Official reprint from UpToDate®

www.uptodate.com © 2023 UpToDate, Inc. and/or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved.

Choledocholithiasis: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis,

and management
AUTHORS: Nabeel Azeem, MD, Mustafa A Arain, MD, Martin L Freeman, MD
SECTION EDITOR: John R Saltzman, MD, FACP, FACG, FASGE, AGAF
DEPUTY EDITOR: Shilpa Grover, MD, MPH, AGAF

All topics are updated as new evidence becomes available and our peer review process is complete.

Literature review current through: Aug 2023.

This topic last updated: Feb 28, 2023.

INTRODUCTION

Choledocholithiasis refers to the presence of gallstones within the common bile duct. This topic
will review the clinical manifestations and diagnosis of choledocholithiasis. The treatment of
choledocholithiasis, as well as the epidemiology and the general management of patients with
gallstones, are discussed separately:

● (See "Endoscopic management of bile duct stones".)

● (See "Gallstones: Epidemiology, risk factors and prevention".)
● (See "Approach to the management of gallstones".)
● (See "Overview of gallstone disease in adults".)
● (See "Overview of nonsurgical management of gallbladder stones".)

EPIDEMIOLOGY

According to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), over 20
million Americans are estimated to have gallbladder disease (defined as the presence of
gallstones on transabdominal ultrasound or a history of cholecystectomy) [1,2]. Cholelithiasis
and cholecystitis are responsible for over 1.4 million annual emergency department visits in the
United States [3]. Approximately 10 to 15 percent of individuals with gallstones will develop
symptomatic gallstone disease over the course of a decade [4]. It has been estimated that 5 to
20 percent of patients have choledocholithiasis at the time of cholecystectomy, with the
incidence increasing with age [5-11]. Of those with symptomatic gallstones, 10 percent will also
have choledocholithiasis and this number increases to 15 percent when patients are presenting
with acute cholecystitis [12].

ETIOLOGY

Primary choledocholithiasis (ie, formation of stones within the common bile duct) typically
occurs in the setting of bile stasis (eg, patients with cystic fibrosis), resulting in a higher
propensity for intraductal stone formation. Older adults with large bile ducts and periampullary
diverticular are also at elevated risk for the formation of primary bile duct stones. Patients with
recurrent or persistent infection involving the biliary system frequently form bile duct stones, a
phenomenon seen most commonly in populations from East Asia. Other causes include
ischemia due to hepatic artery injury, which may occur post-liver transplant. The causes of
primary choledocholithiasis often affect the biliary tract diffusely, so patients may have both
extrahepatic and intrahepatic biliary stones. Intrahepatic stones may be complicated by
recurrent pyogenic cholangitis. (See "Recurrent pyogenic cholangitis".)

Secondary choledocholithiasis results from the passage of gallstones from the gallbladder into
the common bile duct. In Western countries, most cases of choledocholithiasis are secondary to
gallbladder stones.

CLINICAL MANIFESTATIONS

Patients with choledocholithiasis typically present with biliary-type pain and laboratory testing
that reveals a cholestatic pattern of liver test abnormalities (ie, elevated bilirubin and alkaline
phosphatase). Patients with uncomplicated choledocholithiasis are typically afebrile and have a
normal complete blood count and pancreatic enzyme levels. Occasionally, patients are
asymptomatic. In such patients, the diagnosis may be suspected because of abnormal liver
blood tests, abnormalities seen on imaging studies obtained for unrelated reasons, or when an
intraoperative cholangiogram obtained during cholecystectomy suggests the presence of a
common bile duct (CBD) stone. (See "Approach to the patient with abnormal liver biochemical
and function tests", section on 'Patterns of liver test abnormalities'.)

Complications of choledocholithiasis include acute pancreatitis and acute cholangitis. Patients

with acute pancreatitis typically have elevated serum pancreatic enzyme levels, and patients
with acute cholangitis are often febrile with a leukocytosis. Rarely, patients with long-standing
biliary obstruction develop secondary biliary cirrhosis. (See 'Complicated choledocholithiasis'
below.)

Uncomplicated choledocholithiasis

Symptoms — Most patients with choledocholithiasis are symptomatic, although occasional

patients are asymptomatic. Symptoms associated with choledocholithiasis include right upper
quadrant or epigastric pain, nausea, and vomiting. The pain is often more prolonged than is
seen with typical biliary colic (which typically resolves within six hours). (See "Overview of
gallstone disease in adults", section on 'Biliary colic'.)

The pain from choledocholithiasis resolves when the stone either passes spontaneously or is
removed. Some patients have intermittent pain due to transient blockage of the CBD. Transient
blockage occurs when there is retention and floating of stones or debris within the bile duct, a
phenomenon referred to as a "ball-valve" effect.

Physical examination — On physical examination, patients with choledocholithiasis often

have right upper quadrant or epigastric tenderness. Patients may also appear jaundiced.
Courvoisier's sign (a palpable gallbladder on physical examination) may be seen when
gallbladder dilation develops because of an obstruction of the CBD. It is more often associated
with malignant CBD obstruction, but has been reported with choledocholithiasis [13].

Laboratory tests — Serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase

(AST) concentrations are typically elevated early in the course of biliary obstruction, sometimes
dramatically. Later, liver tests are typically elevated in a cholestatic pattern, with increases in
serum bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT) exceeding
the elevations in serum ALT and AST. (See "Approach to the patient with abnormal liver
biochemical and function tests", section on 'Patterns of liver test abnormalities'.)

Since liver tests may be elevated due to a wide variety of etiologies, the positive predictive value
of elevated liver tests is poor [11,14,15]. On the other hand, the negative predictive value of
normal liver tests is high. Thus, normal liver tests play a greater role in excluding
choledocholithiasis than elevated liver tests play in diagnosing stones.

Improving liver blood tests combined with symptom resolution suggests that a patient with
choledocholithiasis has spontaneously passed the gallstone, although it can occur if a stone
ball-valves up into the duct and does not exclude the possibility of more than one stone in the
bile duct.
Complicated choledocholithiasis — The two major complications associated with
choledocholithiasis are pancreatitis and acute cholangitis.

Acute pancreatitis — In addition to the findings associated with uncomplicated

choledocholithiasis, patients with biliary pancreatitis typically present with nausea, vomiting,
abdominal pain, elevations in serum amylase and lipase (by definition greater than three times
the upper limit of normal), and/or imaging findings suggestive of acute pancreatitis. (See
"Clinical manifestations and diagnosis of acute pancreatitis", section on 'Clinical features'.)

Acute cholangitis — Patients with acute cholangitis may present with Charcot's triad (fever,
right upper quadrant pain, and jaundice) and leukocytosis. In severe cases, bacteremia and
sepsis may additionally lead to hypotension and altered mental status (Reynolds' pentad).
Cholangitis contributes to nearly 2400 deaths per year in the United States [3]. (See "Acute
cholangitis: Clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and management", section on 'Clinical
manifestations'.)

Long-standing biliary obstruction from various causes, including CBD stones, may result in liver
disease that may progress to cirrhosis, a phenomenon referred to as secondary biliary cirrhosis
[1,5]. Although rare in the setting of bile duct stones, secondary biliary cirrhosis may eventually
result in the same cirrhosis-related complications that occur with other etiologies. Relief of
biliary obstruction has been shown to result in regression of liver fibrosis in patients with
secondary biliary cirrhosis in the setting of chronic pancreatitis and choledochal cysts [6,7]. It is
likely, but not known, whether stone removal results in similar improvement in liver disease in
patients with choledocholithiasis-induced secondary biliary cirrhosis.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

Patients with uncomplicated gallstone disease, acute cholecystitis, sphincter of Oddi

dysfunction, or functional gallbladder disorder may all present with biliary colic, and patients
with liver disease, hematologic disorders, or biliary obstruction from any cause may present
with jaundice ( table 1). Choledocholithiasis can typically be differentiated from these other
entities based on the patient's history, laboratory tests, and abdominal imaging.

Patients with choledocholithiasis typically present acutely with sudden onset of pain that may
be stuttering and progress to prolonged episodes of pain. On the other hand, the episodes of
pain in patients with uncomplicated gallstone disease, sphincter of Oddi dysfunction, or
functional gallbladder disorder typically last less than six hours and often occur intermittently.
In addition, patients with uncomplicated gallstone disease or functional gallbladder disorder
should have normal laboratory tests and imaging (though patients with sphincter of Oddi
dysfunction may have bile duct dilation and elevations in the alanine aminotransferase,
aspartate aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase that normalize between attacks).
Endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography may be required to
identify choledocholithiasis. (See "Overview of gallstone disease in adults" and "Functional
gallbladder disorder in adults".)

Like patients with choledocholithiasis, patients with acute cholecystitis may have prolonged
episodes of pain that start suddenly. However, patients with acute cholecystitis generally do not
have significantly elevated (greater than three times the upper limit of normal) bilirubin or
alkaline phosphatase levels unless there is a secondary process causing cholestasis. In addition,
abdominal imaging in acute cholecystitis typically reveals a normal CBD, gallbladder wall
thickening, and a sonographic Murphy's sign. (See "Acute calculous cholecystitis: Clinical
features and diagnosis".)

There are numerous causes of jaundice in addition to choledocholithiasis ( table 1).

Choledocholithiasis is differentiated from these other conditions by the presence of biliary-type
pain and sometimes by a dilated CBD on abdominal imaging. (See "Diagnostic approach to the
adult with jaundice or asymptomatic hyperbilirubinemia", section on 'Terminology'.)

INITIAL DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION

Patients suspected of having choledocholithiasis are diagnosed with a combination of

laboratory tests and imaging studies. The first imaging study obtained is typically a
transabdominal ultrasound. Additional testing may include magnetic resonance
cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). Endoscopic retrograde
cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is reserved for therapeutic purposes after determining a very
high probability of common bile duct (CBD) stones, or cholangitis, and/or other diagnostic
procedures have confirmed the presence of choledocholithiasis. ERCP carries a high risk of
complications including pancreatitis, hemorrhage, or perforation from sphincterotomy, and
other adverse events. The aim of the diagnostic evaluation is to confirm or exclude the
presence of CBD stones using the least invasive, most accurate, and most cost-effective
imaging modality [16]. The specific approach is determined by the level of clinical suspicion,
availability of imaging modalities, and patient factors (eg, contraindications to a particular test)
( algorithm 1). Our approach is consistent with the 2019 guideline by the American Society
for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) [17].
Whom to suspect — Patients are often suspected of having choledocholithiasis when they
present with right upper quadrant pain with elevated liver enzymes in a primarily cholestatic
pattern (compared with the AST and ALT, there is disproportionate elevation of the alkaline
phosphatase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, and bilirubin). (See 'Assess risk of
choledocholithiasis' below.)

Initial evaluation — In a patient suspected of having choledocholithiasis based on the history,

physical examination, and laboratory testing, we start by obtaining a transabdominal
ultrasound. (See 'Transabdominal ultrasound' below.)

Laboratory findings — If not already done, we also obtain a complete blood count to look for
leukocytosis (which may suggest acute cholangitis has developed), liver tests, and pancreatic
enzyme levels to evaluate for concurrent pancreatitis. (See "Management of acute pancreatitis",
section on 'Management of underlying predisposing conditions'.)

Transabdominal ultrasound — The initial imaging study of choice in patients with suspected
CBD stones is a transabdominal ultrasound of the right upper quadrant. Transabdominal
ultrasound can evaluate for cholelithiasis, choledocholithiasis, and CBD dilation. It is readily
available, noninvasive, permits bedside evaluation, and provides a low-cost means of evaluating
the CBD for stones.

The sensitivity of transabdominal ultrasound for choledocholithiasis ranges from 20 to 90

percent [17]. In a meta-analysis of five studies, the pooled sensitivity of ultrasound for detecting
a CBD stone was 73 percent, with a specificity of 91 percent [18]. Transabdominal ultrasound
has poor sensitivity for stones in the distal CBD because the distal CBD is often obscured by
bowel gas in the imaging field [19-21]. Occasionally, a definite CBD stone (one that casts a
shadow) can be imaged by transabdominal ultrasound ( image 1).

A dilated CBD on transabdominal ultrasound is suggestive of, but not specific for,
choledocholithiasis [9,11,14]. A cutoff of 6 mm is often used to classify a duct as being dilated,
however, this may change with advancing age or with a history of cholecystectomy [17].
However, using a cutoff of 6 mm may miss CBD stones [22]. One study of 870 patients
undergoing cholecystectomy found that stones were often detected in patients whose ducts
would have been classified as "nondilated" using the 6 mm cutoff [23]. In addition, the
probability of a stone in the CBD increased with increasing CBD diameter:

● 0 to 4 mm: 3.9 percent

● 4.1 to 6 mm: 9.4 percent
● 6.1 to 8 mm: 28 percent
● 8.1 to 10 mm: 32 percent
 ● >10 mm: 50 percent

Conversely, because the diameter of the CBD increases with age, older adults may have a
normal duct with a diameter that is >6 mm. Following cholecystectomy, the CBD may dilate to
10 mm. (See 'Prior cholecystectomy' below.)

Assess risk of choledocholithiasis — Results of laboratory tests and transabdominal

ultrasound are used to stratify a patient as high risk, intermediate risk, or low risk for having
choledocholithiasis. Subsequent management varies depending on the patient's level of risk of
choledocholithiasis ( algorithm 1) [17]. (See 'Subsequent evaluation and management' below.)

● High risk – Patients with any one of the following are considered at high risk for a CBD
stone and have an estimated probability of having a CBD stone of >50 percent:

• The presence of a CBD stone on transabdominal ultrasound or cross-sectional imaging.

• Acute cholangitis.
• A serum bilirubin greater than 4 mg/dL (68 micromol/L) and a dilated CBD on
ultrasound (more than 6 mm in a patient with a gallbladder in situ and more than 8
mm in those that have had a cholecystectomy).

● Intermediate risk – Patients with any one of the following are considered to be at
intermediate risk with an estimated 10 to 50 percent probability of having a CBD stone:

• Abnormal liver biochemical tests.

• Age >55.
• Dilated CBD on ultrasound or cross-sectional imaging.

● Low risk

• No predictors present.

These risk criteria have been proposed by the ASGE in their 2019 guidelines on the role of
endoscopy in the evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis. They differ from the 2010
ASGE guidelines where either a serum bilirubin >4 mg/dL (68 micromol/L) or a dilated CBD on
ultrasound >6 mm in a patient with a gallbladder in situ were considered high-risk predictors
[17]. In a very large cohort of 2724 patients using a more restrictive high-risk criteria that
required both a serum bilirubin >4 mg/dL and bile duct dilation, this improved the specificity of
finding a CBD stone at the time of ERCP from 74 to 94 percent [24]. (See 'Subsequent evaluation
and management' below.)
SUBSEQUENT EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT

High risk of common bile duct stone

Choice of treatment — In patients with acute cholangitis, and in patients with both ongoing
evidence of biliary obstruction and acute pancreatitis, preoperative endoscopic retrograde
cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with stone removal is indicated; if ERCP is unsuccessful,
endoscopic ultrasound-guided rendezvous may facilitate access for ERCP [25]. If endoscopic
drainage is not feasible due to altered anatomy or other reasons, the patient may undergo
percutaneous biliary drainage ( algorithm 1). (See 'Concomitant acute pancreatitis' below.)

For all other patients at high risk for having common bile duct (CBD) stones, options include
ERCP with stone removal followed by elective cholecystectomy or cholecystectomy with
intraoperative ERCP or CBD exploration/postoperative ERCP [26]. For most patients, the choice
of treatment depends on available expertise and patient preference.

In the United States at least, the use of ERCP is rising and the use of surgical CBD exploration is
declining [27,28]. Outcomes for laparoscopic versus endoscopic treatment have been compared
in randomized trials and observational studies [29-35]. A 2018 network meta-analysis aimed to
determine the optimal approach for the treatment of gallstone disease with
choledocholithiasis, comparing preoperative ERCP plus laparoscopic cholecystectomy,
laparoscopic cholecystectomy with laparoscopic CBD exploration, laparoscopic cholecystectomy
plus intraoperative ERCP, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus postoperative ERCP [36].
Twenty trials with 2489 patients were included. Same-session laparoscopic cholecystectomy
with intraoperative ERCP was the most successful, safest, and had the shortest length of
hospital stay. However, intraoperative ERCP may not be feasible at some centers. Although
laparoscopic cholecystectomy plus laparoscopic CBD exploration had the shortest operative
time, least total cost, and lowest acute pancreatitis rate, it had a higher risk of biliary leak. It
should be noted that some of the intraoperative ERCP studies used a rendezvous technique
where a transcystic guidewire was passed laparoscopically across the major papilla, which
would then facilitate atraumatic biliary ERCP cannulation, potentially explaining higher rates of
success compared with preoperative and postoperative ERCP. However, this technique is not
universal among centers. (See "Surgical common bile duct exploration".)

Preoperative ERCP and elective cholecystectomy — ERCP can diagnose and remove CBD
stones ( image 2). The sensitivity of ERCP for choledocholithiasis is estimated to be 80 to 93
percent, with a specificity of 99 to 100 percent [37,38]. However, ERCP is invasive, requires
technical expertise, and is associated with complications such as pancreatitis, bleeding, and
perforation. Endoscopic techniques for CBD stone clearance include sphincterotomy and/or
balloon dilation of the ampulla followed by stone extraction using baskets and extraction
balloons as well as mechanical lithotripsy. These techniques are discussed in detail separately.
(See "Endoscopic management of bile duct stones".)

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative CBD exploration or postoperative

ERCP — Intraoperative CBD exploration is performed selectively, based on surgeon preference
and local expertise. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with concomitant bile duct exploration has
the advantage of being a single-stage procedure that both removes the gallbladder and clears
the CBD. The disadvantages are that it requires greater technical expertise and equipment and
takes a longer operative time than laparoscopic cholecystectomy alone.

If CBD exploration or ERCP is not performed intraoperatively, ERCP can be performed

postoperatively. A potential disadvantage of this approach is the need for a second anesthesia
and reoperation for duct clearance if ERCP fails. However, this is rare in centers with significant
ERCP experience. (See "Surgical common bile duct exploration".)

Intermediate risk of CBD stone — Intermediate-risk patients have an estimated 10 to 50

percent probability of having a CBD stone. Such patients require additional evaluation
(magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography [MRCP] or endoscopic ultrasound [EUS]) to
rule out choledocholithiasis prior to direct ERCP, given the risks associated with the procedure
[17]. Alternatively, such patients may also proceed directly to laparoscopic cholecystectomy with
intraoperative cholangiography. CBD stones identified on intraoperative cholangiogram can be
removed by laparoscopic CBD exploration (in centers with the requisite expertise) or by
intraoperative or postoperative ERCP. The choice is based on local endoscopic and surgical
expertise.

Additional imaging (MRCP or EUS) — Patients at intermediate risk may be considered for
cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography or additional imaging to confirm the
presence of a CBD stone prior to an ERCP. MRCP is often the preferred imaging modality for
CBD stones in patients at intermediate risk ( image 3) [39,40]. Deciding which test should be
performed depends on various factors such as ease of availability, cost, patient-related factors,
and the suspicion for a small stone ( table 2). If an ERCP can be performed at the same
setting as the EUS, performing EUS may facilitate therapy by ERCP, especially if the clinical
suspicion for a CBD stone is high ( image 4). A meta-analysis from 2017 showed that the
pooled sensitivity of EUS was higher than MRCP. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS
was 97 percent and 90 percent, respectively, and for MRCP was 87 percent and 92 percent,
respectively [41]. The lower sensitivity of MRCP may be due to difficulty detecting small stones
[<6 mm, ( image 5)] [42]. (See 'Intermediate risk of CBD stone' above.)
 CBD stone visualized — If the MRCP or EUS is positive for a CBD stone, patients should
undergo either preoperative ERCP and elective cholecystectomy or laparoscopic
cholecystectomy with intraoperative ERCP, CBD exploration, or postoperative ERCP. (See
'Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative CBD exploration or postoperative ERCP'
above.)

CBD stone not visualized — If the MRCP is negative for a CBD stone, but the suspicion
for a CBD stone remains moderate to high (eg, in a patient whose laboratory tests are not
improving), EUS is an appropriate next step. In many centers, the endoscopist performing the
EUS can perform an ERCP during the same session if a stone is found.

In all other patients with an MRCP that is negative for a CBD stone, an elective cholecystectomy
(provided gallstones or biliary sludge were demonstrated on preoperative imaging) can be
performed.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative imaging — Laparoscopic

cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography or intraoperative ultrasonography is an
alternative strategy in patients at intermediate risk for a CBD stone. The decision regarding
intraoperative cholangiography or intraoperative ultrasonography depends upon availability
and surgical expertise [43].

● Intraoperative cholangiography – Intraoperative cholangiography has an estimated

sensitivity of 59 to 100 percent for diagnosing choledocholithiasis, with a specificity of 93
to 100 percent [38,44-46]. However, it may be technically unfeasible in patients with a
severely inflamed gallbladder or with a tiny or inflamed cystic duct. Laparoscopic
exploration of the CBD for removal of intraductal stones is technically challenging, highly
operator-dependent, and is not routinely performed by many surgeons [47]. (See
"Laparoscopic cholecystectomy", section on 'Evaluation for choledocholithiasis' and
"Surgical common bile duct exploration", section on 'Intraoperative cholangiography'.)

● Intraoperative ultrasonography – During laparoscopy, an ultrasound probe is inserted

into the peritoneal cavity though a 10-mm trochar and is used to scan the bile ducts. The
reported sensitivity and specificity are over 90 percent in experienced hands, and it has
been suggested that the routine use of intraoperative ultrasound followed by selective
intraoperative cholangiography leads to the accurate diagnosis of choledocholithiasis
while reducing the need for intraoperative cholangiography [48]. The use of intraoperative
ultrasound may also decrease the rate of bile duct injury [49]. However, it is associated
with a longer learning curve, equipment costs, and is not as widely available [44].

Subsequent management is based on results of intraoperative imaging:

 ● If intraoperative imaging is positive, patients can undergo laparoscopic CBD exploration
(in centers with the requisite expertise) or intraoperative or postoperative ERCP. (See
'Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative CBD exploration or postoperative ERCP'
above.)

● If intraoperative imaging is negative for a CBD stone, the patient can proceed to elective
cholecystectomy.

Low risk of CBD stone — Low-risk patients are estimated to have a <10 percent probability of
having a CBD stone [17]. (See 'Assess risk of choledocholithiasis' above.)

Gallstones/sludge on imaging — If gallstones or sludge are present within the gallbladder on

transabdominal ultrasound and the patient is a good surgical candidate, the patient should
proceed to cholecystectomy without imaging of the CBD preoperatively or intraoperatively.
Alternative therapies, such as medical gallstone dissolution, may be considered for patients
who are not surgical candidates. (See "Overview of nonsurgical management of gallbladder
stones", section on 'Oral bile acid dissolution therapy'.)

Without gallstones/sludge — In the absence of gallstones on imaging, alternative

explanations for the patient's pain should be sought. (See "Evaluation of the adult with
abdominal pain", section on 'Right upper quadrant pain'.)

Special circumstances

Concomitant acute pancreatitis — Patients with both acute pancreatitis and acute
cholangitis should undergo urgent (<24 hours) ERCP [17]. (See "Management of acute
pancreatitis", section on 'Gallstone pancreatitis'.)

In patients with gallstone pancreatitis and persistent obstruction without cholangitis, urgent
ERCP (within 24 hours) is not indicated. In such patients, therapeutic ERCP can be performed
either before the cholecystectomy, if there is a strong suspicion of a stone in the bile duct, or if
confirmed by other imaging. ERCP can also be considered in patients who will be discharged
from the hospital before cholecystectomy, which is typically due to necrotizing pancreatitis.
However, ERCP in the presence of sterile necrotizing pancreatitis may introduce risk of early
infection of the necrosis, which can be highly morbid [50]

In patients with acute pancreatitis but equivocal evidence of bile duct stones (eg, improving
liver enzyme tests and/or improvement or resolution of pain), MRCP or EUS followed by ERCP
only if the EUS/MRCP reveals a CBD stone is an attractive option because it can detect CBD
stones but is not associated with pancreatitis.
Issues related to ERCP in patients with acute biliary pancreatitis are discussed elsewhere. (See
"Management of acute pancreatitis", section on 'Endoscopic retrograde
cholangiopancreatography'.)

Prior cholecystectomy — Choledocholithiasis will sometimes be suspected in a patient who

has previously undergone cholecystectomy. Choledocholithiasis can occur in this setting if a
gallstone escapes from the gallbladder during cholecystectomy, stones were within the CBD but
clinically silent and unrecognized at the time of the cholecystectomy, or if there is de novo stone
formation within the CBD. (See "Laparoscopic cholecystectomy", section on
'Postcholecystectomy syndrome'.)

Following cholecystectomy, the CBD may dilate to 10 mm or more, especially in older adult
patients. In such patients, transabdominal ultrasound is less helpful because a dilated CBD seen
on ultrasound may be the result of a CBD stone, or it may be the result of the cholecystectomy.
One approach to patients who have undergone a prior cholecystectomy and who present with
biliary-type pain and liver test abnormalities, but in whom there is uncertainty following a
transabdominal ultrasound as to the presence of a bile duct stone, is to proceed with an MRCP
or EUS to confirm the presence of a stone. If a stone is absent, it is important to consider
alternative etiologies including sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. (See 'Differential diagnosis'
above.)

SOCIETY GUIDELINE LINKS

Links to society and government-sponsored guidelines from selected countries and regions
around the world are provided separately. (See "Society guideline links: Cholecystitis and other
gallbladder disorders" and "Society guideline links: Gallstones" and "Society guideline links:
Biliary infection and obstruction".)

INFORMATION FOR PATIENTS

UpToDate offers two types of patient education materials, "The Basics" and "Beyond the
Basics." The Basics patient education pieces are written in plain language, at the 5th to 6th grade
reading level, and they answer the four or five key questions a patient might have about a given
condition. These articles are best for patients who want a general overview and who prefer
short, easy-to-read materials. Beyond the Basics patient education pieces are longer, more
sophisticated, and more detailed. These articles are written at the 10th to 12th grade reading
level and are best for patients who want in-depth information and are comfortable with some
medical jargon.

Here are the patient education articles that are relevant to this topic. We encourage you to print
or e-mail these topics to your patients. (You can also locate patient education articles on a
variety of subjects by searching on "patient info" and the keyword(s) of interest.)

● Beyond the Basics topics (see "Patient education: ERCP (endoscopic retrograde
cholangiopancreatography) (Beyond the Basics)")

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

● Epidemiology – Choledocholithiasis refers to the presence of gallstones within the

common bile duct. It has been estimated that 5 to 20 percent of patients with gallstones
will have choledocholithiasis at the time of cholecystectomy, with the incidence increasing
with age. (See 'Epidemiology' above.)

● Clinical manifestations – Most patients with choledocholithiasis are symptomatic,

although occasional patients are asymptomatic. Symptoms associated with
choledocholithiasis include right upper quadrant or epigastric pain, nausea, and vomiting.
The pain is often more prolonged than is seen with typical biliary colic (which typically
resolves within six hours). On physical examination, patients with choledocholithiasis
often have right upper quadrant or epigastric tenderness. Patients may also appear
jaundiced. (See 'Symptoms' above and 'Physical examination' above.)

● Laboratory findings – Serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate

aminotransferase (AST) are typically elevated early in the course of biliary obstruction.
Later, liver tests are typically elevated in a cholestatic pattern, with elevations in serum
bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase, and gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase being more
pronounced than those in ALT and AST. (See 'Laboratory tests' above.)

● Complications – Complications of choledocholithiasis include acute pancreatitis and acute

cholangitis. Patients with acute pancreatitis typically have elevated serum pancreatic
enzyme levels, and patients with acute cholangitis are often febrile with leukocytosis. (See
'Complicated choledocholithiasis' above.)

● Initial evaluation and assessment of risk of choledocholithiasis – Patients suspected of

having choledocholithiasis are diagnosed with a combination of laboratory tests and
imaging studies. The first imaging study obtained is typically a transabdominal
 ultrasound. The results of laboratory testing and transabdominal ultrasound are then
used to stratify a patient as high risk, intermediate risk, or low risk for having
choledocholithiasis ( algorithm 1). (See 'Initial diagnostic evaluation' above.)

• High risk – Patients with any one of the following are considered at high risk for a
common bile duct (CBD) stone and have an estimated probability of having a CBD
stone of >50 percent:

- The presence of a CBD stone on transabdominal ultrasound or cross-sectional

imaging.
- Acute cholangitis.
- A serum bilirubin greater than 4 mg/dL (68 micromol/L) and a dilated CBD on
ultrasound (more than 6 mm in a patient with a gallbladder in situ and more than 8
mm in those that have had a cholecystectomy).

• Intermediate risk – Patients with any one of the following are considered to be at
intermediate risk with an estimated 10 to 50 percent probability of having a CBD stone:

- Abnormal liver biochemical tests.

- Age >55.
- Dilated CBD on ultrasound or cross-sectional imaging.

• Low risk

- No predictors present.

● Additional evaluation based on risk of choledocholithiasis

• Patients at high risk for having common bile duct stones and with an intact gallbladder
generally proceed to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with
stone removal, followed by elective cholecystectomy, or they undergo cholecystectomy
with intraoperative cholangiography, followed by intraoperative or postoperative ERCP;
where expertise is available, laparoscopic common bile duct exploration can be
performed. Precholecystectomy ERCP followed by cholecystectomy is appropriate in
patients with acute cholangitis, in those with ongoing evidence of biliary obstruction
and acute pancreatitis. (See 'High risk of common bile duct stone' above.)

• Patients at intermediate risk either undergo preoperative endoscopic ultrasound or

magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, or they proceed to laparoscopic
cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiography or ultrasonography. Subsequent
management choices are as above. (See 'Intermediate risk of CBD stone' above.)
 • Patients at low risk can proceed directly to cholecystectomy without additional testing,
provided gallstones or sludge were seen on preoperative imaging. (See 'Low risk of
CBD stone' above.)

Use of UpToDate is subject to the Terms of Use.

REFERENCES

1. Everhart JE, Khare M, Hill M, Maurer KR. Prevalence and ethnic differences in gallbladder
disease in the United States. Gastroenterology 1999; 117:632.
2. Baiu I, Hawn MT. Choledocholithiasis. JAMA 2018; 320:1506.

3. Peery AF, Crockett SD, Murphy CC, et al. Burden and Cost of Gastrointestinal, Liver, and
Pancreatic Diseases in the United States: Update 2018. Gastroenterology 2019; 156:254.
4. Figueiredo JC, Haiman C, Porcel J, et al. Sex and ethnic/racial-specific risk factors for
gallbladder disease. BMC Gastroenterol 2017; 17:153.
5. Collins C, Maguire D, Ireland A, et al. A prospective study of common bile duct calculi in
patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: natural history of choledocholithiasis
revisited. Ann Surg 2004; 239:28.
6. Hunter JG. Laparoscopic transcystic common bile duct exploration. Am J Surg 1992; 163:53.
7. Petelin JB. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration. Surg Endosc 2003; 17:1705.
8. Neuhaus H, Feussner H, Ungeheuer A, et al. Prospective evaluation of the use of
endoscopic retrograde cholangiography prior to laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Endoscopy
1992; 24:745.
9. Houdart R, Perniceni T, Darne B, et al. Predicting common bile duct lithiasis: determination
and prospective validation of a model predicting low risk. Am J Surg 1995; 170:38.
10. O'Neill CJ, Gillies DM, Gani JS. Choledocholithiasis: overdiagnosed endoscopically and
undertreated laparoscopically. ANZ J Surg 2008; 78:487.
11. Prat F, Meduri B, Ducot B, et al. Prediction of common bile duct stones by noninvasive tests.
Ann Surg 1999; 229:362.

12. Frossard JL, Morel PM. Detection and management of bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc
2010; 72:808.
13. Fitzgerald JE, White MJ, Lobo DN. Courvoisier's gallbladder: law or sign? World J Surg 2009;
33:886.
14. Abboud PA, Malet PF, Berlin JA, et al. Predictors of common bile duct stones prior to
cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 44:450.
15. Yang MH, Chen TH, Wang SE, et al. Biochemical predictors for absence of common bile duct
stones in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2008; 22:1620.
16. Tse F, Barkun JS, Barkun AN. The elective evaluation of patients with suspected
choledocholithiasis undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;
60:437.

17. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Buxbaum JL, Abbas Fehmi SM, et al. ASGE guideline
on the role of endoscopy in the evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis.
Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89:1075.
18. Gurusamy KS, Giljaca V, Takwoingi Y, et al. Ultrasound versus liver function tests for
diagnosis of common bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; :CD011548.
19. O'Connor HJ, Hamilton I, Ellis WR, et al. Ultrasound detection of choledocholithiasis:
prospective comparison with ERCP in the postcholecystectomy patient. Gastrointest Radiol
1986; 11:161.
20. Wermke W, Schulz HJ. [Sonographic diagnosis of bile duct calculi. Results of a prospective
study of 222 cases of choledocholithiasis]. Ultraschall Med 1987; 8:116.
21. Pasanen PA, Partanen KP, Pikkarainen PH, et al. A comparison of ultrasound, computed
tomography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the differential
diagnosis of benign and malignant jaundice and cholestasis. Eur J Surg 1993; 159:23.

22. Urquhart P, Speer T, Gibson R. Challenging clinical paradigms of common bile duct
diameter. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74:378.
23. Hunt DR. Common bile duct stones in non-dilated bile ducts? An ultrasound study.
Australas Radiol 1996; 40:221.
24. He H, Tan C, Wu J, et al. Accuracy of ASGE high-risk criteria in evaluation of patients with
suspected common bile duct stones. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86:525.
25. Mallery S, Matlock J, Freeman ML. EUS-guided rendezvous drainage of obstructed biliary
and pancreatic ducts: Report of 6 cases. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59:100.
26. Mallick R, Rank K, Ronstrom C, et al. Single-session laparoscopic cholecystectomy and
ERCP: a valid option for the management of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc 2016;
84:639.
27. Poulose BK, Arbogast PG, Holzman MD. National analysis of in-hospital resource utilization
in choledocholithiasis management using propensity scores. Surg Endosc 2006; 20:186.
28. Wandling MW, Hungness ES, Pavey ES, et al. Nationwide Assessment of Trends in
Choledocholithiasis Management in the United States From 1998 to 2013. JAMA Surg 2016;
151:1125.
29. Dasari BV, Tan CJ, Gurusamy KS, et al. Surgical versus endoscopic treatment of bile duct
stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; :CD003327.
30. Singh AN, Kilambi R. Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and
cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by laparoscopic
cholecystectomy for patients with gallbladder stones with common bile duct stones:
systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials with trial sequential analysis.
Surg Endosc 2018; 32:3763.
31. Pan L, Chen M, Ji L, et al. The Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Common Bile Duct
Exploration Combined with Cholecystectomy for the Management of Cholecysto-
choledocholithiasis: An Up-to-date Meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2018; 268:247.

32. Poh BR, Ho SP, Sritharan M, et al. Randomized clinical trial of intraoperative endoscopic
retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus laparoscopic bile duct exploration in patients
with choledocholithiasis. Br J Surg 2016; 103:1117.
33. Bansal VK, Misra MC, Rajan K, et al. Single-stage laparoscopic common bile duct
exploration and cholecystectomy versus two-stage endoscopic stone extraction followed by
laparoscopic cholecystectomy for patients with concomitant gallbladder stones and
common bile duct stones: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 2014; 28:875.

34. Noble H, Tranter S, Chesworth T, et al. A randomized, clinical trial to compare endoscopic
sphincterotomy and subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy with primary laparoscopic
bile duct exploration during cholecystectomy in higher risk patients with
choledocholithiasis. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2009; 19:713.
35. Sgourakis G, Karaliotas K. Laparoscopic common bile duct exploration and
cholecystectomy versus endoscopic stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy for
choledocholithiasis. A prospective randomized study. Minerva Chir 2002; 57:467.
36. Ricci C, Pagano N, Taffurelli G, et al. Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of 4 Combinations of
Laparoscopic and Intraoperative Techniques for Management of Gallstone Disease With
Biliary Duct Calculi: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 2018;
153:e181167.
37. Prat F, Amouyal G, Amouyal P, et al. Prospective controlled study of endoscopic
ultrasonography and endoscopic retrograde cholangiography in patients with suspected
common-bileduct lithiasis. Lancet 1996; 347:75.
38. Gurusamy KS, Giljaca V, Takwoingi Y, et al. Endoscopic retrograde
cholangiopancreatography versus intraoperative cholangiography for diagnosis of
common bile duct stones. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; :CD010339.
39. Scheiman JM, Carlos RC, Barnett JL, et al. Can endoscopic ultrasound or magnetic
resonance cholangiopancreatography replace ERCP in patients with suspected biliary
disease? A prospective trial and cost analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96:2900.

40. Carlos RC, Scheiman JM, Hussain HK, et al. Making cost-effectiveness analyses clinically
relevant: the effect of provider expertise and biliary disease prevalence on the economic
comparison of alternative diagnostic strategies. Acad Radiol 2003; 10:620.
41. Meeralam Y, Al-Shammari K, Yaghoobi M. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS compared with MRCP
in detecting choledocholithiasis: a meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy in head-to-
head studies. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86:986.
42. Zidi SH, Prat F, Le Guen O, et al. Use of magnetic resonance cholangiography in the
diagnosis of choledocholithiasis: prospective comparison with a reference imaging
method. Gut 1999; 44:118.
43. Iranmanesh P, Frossard JL, Mugnier-Konrad B, et al. Initial cholecystectomy vs sequential
common duct endoscopic assessment and subsequent cholecystectomy for suspected
gallstone migration: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2014; 312:137.
44. Machi J, Tateishi T, Oishi AJ, et al. Laparoscopic ultrasonography versus operative
cholangiography during laparoscopic cholecystectomy: review of the literature and a
comparison with open intraoperative ultrasonography. J Am Coll Surg 1999; 188:360.
45. Videhult P, Sandblom G, Rasmussen IC. How reliable is intraoperative cholangiography as a
method for detecting common bile duct stones? : A prospective population-based study on
1171 patients. Surg Endosc 2009; 23:304.
46. MacFadyen BV. Intraoperative cholangiography: past, present, and future. Surg Endosc
2006; 20 Suppl 2:S436.
47. Massarweh NN, Devlin A, Elrod JA, et al. Surgeon knowledge, behavior, and opinions
regarding intraoperative cholangiography. J Am Coll Surg 2008; 207:821.
48. Machi J, Oishi AJ, Tajiri T, et al. Routine laparoscopic ultrasound can significantly reduce the
need for selective intraoperative cholangiography during cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc
2007; 21:270.
49. Machi J, Johnson JO, Deziel DJ, et al. The routine use of laparoscopic ultrasound decreases
bile duct injury: a multicenter study. Surg Endosc 2009; 23:384.
 50. Trikudanathan G, Wolbrink DRJ, van Santvoort HC, et al. Current Concepts in Severe Acute
and Necrotizing Pancreatitis: An Evidence-Based Approach. Gastroenterology 2019;
156:1994.
Topic 13922 Version 39.0
GRAPHICS

Classification of jaundice according to type of bile pigment and mechanism

Unconjugated hyperbilirubinemia Conjugated hyperbilirubinemia

(continued)
Increased bilirubin production*

Extravascular hemolysis Extrahepatic cholestasis (biliary

obstruction)
Extravasation of blood into tissues
Choledocholithiasis
Intravascular hemolysis
Intrinsic and extrinsic tumors (eg,
Dyserythropoiesis cholangiocarcinoma, pancreatic cancer)
Wilson disease Primary sclerosing cholangitis
Impaired hepatic bilirubin uptake AIDS cholangiopathy
Heart failure Acute and chronic pancreatitis
Portosystemic shunts Strictures after invasive procedures
Some patients with Gilbert syndrome Certain parasitic infections (eg, Ascaris
Certain drugs ¶ – Rifampin, probenecid, lumbricoides, liver flukes)
flavaspadic acid, bunamiodyl Intrahepatic cholestasis
Impaired bilirubin conjugation Viral hepatitis
Crigler-Najjar syndrome types I and II Alcohol-associated hepatitis
Gilbert syndrome Non-alcohol-associated steatohepatitis
Neonates Chronic hepatitis
Hyperthyroidism Primary biliary cholangitis
Ethinyl estradiol Drugs and toxins (eg, alkylated steroids,
Liver diseases – Chronic hepatitis, chlorpromazine, herbal medications [eg,
advanced cirrhosis Jamaican bush tea], arsenic)

Sepsis and hypoperfusion states

Conjugated hyperbilirubinemia
Infiltrative diseases (eg, amyloidosis,
Defect of canalicular organic anion
lymphoma, sarcoidosis, tuberculosis)
transport
Total parenteral nutrition
Dubin-Johnson syndrome
Postoperative cholestasis
Defect of sinusoidal reuptake of
conjugated bilirubin Following organ transplantation

Rotor syndrome Hepatic crisis in sickle cell disease

Pregnancy
 End-stage liver disease

AIDS: acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.

* Serum bilirubin concentration is usually less than 4 mg/dL (68 mmol/L) in the absence of
underlying liver disease.

¶ The hyperbilirubinemia induced by drugs usually resolves within 48 hours after the drug is
discontinued.

Graphic 55607 Version 13.0

Suggested approach for the evaluation and management of suspected
choledocholithiasis [1]

CBD: common bile duct; ERCP: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram; EUS: endoscopic ultrasoun
IOC: intraoperative cholangiogram; IOU: intraoperative ultrasonography; MRCP: magnetic resonance
cholangiopancreatogram.

* A common bile duct measuring more than 6 mm in a patient with a gallbladder in situ and more than 8
mm in those that have had a cholecystectomy.

¶ Refer to UpToDate content on surgical common bile duct exploration and acute pancreatitis.

Δ If no stone is visualized on MRCP but suspicion for a CBD stone remains moderate to high (eg, in a patient
whose laboratory tests are not improving), EUS is an appropriate next step.

◊ Decision is based on available expertise.

References:
1. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee, Buxbaum JL, Abbas Fehmi SM, et al. ASGE guideline on the role of endoscopy in the
evaluation and management of choledocholithiasis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89:1075.

Graphic 66945 Version 4.0

Transabdominal ultrasound showing common bile
duct stones

A transverse ultrasound in the region of the porta hepatis shows

multiple shadowing stones (arrows) within a dilated distal common
bile duct.

Courtesy of ML Freeman, MD.

Graphic 62309 Version 5.0

Common bile duct stone on endoscopic retrograde
cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)

Cholangiogram showing large (2 cm) common bile duct stone

(arrow).

Courtesy of Martin L. Freeman, MD.

Graphic 59987 Version 5.0

Common bile duct stones

Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography study, obtained in a

60-year-old woman with recurrent right upper quadrant pain and an
unremarkable ultrasound examination, shows small stones (arrows)
in the GB and the CBD.

CBD: common bile duct; GB: gallbladder.

Courtesy of Jonathan Kruskal, MD.

Graphic 80729 Version 3.0

Advantages and disadvantages associated with MRCP and EUS for the
evaluation of choledocholithiasis

MRCP

Advantages

Noninvasive

Intravenous contrast usually given but not required

Established technique, widely available

Disadvantages

Time consuming

Contraindications such as cardiac pacemaker/defibrillator, intracranial metal clips

False-positive studies (eg, intraductal artifacts such as air or blood, image reconstruction artifacts,
motion artifacts)

False-negative studies (eg, stones in dilated CBD or stones <5 mm in the distal duct may not be
visualized well)

EUS

Advantages

Very high resolution (0.1 mm) compared with MRCP (1.5 mm)

Dynamic imaging allowing manipulation and magnification of image for better visualization

ERCP can potentially be performed in the same setting for stone removal

Can be performed at the bedside in critically ill patients

Disadvantages

More invasive than MRCP

Need for sedation

Risks associated with sedation (eg, cardiopulmonary compromise) and endoscopy (eg, bleeding
and perforation)

Limited availability of equipment and trained endosonographers

Not possible or limited role in altered anatomy (eg, pyloric stenosis, Roux-en-Y bypass)

CBD: common bile duct; ERCP: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; EUS: endoscopic
ultrasound; MRCP: magnetic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Courtesy of ML Freeman, MD.

Graphic 73388 Version 1.0
Choledocholithiasis seen on endoscopic ultrasound

Endosonographic image of a gallstone in the common bile duct.

Courtesy of Gavin C Harewood, MD and Mauritis J Wiersema, MD.

Graphic 64622 Version 3.0

Comparison of MRCP/ERCP and EUS for the detection of
common bile duct stones

Small bile duct stone missed by magnetic resonance

cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic retrograde
cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), but shown by endoscopic ultrasound
(EUS). This demonstrates the superior sensitivity of EUS for small bile duct
stones. A) MRCP showing dilated bile duct with no apparent stone,
incidental pancreas divisum. B) EUS in same patient showing very small bile
duct stone (<5 mm) (arrow). C) ERCP in same patient showing dilated
common bile duct without apparent stone. D) Endoscopic view of extracted
stone after biliary sphincterotomy (arrow).

Courtesy of ML Freeman, MD.

Graphic 60410 Version 3.0

