic jaundice. these diagnoses is suspected, ultrasonography may be repeated The presence of ductal dilatation of the intrahepatic or extra- after a short period of observation (when clinically applicable); bil- hepatic biliary system confirms that a posthepatic cause is respon- iary ductal dilatation then generally becomes apparent. If all of sible for the jaundice. Ultrasonography detects ductal dilatation these unusual clinical situations have been ruled out, a hepatic with an accuracy of 95%, though results are to some extent oper- cause for the jaundice should be sought [see Table 2] and a liver ator-dependent.23 If ultrasonography does not reveal bile duct biopsy considered.27,28 dilatation, it is unlikely that an obstructing lesion is present. In Besides being able to identify the presence of extrahepatic duc- some cases, even though ductal dilatation is absent, other ultra- tal obstruction with a high degree of reliability, ultrasonography sonographic findings may still point to a specific hepatic cause of can accurately determine the level of the obstruction in 90% of jaundice (e.g., cirrhosis or infiltration of the liver by tumor). cases.29 For example, a dilated gallbladder suggests that the There are a few specific instances in which ultrasonography may obstruction is probably located in the middle third or the distal fail to detect a posthepatic cause of jaundice. For instance, very third of the CBD. early in the course of an obstructive process, not enough time may Some centers prefer CT to ultrasonography as the initial imag- have elapsed for biliary dilatation to occur. In this setting, a hepa- ing modality,30 but we, like a number of other authors,31 find ultra- to-iminodiacetic acid (HIDA) scan has often helped identify bile sonography to be the most expedient, least invasive, and most eco- duct blockage.24 The yield from this test is highest when the serum nomical imaging method for differentiating between hepatic and bilirubin level is lower than 100 μmol/L.1 Occasionally, the intra- posthepatic causes of jaundice, as well as for suggesting the level of hepatic biliary tree is unable to dilate; possible causes of such obstruction.32 Traditional imaging techniques, such as oral or inability include extensive hepatic fibrosis, cirrhosis, sclerosing intravenous cholangiography, have a negligible role to play in this cholangitis, and liver transplantation. If one of these diagnoses is setting because of their very poor accuracy and safety, especially in suspected, ERCP, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography jaundiced patients. (MRCP), or PTC will eventually be required to confirm the diag- MRCP [see Figure 1] and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) nosis of biliary obstruction. Occasionally, the biliary tree dilatation have been used to visualize the biliary and pancreatic trees in vari- may be intermittent; possible causes of this condition include ous populations of patients with obstructive jaundice.33-37
  6. 6. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 6 Compared with direct cholangiography, both appear to be excel- a lent at diagnosing biliary obstruction and establishing its location and nature.38,39 MRCP exhibits more modest detection rates when diagnosing small CBD stones.40,41 Spiral (helical) CT scanning is also useful in diagnosing biliary obstruction and determining its cause, though concomitant oral or I.V. cholangiography is required to detect choledocholithiasis.42-44 In addition to their ability to detect choledocholithiasis, spiral CT, EUS, and MRCP in combination with abdominal magnetic resonance imaging (e.g., of the pancreas) are very useful in diag- nosing and staging biliopancreatic tumors.45-47 Cytology speci- mens are readily obtained via fine-needle aspiration (FNA) during CT or EUS.46 It is our current practice to employ these modalities as second- line tests after the initial abdominal ultrasonographic examination. To obtain a diagnosis, we favor EUS for periampullary pathologic conditions and MRI with MRCP for more proximal diseases of the biliary tree. In making the choice among the various available second-line tests, local expertise and cost-effectiveness become important con- siderations. Unfortunately, the reports on cost-effectiveness pub- lished to date have suffered either from limited assumptions (when the methodology involved decision modeling) or from the lack of an effectiveness-type design (when the methodology involved allo- cation of patients). Workup and Management of Posthepatic Jaundice Once ultrasonography has con- firmed that ductal obstruction is present, there are three possible b clinical scenarios: suspected chol- angitis, suspected choledocholi- thiasis without cholangitis, and a suspected lesion other than cho- ledocholithiasis. The direction of the subsequent workup depends on which of the three appears most likely. SUSPECTED CHOLANGITIS If a jaundiced patient exhibits a clinical picture compatible with acute suppurative cholangitis (Charcot’s triad or Raynaud’s pen- tad), the most likely diagnosis is choledocholithiasis. After appro- priate resuscitation, correction of any coagulopathies present, and administration of antibiotics, ERCP is indicated for diagnosis and treatment.48 If ERCP is unavailable or is not feasible (e.g., because of previous Roux-en-Y reconstruction), transhepatic drainage or surgery may be necessary. It is important to emphasize here that the mainstay of treatment of severe cholangitis is not just the administration of appropriate antibiotics but rather the establish- ment of adequate biliary drainage. SUSPECTED CHOLEDOCHOLITHIASIS WITHOUT CHOLANGITIS Choledocholithiasis is the most common cause of biliary obstruction.13,14 It should be strongly suspected if the jaundice is episodic or painful or if ultrasonography has demonstrated the presence of gallstones or bile duct stones. Patients with suspected Figure 1 ERCP (a) and corresponding MRCP (b) demonstrate choledocholithiasis should be referred for laparoscopic cholecys- presence of a stone in the distal CBD. tectomy with either preoperative ERCP, intraoperative cholan- giography, or intraoperative ultrasonography [see 5:21 Cholecystec- tomy and Common Bile Duct Exploration].49 We favor preoperative CBD of stones in 95% of cases. Decision analyses appear to con- ERCP in this setting of jaundice because its diagnostic yield is firm the utility of this strategy when laparoscopic CBD exploration high,50 it allows confirmation of the diagnosis preoperatively (thus is not an option.51-55 Many authors, however, favor a fully laparo- obviating intraoperative surprises), and it is capable of clearing the scopic approach, in which choledocholithiasis is detected in the
  7. 7. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 7 OR by means of intraoperative cholangiography56,57 or ultra- lesion will not be resectable with an accuracy approaching 95%; sonography58-60 and laparoscopic biliary clearance is performed however, as many as 33% of tumors that appear to be resectable when choledocholithiasis is confirmed. Given that both the ERCP on CT are found to be unresectable at operation.64 approach and the fully laparoscopic approach have advantages MRI-based staging, along with MRCP, can further dictate the and limitations, the optimal approach in a particular setting subsequent choice of therapy.65-68 MRI may be particularly useful should be dictated by local expertise. for following up patients in whom clip artifacts interfere with a CT image.65 It also appears to be successful in detecting cholangiocar- SUSPECTED LESION OTHER cinoma spreading along the proximal biliary tree.69 Given the THAN CHOLEDOCHOLITHIASIS renewed interest in biliary contrast media and the availability of If no gallstones are identified, if software optimized for multidetector scanners, CT cholangiogra- the clinical presentation is less phy may soon rival MRCP for evaluation of the biliary tree in cases acute (e.g., constant abdominal or of suspected malignancy.70 back pain), or if there are associat- Only in a few very rare instances is traditional angiography used ed constitutional symptoms (e.g., to assess resectability or stage a hepatobiliary or pancreatic neo- weight loss, fatigue, and long- plasm. Increasingly, it is being replaced by CT angiography or standing anorexia), the presence of a lesion other than choledo- duplex Doppler ultrasonography, which can confirm the presence cholithiasis should be suspected. In such cases, another imaging of flow in the hepatic arterial or portal venous systems and occa- modality besides the ultrasonography already performed must be sionally can demonstrate invasion of these vessels by tumor.71 considered before the decision is made to proceed to cholangiog- Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) has also been used with raphy or operation. excellent results. As yet, none of these noninvasive modalities has Possible causes of posthepatic obstruction (other than choledo- been shown to be clearly superior to any of the others.72 cholithiasis) may be classified into three categories, depending on the location of the obstructing lesion (as suggested by the pattern of gallbladder and biliary tree dilatation on the ultrasonogram): the upper third of the biliary tree, the middle third, or the lower (distal) Table 3 Causes of Posthepatic Jaundice third [see Table 3]. Once it has been determined that choledo- Upper-third obstruction cholithiasis is unlikely, the most common cause of such obstruction Polycystic liver disease is pancreatic cancer [see 5:9 Tumors of the Pancreas, Biliary Tract, and Caroli disease Liver].13,14 In adults, many of the other possible causes also involve Hepatocellular carcinoma malignant processes. Consequently, the next step in the workup of Oriental cholangiohepatitis the patient is typically the assessment of resectability and operabili- Hepatic arterial thrombosis (e.g., after liver transplantation or ty [see 5:22 Procedures for Benign and Malignant Biliary Tract Disease]. chemotherapy) Hemobilia (e.g., after biliary manipulation) Diagnosis and Assessment of Resectability Iatrogenic bile duct injury (e.g., after laparoscopic Assessment of the resectability of a tumor usually hinges on cholecystectomy) whether the superior mesenteric vein, the portal vein, the superior Cholangiocarcinoma (Klatskin tumor) mesenteric artery, and the porta hepatis are free of tumor and on Sclerosing cholangitis whether there is evidence of significant local adenopathy or extra- Papillomas of the bile duct pancreatic extension of tumor. Unfortunately, the majority of Middle-third obstruction lesions will be clearly unresectable, either because of tumor exten- Cholangiocarcinoma sion or because of the presence of hepatic or peritoneal metastases. Sclerosing cholangitis Many imaging modalities are currently used to determine Papillomas of the bile duct resectability, and several of these have been established as effective Gallbladder cancer alternatives to direct cholangiography because they involve little if Choledochal cyst any morbidity. Their accuracy varies according to the underlying Intrabiliary parasites pathology and the expertise of the user. They have been studied Mirizzi syndrome mostly with respect to the staging and diagnosis of pancreatic, peri- Extrinsic nodal compression (e.g., from breast cancer or lymphoma) Iatrogenic bile duct injury (e.g., after open cholecystectomy) ampullary, and biliary hilar cancers. Cystic fibrosis For determining resectability and staging lesions before opera- Benign idiopathic bile duct stricture tion, we rely mainly on spiral CT. The advent and widespread availability of multidetector CT have made this modality the dom- Lower-third obstruction inant second-line imaging method in cases of suspected pancreat- Cholangiocarcinoma ic masses. For optimal evaluation of the pancreas, a fine-cut dual- Sclerosing cholangitis phase (arterial phase and portal venous phase) scan should be Papillomas of the bile duct obtained. Oral administration of water allows better evaluation of Pancreatic tumors Ampullary tumors the duodenum and the ampulla.61,62 At present, spiral CT is con- Chronic pancreatitis sidered to be superior for the diagnosis and staging of lesions such Sphincter of Oddi dysfunction as pancreatic cancer.45,63,64 It exhibits a high negative predictive Papillary stenosis value and has a false positive rate of less than 10%; its sensitivity is Duodenal diverticula optimal for pancreatic lesions larger than 1.5 cm in diameter. Penetrating duodenal ulcer Ascites, liver metastases, lymph nodes larger than 2 cm in diame- Retroduodenal adenopathy (e.g., lymphoma, carcinoid) ter, and invasion into adjacent organs are all signs of advanced dis- ease.65 On the basis of these criteria, spiral CT can predict that a
  8. 8. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 8 a b c Figure 2 (a) ERCP demonstrates missing liver segments. (b) Transhepatic cholangiography of segment 6 reveals the excluded liver ductal system. (c) MRCP shows the excluded liver segments, as well as the biliary system, which still communicates with the common hepatic duct. EUS is a highly sensitive method of imaging the pancreas and ence with FDG-PET is growing rapidly as this imaging modality the duodenum.46,73,74 In two large studies, it was found to be supe- becomes more readily accessible. rior to CT and standard ultrasonography in staging pancreatic When a biliary stricture is detected at cholangiography, brush and ampullary cancers.75,76 Subsequent studies indicated that cytology or biopsy is mandatory. Biliary cytology, however, has whereas EUS is superior to CT for detection and staging, it pro- been disappointing, particularly at ERCP: diagnostic accuracy vides similar information regarding nodal status and overall assess- ranges from 40% to 85%,85,86 mostly because the negative predic- ment of resectability.61,77 From a cost-minimization point of view, tive value is poor. Accuracy improves with multiple sampling and the optimal strategy is to begin with a dual-phase CT scan and to when a biliary rather than a pancreatic malignancy is detected. In follow up with EUS only in cases in which further information or addition, biopsy tends to be more accurate than brush cytology.85 a tissue diagnosis is required.78,79 In another large series, EUS was reported to be more accurate than CT in the comparative staging Nonoperative Management: of pancreatic and ampullary cancers. It has also been found use- Drainage and ful for identifying small (< 2 cm) pancreatic tumors, which may be Cholangiography suspected in a patient who has an obstruction of the distal third In the majority of patients with of the bile duct and whose CT scan is normal.74 Furthermore, malignant obstructions, treat- EUS is currently the dominant technique for staging ampullary ment is palliative rather than tumors.80 curative. It is therefore especially In patients with a suspected pancreatic tumor, direct FNA of important to recognize and mini- the lesion at the time of EUS has become the gold-standard mize the iatrogenic risks related to the manipulation of an method for obtaining a tissue diagnosis. In the case of potentially obstructed biliary system; this is why staging and cholangiography resectable lesions, however, this measure adds very little to the are currently being performed with EUS and MRCP. decision-making process.The limited data currently available sug- gest that assays of tumor markers in serum and pancreatic fluid are Cholangiography and decompression of obstructed bil- useful, particularly for cystic lesions of the pancreas.81 iary system As a rule, we favor ERCP, though PTC may be At this point in the evaluation, patients can be referred either for preferable for obstructions near the hepatic duct bifurcation. cholangiography (ERCP or MRCP) to clarify a still-unclear diag- Whichever imaging modality is used, the following four principles nosis or for biliary decompression (see below). MRI of the pancreas apply. with MRCP continues to improve rapidly. It is a noninvasive modal- ity that evaluates the pancreas, vasculature, and the pancreatobiliary 1. In the absence of preexisting or concomitant hepatocellular dys- ductal system in a single examination, with the additional benefit of function, drainage of one half of the liver is generally sufficient avoiding ionizing radiation and iodinated contrast agents.82 MRCP for resolution of jaundice.87 remains our test of choice for evaluation of middle- and upper-third 2. Because of its external diameter, a transhepatic drain, once lesions in cases in which decompression is not required. inserted, does not necessarily permit equal drainage of all seg- In the event that none of these modalities point to a diagnosis, ments of the liver, particularly if there are a number of intrahep- the use of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomog- atic ductal stenoses. Accordingly, some patients with conditions raphy (PET) may be considered to help differentiate benign pan- such as sclerosing cholangitis or a growing tumor may experience creatic conditions from malignant ones.83,84 Besides facilitating persistent sepsis from an infected excluded liver segment even diagnosis, FDG-PET provides information regarding occult me- when the prosthesis is patent [see Figure 2]. An excluded segment tastases and can be useful in detecting recurrent disease. Experi- may even be responsible for severe persistent pruritus.
  9. 9. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 9 3. Any attempt at opacifying an obstructed biliary tree introduces Operative Management at a significant risk of subsequent cholangitis, even when appropri- Specific Sites: Bypass and ate antibiotic prophylaxis is provided. Accordingly, when one Resection elects to perform direct cholangiography, there should be a plan Surgical treatment of tumors for biliary drainage either at the time of ERCP or PTC or soon causing biliary obstruction is thereafter. determined primarily by the level 4. Even though jaundice is believed to be associated with multiple of the biliary obstruction. Current adverse systemic effects (e.g., renal failure, sepsis, and impaired evidence indicates that modern wound healing),88,89 routine preoperative drainage of an surgical approaches are resulting in lower postoperative morbidity obstructed biliary system does not benefit patients who will and, possibly, improved 5-year survival104; however, the prognosis is soon undergo resection.90,91 There is a growing body of evi- still uniformly poor, except for patients with ampullary tumors. In dence suggesting that in patients with either pancreatic92,93 or fact, the surgical procedure rarely proves curative, even after metic- hepatic94 malignancies, routine preoperative direct cholangiog- ulous preoperative patient selection. raphy with decompression is associated with a higher incidence At one time, there was considerable enthusiasm for routine use of postoperative complications when tumor resection is ulti- of staging laparoscopy; at present, however, selective use is recom- mately carried out. mended.105 The benefits of staging laparoscopy include more accu- When direct cholangiography is ordered, it should be thought of rate assessment of resectability and prevention of the prolonged as more than just a diagnostic test: it is the ideal setting for cytol- hospital stay and convalescence associated with an unnecessary ogy, biopsy, or even drainage of the obstructed bile duct via a laparotomy. Laparoscopy is used mostly to detect peritoneal carci- sphincterotomy, a nasobiliary tube, or a catheter or stent. Accord- nomatosis, liver metastases, malignant ascites, and gross hilar ingly, it is essential that the surgeon, the gastroenterologist, and the adenopathy.106,107 The main limitation of laparoscopy in this setting radiologist discuss the possible need for drainage well before it is appears to be that it does not accurately detect the spread of required. Early, open communication among all the members of tumors to lymph nodes or the vascular system.108 In several stud- the treating team is a hallmark of the modern management of bil- ies, a combined approach that included both laparoscopy and iary obstruction. laparoscopic ultrasonography was associated with shorter hospital stays and lower costs.105,107-109 Palliation in patients with advanced malignant disease When a patient has advanced malignant disease, drainage of the biliary system for palliation is not routinely indicated, because the risk of complications related to the procedure may outweigh the potential benefit. Indeed, the best treatment for a patient with asymptomatic obstructive jaundice and liver metastases may be supportive care alone.95 Biliary decompression is indicated if cholangitis or severe pruritus interferes with quality of life. We, like others,22 consider a stent placed with ERCP to be the palliative modality of choice for advanced disease, though upper- third lesions may be managed most easily through the initial place- ment of an internal/external catheter at the time of PTC. Metal expandable stents remain patent longer than large conventional plastic stents,96,97 but the high price of the metal stents has kept them from being widely used, and their overall cost-effectiveness has yet to be clearly demonstrated. Whether plastic biliary stents should be replaced prophylactically or only after obstruction has occurred remains controversial; however, results from a random- ized, controlled trial (RCT) favor the former approach.98 In anoth- er RCT, the use of prophylactic ciprofloxacin did not prolong stent patency but did reduce the incidence of cholangitis and improve quality of life scores.99 RCTs suggest that surgical biliary bypass should be reserved for patients who are expected to survive for 6 months or longer because bypass is associated with more prolonged palliation at the cost of greater initial morbidity.100 The role of prophylactic gastric drainage at the time of operative biliary drainage remains controversial,101,102 though two RCTs demonstrated a reduced incidence of subsequent clinical gastric outlet obstruction when this measure was employed. Jaundiced patients with unresectable lesions who also present with duodenal or jejunal obstruction should be referred for gastrojejunostomy at the time of biliary bypass surgery.There is evidence to suggest that when a pancreatic malignancy is present, intraoperative celiac gan- Figure 3 ERCP demonstrates extrinsic compression of the com- glion injection should be performed for either prophylactic or ther- mon hepatic duct by a stone in Hartmann’s pouch. A biliary stent apeutic pain control.103 has been inserted for drainage.
  10. 10. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 10 In what follows, only the general principles of resection or bypass at each level of obstruction are discussed; operative technical details are addressed elsewhere [see 5:22 Procedures for Benign and Malignant Biliary Tract Disease]. Our preferred method of biliary anastomosis, for either reconstruction or bypass, involves the fash- ioning of a Roux-en-Y loop, followed by a mucosa-to-mucosa anas- tomosis. In all cases, a cholecystectomy is performed to facilitate access to the biliary tree. Upper-third obstruction Palliation. Because the left hepatic duct has a long extrahepatic seg- ment that makes it more accessi- ble, the preferred bypass tech- nique for an obstructing upper- third lesion is a left (or segment 3) hepaticojejunostomy. This opera- tion has superseded the Longmire procedure because it does not involve formal resection of liver parenchyma. Laparoscopic bypass techniques that make use of segment 3 have been developed, but their performance has yet to be formally assessed, and they cannot yet be incorporated into a management algorithm.110,111 Resection for cure. The hilar plate is taken down to lengthen the hepatic duct segment available for subsequent anastomosis. Often, a formal hepatectomy or segmentectomy is required to ensure an adequate proximal margin of resection. If the resection must be carried out proximal to the hepatic duct bifurcation, several cholan- giojejunostomies will have to be done to anastomose individual hepatic biliary branches. Frozen-section examination of the proxi- mal and distal resection margins is important because of the propensity of tumors such as cholangiocarcinoma to spread in a submucosal or perineural plane. The results of aggressive hilar tumor resections that included as much liver tissue as was necessary to obtain a negative margin appear to justify this approach.112 In cases of left hepatic involve- Figure 4 Jaundice has occurred after laparoscopic cholecystec- ment, resection of the caudate lobe (segments 1 and 9) is indicat- tomy as a result of bile leakage from a distal biliary tributary. A stent has been inserted to decrease bile duct luminal pressure and ed as well.113,114 foster spontaneous resolution. Middle-third obstruction Palliation. Surgical bypass of mid- dle-third lesions is technically sim- Lower-third obstruction pler because a hepaticojejunosto- Palliation. The preferred bypass my can often be performed distal technique for lower-third lesions is to the hepatic duct bifurcation, a Roux-en-Y choledochojejunos- which means that exposure of the tomy. Cholecystojejunostomy car- hilar plate or the intrahepatic ries a higher risk of complications ducts is unnecessary. and subsequent development of jaundice117; this remains true even Resection for cure. Discrete tumors in this part of the bile duct, when it is performed laparoscopically. Occasionally, it may be done though uncommon, are usually quite amenable to resection as a temporizing measure before a more definitive procedure in the along with the lymphatic chains in the porta hepatis. Resection context of an upcoming transfer to a specialized center. of an early gallbladder cancer may, on occasion, necessitate the concomitant resection of segment 5, though the value of resect- Resection for cure. Occasionally, an impacted CBD stone at the ing this segment prophylactically has not been conclusively duodenal ampulla mimics a tumor and is not clearly identified pre- demonstrated.115 Sometimes, jaundice from a suspected mid- operatively. Because of the growing use of EUS and MRCP, such dle-third lesion is in fact caused by a case of Mirizzi syndrome a situation is increasingly uncommon. Resection of a lower-third [see Figure 3]. In such cases, a gallstone is responsible for extrin- lesion usually involves a pancreaticoduodenectomy [see 5:24 sic obstruction of the CBD, either by causing inflammation Procedures for Benign and Malignant Pancreatic Disease], though of the gallbladder wall or via direct impingement. Proper treat- transduodenal ampullary resection may be an acceptable alterna- ment of this syndrome may involve hepaticojejunostomy in tive for a small adenoma of the ampulla [see 5:24 Procedures for addition to cholecystectomy if a cholecystocholedochal fistula is Benign and Malignant Gastric and Duodenal Disease]; local duode- present.116 nal resection without removal of the head of the pancreas has also
  11. 11. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 11 been described.118 For optimal results, pancreaticoduodenectomy ment of heart failure can lead to conjugated hyperbilirubinemia is best performed in specialized centers.119 within 5 to 10 days after operation.The hyperbilirubinemia may It has been suggested that postoperative adjuvant therapy may be associated with other end-organ damage (e.g., acute tubular improve the prognosis after resection of a pancreatic adenocarci- necrosis). In fact, any impairment of renal function causes a noma,104 but this debate falls outside the scope of our discussion. decrease in bilirubin excretion and can be responsible for a mild hyperbilirubinemia. • Jaundice may develop 7 to 10 days after operation in association Postoperative Jaundice with a medication-induced hepatitis attributable to an anesthet- A clinical scenario of particular pertinence to surgeons that we ic agent.This syndrome has an estimated incidence of 1/10,000 have not yet addressed is the development of jaundice in the post- after an initial exposure.122 More commonly, the jaundice is operative setting. related to the administration of antibiotics or other medications Jaundice develops in approximately 1% of all surgical patients used in the perioperative setting.122 after operation.120 When jaundice occurs after a hepatobiliary pro- • After the first week, jaundice associated with intrahepatic cedure, it may be attributable to specific biliary causes, such as cholestasis is often a manifestation of a septic response and usu- retained CBD stones, postoperative biliary leakage (through reab- ally presents in the setting of overt infection, particularly in sorption of bile leaking into the peritoneum) [see Figure 4], injury patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Gram-neg- to the CBD, and the subsequent development of biliary strictures. ative sepsis from an intra-abdominal source is typical; if it per- In most instances, however, the jaundice derives from a combina- sists, the outcome is likely to be poor. Jaundice may occur in as tion of disease processes, and only rarely is invasive testing or active many as 30% of patients receiving total parenteral nutrition treatment required.121 (TPN). It may be attributable to steatosis, particularly with for- A diagnostic approach similar to the one outlined earlier (see mulas containing large amounts of carbohydrates. In addition, above) is applicable to postoperative jaundice; however, another decreased export of bilirubin from the hepatocytes may lead to useful approach is to consider the possible causes in the light of the cholestasis, the severity of which appears to be related to the time interval between the operation and the subsequent develop- duration of TPN administration. Acalculous cholecystitis or even ment of jaundice. ductal obstruction may develop as a result of sludge in the gall- • Jaundice may develop within 48 hours of the operation; this is bladder and the CBD. An elevated postoperative bilirubin level most often the result of the breakdown of red blood cells, occur- at any time may also result from unsuspected hepatic or post- ring in the context of multiple blood transfusions (particularly hepatic causes (e.g., occult cirrhosis, choledocholithiasis, or with stored blood), the resorption of a large hematoma, or a cholecystitis). A rare cause of postoperative jaundice is the devel- transfusion reaction. Hemolysis may also develop in a patient opment of thyrotoxicosis. Another entity to consider (as a diag- with a known underlying hemolytic anemia and may be precip- nosis of exclusion) is so-called benign postoperative cholestasis, itated by the administration of specific drugs (e.g., sulfa drugs in a primarily cholestatic, self-limited process with no clearly a patient who has glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficien- demonstrable cause that typically arises within 2 to 10 days after cy).122 Cardiopulmonary bypass or the insertion of a prosthetic operation. Benign postoperative cholestasis may be attributable valve may be associated with the development of early postoper- to a combination of mechanisms, including an increased pig- ative jaundice as well. Gilbert syndrome [see Sidebar Hepatic ment load, impaired liver function resulting from hypoxemia and Jaundice] may first manifest itself early in the postoperative peri- hypotension, and decreased renal bilirubin excretion caused by od. Occasionally, a mild conjugated hyperbilirubinemia may be varying degrees of tubular necrosis.123 The predominantly con- related to Dubin-Johnson syndrome, which is an inherited dis- jugated hyperbilirubinemia may reach 40 mg/dl and remain ele- order of bilirubin metabolism.This condition is usually self-lim- vated for as long as 3 weeks.122 ited and is characterized by the presence of a melaninlike pig- • In the late postoperative period, the development of non-A, non- ment in the liver. B, non-C viral hepatitis after transfusion of blood products will • Intraoperative hypotension or hypoxemia or the early develop- usually occur within 5 to 12 weeks of operation. References 1. Schiff L: Jaundice: a clinical approach. Diseases 7. Lumeng L, Snodgrass PJ, Swonder JW: Final 61 proved cases. Am J Dig Dis 7:449, 1962 of the Liver, 7th ed. Schiff L, Schiff ER, Eds. JB report of a blinded prospective study comparing 12. Theodossi A, Spiegelhalter D, Portmann B, et al: Lippincott Co, Philadelphia, 1993, p 334 current non-invasive approaches in the differen- The value of clinical, biochemical, ultrasound 2. Jabbari M: Personal communication tial diagnosis of medical and surgical jaundice. and liver biopsy data in assessing patients with Gastroenterology 78:1312, 1980 liver disease. Liver 3:315, 1983 3. Scharschmidt BF, Gollan JL: Current concepts of bilirubin metabolism and hereditary hyper- 8. Martin W, Apostolakos PC, Roazen H: Clinical 13. Pasanen PA, Pikkarainen P, Alhava E, et al: The bilirubinemia. Progress in Liver Diseases. Popper versus actuarial prediction in the differential value of clinical assessment in the diagnosis of H, Schaffner F, Eds. Grune & Stratton, New diagnosis of jaundice. Am J Med Sci 240:571, icterus and cholestasis. Ital J Gastroenterol York, 1979, p 187 1960 Hepatol 24:313, 1992 4. Frank BB: Clinical evaluation of jaundice: a 9. Matzen P, Malchow-Möller A, Hilden J, et al: 14. Theodossi A: The value of symptoms and signs guideline of the Patient Care Committee of the Differential diagnosis of jaundice: a pocket diag- in the assessment of jaundiced patients. Clin American Gastroenterological Association. nostic chart. Liver 4:360, 1984 Gastroenterol 14:545, 1985 JAMA 262:3031, 1989 10. O’Connor K, Snodgrass PJ, Swonder JE, et al: A 15. Fung KP, Lau SP: Differentiation between extra- 5. Schiff’s Diseases of the Liver, 8th ed. Schiff ER, blinded prospective study comparing four cur- hepatic and intrahepatic cholestasis by discrimi- Sorrell MF, Maddrey WC, Eds. Lippincott- rent non-invasive approaches in the differential nant analysis. J Paediatr Child Health 26:132, Raven, Philadelphia, 1999, p 119 diagnosis of medical versus surgical jaundice. 1990 6. Lindberg G, Björkman A, Helmers C: A descrip- Gastroenterology 84:1498, 1983 16. Pasanen PA, Pikkarainen P, Alhava E, et al: tion of diagnostic strategies in jaundice. Scand J 11. Schenker S, Balint J, Schiff L: Differential diag- Evaluation of a computer-based diagnostic score Gastroenterol 18:257, 1983 nosis of jaundice: report of a prospective study of system in the diagnosis of jaundice and cholesta-
  12. 12. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 12 sis. Scand J Gastroenterol 28:732, 1993 a meta-analysis of test performance in suspected 57. Crawford DL, Phillips EH: Laparoscopic com- 17. Malchow-Möller A, Gronvall S, Hilden J, et al: biliary disease. Ann Intern Med 139:547, 2002 mon bile duct exploration. World J Surg 23:343, Ultrasound examination in jaundiced patients: is 39. Mallery S, Van Dam J: Current status of diag- 1999 computer-assisted preclassification helpful? J nostic and therapeutic endoscopic ultrasonogra- 58. Falcone RA Jr, Fegelman EJ, Nussbaum MS, et Hepatol 12:321, 1991 phy. Radiol Clin North Am 39:449, 2001 al: A prospective comparison of laparoscopic 18. Loperfido S, Angelini G, Benedetti G, et al: 40. Sugiyama M, Atomi Y, Hachiya J: Magnetic res- ultrasound vs intraoperative cholangiogram dur- Major early complications from diagnostic and onance cholangiography using half-Fourier ing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc therapeutic ERCP: a prospective multicenter acquisition for diagnosing choledocholithiasis. 13:784, 1999 study. Gastrointest Endosc 48:1, 1998 Am J Gastroenterol 93:1886, 1998 59. Thompson DM, Arregui ME, Tetik C, et al: A 19. Freeman ML, DiSario JA, Nelson DB, et al: Risk 41. Jendresen MB, Thorboll JE, Adamsen S, et al. comparison of laparoscopic ultrasound with dig- factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospec- Preoperative routine magnetic resonance cholan- ital fluorocholangiography for detecting choledo- tive, multicenter study. Gastrointest Endosc giopancreatography before laparoscopic chole- cholithiasis during laparoscopic cholecystecto- 54:425, 2001 cystectomy: a prospective study. Eur J Surg my. Surg Endosc 12:929, 1998 20. Lillemoe KD: Surgical treatment of biliary tract 168:690, 2002 60. Wu JS, Dunnegan DL, Soper NJ: The utility of infections. Am Surg 66:138, 2000 42. Soto JA, Alvarez O, Munera F, et al: Diagnosing intracorporeal ultrasonography for screening of bile duct stones: comparison of unenhanced heli- the bile duct during laparoscopic cholecystecto- 21. NIH state-of-the-science statement on endo- my. J Gastrointest Surg 2:50, 1998 scopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography cal CT, oral contrast-enhanced CT cholangiog- (ERCP) for diagnosis and therapy. NIH Consens raphy, and MR cholangiography. AJR Am J 61. Stroszczynski C, Hunerbein M: Malignant bil- State Sci Statements 19:1, 2002 Roentgenol 175:1127, 2000 iary obstruction: value of imaging findings. 43. Soto JA, Velez SM, Guzman J: Choledocholithi- Abdom Imaging 30:314, 2005 22. Rossi LR, Traverso W, Pimentel F: Malignant obstructive jaundice: evaluation and manage- asis: diagnosis with oral-contrast-enhanced CT 62. Legmann P, Vignaux O, Dousset B, et al: ment. Surg Clin North Am 76:63, 1996 cholangiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:943, Pancreatic tumors: comparison of dual-phase 1999 helical CT and endosocpic sonography. AJR Am 23. Taylor KJW, Rosenfield A: Grey-scale ultra- J Roentgenol 170:1315, 1998 sonography in the differential diagnosis of jaun- 44. Stabile Ianora AA, Memeo M, Scardapane A, et dice. Arch Surg 112:820, 1977 al. Oral contrast enhanced three-dimensional 63. Freeny PC, Traverso LW, Ryan JA: Diagnosis and helical-CT cholangiography: clinical applica- staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma with 24. Kaplun L, Weissman HS, Rosenblatt RR, et al: tions. Eur Radiol 13(4):867, 2003 dynamic computed tomography. Am J Surg 165: The early diagnosis of common bile duct 600, 1993 obstruction using cholescintigraphy. JAMA 45. Freeny PC: Computed tomography in the diag- 254:2431, 1985 nosis and staging of cholangiocarcinoma and 64. Moosa AR, Gamagami RA: Diagnosis and stag- pancreatic carcinoma. Ann Oncol 10(suppl ing of pancreatic neoplasms. Surg Clin North 25. Abboud PA, Malet PF, Berlin JA, et al: 4):12, 1999 Am 75:871, 1995 Predictors of common bile duct stones prior to cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest 46. Hawes RH, Xiong Q, Waxman I, et al: A multi- 65. Megibow AJ, Zhou XH, Rotterdam H, et al: Endosc 44:450, 1996 specialty approach to the diagnosis and manage- Pancreatic carcinoma: CT vs MR imaging in the ment of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol evaluation of resectability. Radiology 195:327, 26. Roston AD, Jacobson IM: Evaluation of the pat- 95:17, 2000 1995 tern of liver tests and yield of cholangiography in symptomatic choledocholithiasis: a prospective 47. Megibow AJ, Lavelle MT, Rofsky NM: MR 66. Hann LE, Winston CB, Brown KT, et al: study. Gastrointest Endosc 45:394, 1997 imaging of the pancreas. Surg Clin North Am Diagnostic imaging approaches and relationship 81:307, 2001 to hepatobiliary cancer staging and therapy. 27. Richter JM, Silverstein MD, Schapiro R: 48. Lai EC, Mok FP, Tan ES, et al: Endoscopic bil- Semin Surg Oncol 19:94, 2000 Suspected obstructive jaundice: a decision analy- sis of diagnostic strategies. Ann Intern Med iary drainage for severe acute cholangitis. N Engl 67. Zidi SH, Prat F, Le Guen O, et al: Performance 99:46, 1983 J Med 326:1582, 1992 characteristics of magnetic resonance cholan- 49. Siperstein AE, Pearl J, Macho J, et al: giography in the staging of malignant hilar stric- 28. Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S: Liver biopsy. N Comparison of laparoscopic ultrasonography tures. Gut 46:103, 2000 Engl J Med 344:495, 2001 and fluorocholangiography in 300 patients 68. Kim MJ, Mitchell DG, Ito K, et al: Biliary dilata- 29. Blackbourne LH, Earnhardt RC, Sistrom CL, et undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg tion: differentiation of benign from malignant al: The sensitivity and role of ultrasound in the Endosc 13:967, 1999 causes—value of adding conventional MR imag- evaluation of biliary obstruction. Am Surg 50. Barkun JS, Fried GM, Barkun AN, et al: ing to MR cholangiopancreatography. Radiology 60:683, 1994 Cholecystectomy without operative cholangiog- 214:173, 2000 30. Sherlock S: Ultrasound (US), computerized raphy: implications for bile duct injury and com- 69. Georgopoulos SK, Schwartz LH, Jarnagin WR, axial tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance mon bile duct stones. Ann Surg 218:371, 1993 et al: Comparison of magnetic resonance and imaging (MRI). Diseases of the Liver and Biliary System 5:70, 1989 51. Sahai AV, Mauldin PD, Marsi V, et al: Bile duct endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogra- stones and laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a deci- phy in malignant pancreaticobiliary obstruction. 31. Cosgrove DO: Ultrasound in surgery of the liver Arch Surg 134:1002, 1999 and biliary tract. Surgery of the Liver and Biliary sion analysis to assess the roles of intraoperative Tract, 2nd ed, Vol 1. Blumgart LH, Ed. New cholangiography, EUS, and ERCP. Gastrointest 70. McNulty N, Francis I, Platt J, et al: Multi-detec- York, Churchill Livingstone, 1994, p 189 Endosc 49(3 pt 1):334, 1999 tor row helical CT of the pancreas: effect of con- 52. Abraham N, Barkun AN, Barkun JS, et al: What trast-enhanced multiphasic imaging on enhance- 32. Lindsell DRM: Ultrasound imaging of pancreas ment of the pancreas, peripancreatic vasculature, and biliary tract. Lancet 335:390, 1990 is the optimal management of patients with sus- pected choledocholithiasis in the era of laparo- and pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Radiology 33. Gillams A, Gardener J, Richards R, et al: Three- scopic cholecystectomy? a decision analysis. 220:97, 2001 dimensional computed tomography cholangiog- Gastroenterology 116:G0012, 1999 71. Smits NJ, Reeders JW: Current applicability of raphy: a new technique for biliary tract imaging. duplex Doppler ultrasonography in pancreatic Br J Radiol 67:445, 1994 53. Tse F, Barkun JS, Barkun AN. The elective eval- uation of patients with suspected choledo- head and biliary malignancies. Baillieres Clin 34. Low RN, Sigeti JS, Francis IR, et al: Evaluation cholithiasis undergoing laparoscopic cholecys- Gastroenterol 9:153, 1995 of malignant biliary obstruction: efficacy of fast tectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 60:437, 2004 72. Arslan A, Buanes T, Geitung JT: Pancreatic car- multiplanar spoiled gradient-recalled MR imag- cinoma: MR, MR angiography and dynamic ing vs spin-echo MR imaging, CT, and cholan- 54. Erickson RA, Carlson B: The role of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients helical CT in the evaluation of vascular invasion. giography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 162:315, 1994 Eur J Radiol 38:151, 2001 with laparoscopic cholecystectomies. Gastroen- 35. Amouyal P, Amouyal G, Levy P, et al: Diagnosis terology 109:252, 1995 73. Giovannini M, Seitz JF: Endoscopic ultrasonog- of choledocholithiasis by endoscopic ultrasonog- raphy with a linear-type echoendoscope in the raphy. Gastroenterology 106:1062, 1994 55. Urbach DR, Khajanchee YS, Jobe BA, et al: Cost-effective management of common bile duct evaluation of 94 patients with pancreatobiliary 36. Guibaud L, Bret PM, Reinhold C, et al: Bile duct stones: a decision analysis of the use of endo- disease. Endoscopy 26:579, 1994 obstruction and choledocholithiasis: diagnosis scopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography 74. Snady H, Cooperman A, Siegel J: Endoscopic with MR cholangiography. Radiology 197:109, (ERCP), intraoperative cholangiography, and ultrasonography compared with computed 1995 laparoscopic bile duct exploration. Surg Endosc tomography and E.R.C.P. in patients with 37. Ishizaki Y, Wakayama T, Okada Y, et al: MR 15:4, 2001 obstructive jaundice or small peri-pancreatic cholangiography for evaluation of obstructed 56. Memon MA, Hassaballa H, Memon MI: mass. Gastrointest Endoscopy 38:27, 1992 jaundice. Am J Gastroenterol 88:2072, 1993 Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration: the 75. Nakaizumi A, Uehara H, Iishi H, et al: Endo- 38. Bardou M, Romagnuolo J, Barkun AN, et al: past, the present, and the future. Am J Surg scopic ultrasonography in diagnosis and staging Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography: 179:309, 2000 of pancreatic cancer. Dig Dis Sci 40:696, 1995
  13. 13. © 2006 WebMD, Inc. All rights reserved. ACS Surgery: Principles and Practice 5 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT AND ABDOMEN 3 Jaundice — 13 76. Bakkevold KE, Arnesjo B, Kambestad B: patients with primary and secondary hepatobil- 24:189, 2004 Carcinoma of the pancreas and papilla of Vater— iary malignancies. J Gastrointest Surg 4:34, 2000 115. Bartlett D: Gallbladder cancer. Semin Surg assessment of resectability and factors influenc- 95. Abraham N, Barkun J, Barkun AN, et al: Clinical Oncol 19:145, 2000 ing resectability in stage I carcinomas: a prospec- risk factors of plastic biliary stent obstruction: a tive multicentre trial in 472 patients. Eur J Surg 116. Baer HU, Matthews JB, Schweizer WP, et al: prospective trial. Am J Gastroenterol 95:2471, Oncol 18:494, 1992 Management of the Mirizzi syndrome and the 2000 surgical implications of cholecystocholedochal 77. DeWitt J, Devereaux B, Chiswell M, et al: 96. Knyrim K, Wagner HJ, Pausch J, et al: A fistula. Br J Surg 77:743, 1990 Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonagraphy and prospective, randomized controlled trial of metal multidetector computed tomography for detect- stents for malignant obstruction of the common 117. Sarfeh MG, Rypins EB, Jakowatz JG, et al: A ing and staging pancreatic cancer. Ann Intern bile duct. Endoscopy 25:207, 1993 prospective, randomized clinical investigation of Med 141:753, 2004 cholecystoenterostomy and choledochoenteros- 97. Davids P, Groen A, Rauws E, et al: Randomized tomy. Am J Surg 155:411, 1988 78. Soriano A, Castells A, Ayuso C, et al: Preoperative trial of self-expanding metal stents versus poly- staging and tumor resectability assessment of pan- ethylene stents for distal malignant biliary 118. Kalady MF, Clary BM, Tyler DS, Pappas TN. creatic cancer: prospective study comparing endo- obstruction. Lancet 340:1488, 1992 Pancreas-preserving duodenectomy in the man- scopic ultrasonography, helical computed tomog- agement of duodenal familial adenomatous poly- raphy, magnetic resonance imaging and angiogra- 98. Prat F, Chapat O, Ducot B, et al: A randomized posis. J Gastrointest Surg 6:82, 2002 phy. Am J Gastroenterol 99:492, 2004. trial of endoscopic drainage methods for inoper- able malignant strictures of the common bile 119. Lieberman MD, Kilburn H, Lindsey M, et al: 79. Agarwal B, Abu-Hamda E, Molke KL, et al: duct. Gastrointest Endosc 47:1, 1998 Relation of perioperative deaths to hospital vol- Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided fine needle aspi- ume among patients undergoing pancreatic ration and multidetector spiral CT in the diag- 99. Chan G, Barkun J, Barkun AN, et al: The role of resection for malignancy. Ann Surg 222:638, ciprofloxacin in prolonging polyethylene biliary nosis of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 1995 stent patency: a multicenter, double-blinded 99:844, 2004 effectiveness study. J Gastrointest Surg 9:481, 120. Lamont JT, Isselbacher KJ: Current concepts of 80. Cannon ME, Carpenter SL, Elta GH, et al: EUS 2005 postoperative hepatic dysfunction. Conn Med compared with CT, magnetic resonance imag- 39:461, 1975 100. Smith AC, Dowsett JF, Russell RC, et al: ing, and angiography and the influence of biliary Randomized trial of endoscopic stenting vs sur- 121. Matlof DS, Kaplan MM: Postoperative jaundice. stenting on staging accuracy of ampullary neo- gical bypass in malignant low bile duct obstruc- Orthop Clin North Am 9:799, 1978 plasms. Gastrointest Endosc 50:27, 1999 tion. Lancet 344:1655, 1994 122. Moody FG, Potts JR III: Postoperative jaundice. 81. Brugge WR, Lauwers GY, Sahani D, et al: 101. Lillemoe KD, Sauter P, Pitt HA, et al: Current Diseases of the Liver, 7th ed. Schiff L, Schiff ER, Current concepts: cystic neoplasms of the pan- status of surgical palliation of periampullary car- Eds. JB Lippincott Co, Philadelphia, 1993, p 370 creas. N Engl J Med 351:1218, 2004 cinoma. Surg Gynecol Obstet 176:1, 1993 82. Keppke AL, Miller FH: Magnetic resonance 123. Isselbacher KJ: Bilirubin metabolism and hyper- 102. Van Heek NT, De Castro SM, Van Eijck CH, et bilirubinemia. Harrison’s Principles of Internal imaging of the pancreas: the future is now. al: Need for a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy for Medicine, 12th ed. Wilson JD, Braunwald E, Semin Ultrasound CT MR 26:132, 2005 unresectable periampullary cancer: a propsective Isselbacher KJ, et al, Eds. McGraw-Hill, New 83. Delbeke D, Pinson CW: Pancreatic tumors: role randomized multicenter trial with special focus York, 1991, p 1320 of imaging in the diagnosis, staging and treat- on assessment of quality of life. Ann Surg ment. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 11:4, 2004 238:894, 2003 124. Watson CJ: Prognosis and treatment of hepatic insufficiency. Ann Intern Med 31:405, 1959 84. Heinrich S, Goerres G, Schafer M, et al: Posi- 103. Lillemoe KD, Cameron JL, Kaufman HS, et al: tron emission tomography/computed tomogra- Chemical splanchnicectomy in patients with 125. Sherlock S: Jaundice. Diseases of the Liver and phy influences in the management of resectable unresectable pancreatic cancer: a prospective Biliary System, 8th ed. Sherlock S, Ed. Blackwell pancreatic cancer and its cost-effectiveness. Ann randomized trial. Ann Surg 217:447, 1993 Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1989, p 230 Surg 242:235, 2005 104. Lillemoe KD, Cameron JL, Yeo CJ, et al: 126. Gollan JL, Keefe EB, Scharschmidt BF: Cholesta- 85. Davidson BR: Progress in determining the Pancreaticoduodenectomy: does it have a role in sis and hyperbilirubinemia. Current Hepatology, nature of biliary strictures. Gut 34:725, 1993 the palliation of pancreatic cancer? Ann Surg Vol I. Gitnick G, Ed. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 223:718, 1996 1980, p 277 86. Hawes RH: Endoscopy and non-calculus biliary obstruction. Annuals of Gastrointestinal Endos- 105. D’Angelica M, Fong Y,Weber S, et al:The role of 127. Bosma PJ, Chowdhury JR, Bakker C, et al: The copy, 8th ed. Cotton PB, Tytgat GNJ, Williams staging laparoscopy in hepatobiliary malignancy: genetic basis of the reduced expression of biliru- CB, Eds. Current Science, England, 1995, p 101 prospective analysis of 401 cases. Ann Surg bin UCP-glucuronosyltransferase 1 in Gilbert’s Oncol 10:183, 2003 syndrome. N Engl J Med 333:1171, 1995 87. Baer HU, Rhyner M, Stain SC, et al: The effect of communication between the right and left 106. Conlon KC, Dougherty E, Klimstra DS, et al: 128. O’Grady JG, Portmann B, Williams R: Fulmi- liver on the outcome of surgical drainage from The value of minimal access surgery in the stag- nant hepatic failure. Diseases of the Liver, 7th jaundice due to malignant obstruction at the ing of patients with potentially resectable pan- ed. Schiff L, Schiff ER, Eds. JB Lippincott Co, hilus of the liver. HPB Surg 8:27, 1994 creatic malignancy. Ann Surg 223:134, 1996 Philadelphia, 1993, p 1077 88. Rege RV: Adverse effects of biliary obstruction: 107. John TG, Greig JD, Carter DC, et al: Carcinoma 129. Bismuth H, Samuel D, Castaing D, et al: implications for treatment of patients with of the pancreatic head and periampullary region: Orthotopic liver transplantation in fulminant obstructive jaundice. AJR Am J Roentgenol tumor staging with laparoscopy and laparoscop- and subfulminant hepatitis. Ann Surg 222:109, 164:287, 1995 ic ultrasonography. Ann Surg 221:156, 1995 1995 89. Grande L, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Fuster J, et al: 108. Jarnagin WR, Bodniewicz J, Dougherty E, et al: 130. Boyer JL, Reuben A: Chronic hepatitis. Diseases Obstructive jaundice and wound healing. Br J A prospective analysis of staging laparoscopy in of the Liver, 7th ed. Schiff L, Schiff ER, Eds. JB Surg 77:440, 1990 patients with primary and secondary hepatobil- Lippincott Co, Philadelphia, 1993, p 586 iary malignancies. J Gastrointest Surg 4:34, 2000 90. Pitt HA, Gomes AS, Lois JF: Does preoperative 131. Pugh RN, Murray-Lyon IM, Dawson JL, et al: percutaneous biliary drainage reduce operative 109. Hunerbein M, Rau B, Schlag PM: Laparoscopic Transection of the esophagus for bleeding risk or increase hospital cost? Ann Surg 201:545, ultrasound for staging of upper gastrointestinal esophageal varices. Br J Surg 60:646, 1973 1985 tumours. Eur J Surg Oncol 21:50, 1995 132. Kamath PS, Wiesner RH, Malinchoc M, et al: A 91. McPherson GA, Benjamin IS, Hodgson HJ, et 110. Scott-Conner CE: Laparoscopic biliary bypass model to predict survival in patients with end- al: Preoperative percutaneous transhepatic bil- for inoperable pancreatic cancer. Semin stage liver disease. Hepatology 33:464, 2001 iary drainage: results of a controlled trial. Br J Laparosc Surg 5:185, 1998 Surg 71:371, 1984 133. Fallon MB, Anderson JM, Boyer JL: Intrahepatic 111. Date RS, Siriwardena AK: Current status of cholestasis. Diseases of the Liver, 7th ed. Schiff 92. Povoski SP, Karpeh MS Jr, Conlon KC, et al: laparoscopic biliary bypass in the management of L, Schiff ER, Eds. JB Lippincott Co, Philadel- Preoperative biliary drainage: impact on intraop- non-resectable peri-ampullary cancer. Pancreatolo- phia, 1993, p 343 erative bile cultures and infectious morbidity and gy 5:325, 2005. mortality after pancreaticoduodenectomy. J Gastro- 112. Chamberlain RS, Blumgart LH: Hilar cholan- intest Surg 3:496, 1999 giocarcinoma: a review and commentary. Ann 93. Sohn TA, Yeo CJ, Cameron JL, et al: Do preop- Surg Oncol 7:55, 2000 Acknowledgment erative biliary stents increase postpancreatico- 113. Ogura Y, Kawarada Y: Surgical strategies for car- duodenectomy complications? J Gastrointest cinoma of the hepatic duct confluence. Br J Surg Figure 2c From MRI of the Abdomen and Pelvis: A Text- Surg 4:258, 2000 85:20, 1998 Atlas, by R. C. Semelka, S. M. Asher, and C. Reinhold. 94. Jarnagin WR, Bodniewicz J, Dougherty E, et al: 114. Jarnagin W, Shoup M. Surgical management of John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1997. Used with per- A prospective analysis of staging laparoscopy in cholangiocarcinoma. Seminars in liver disease mission.