Earl J. Williams
Royal Bournemouth Hospital
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Earl J. Williams.
Endoscopy | 2016
Pier Alberto Testoni; Alberto Mariani; Lars Aabakken; Marianna Arvanitakis; Erwan Bories; Guido Costamagna; Jacques Devière; Mário Dinis-Ribeiro; Jean-Marc Dumonceau; Marc Giovannini; Tibor Gyökeres; Michael Häfner; Jorma Halttunen; Cesare Hassan; Luís Lopes; Ioannis S. Papanikolaou; Tony C K Tham; Andrea Tringali; Jeanin E. van Hooft; Earl J. Williams
This Guideline is an official statement of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE). It provides practical advice on how to achieve successful cannulation and sphincterotomy at minimum risk to the patient. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was adopted to define the strength of recommendations and the quality of evidence. Main recommendations 1 ESGE suggests that difficult biliary cannulation is defined by the presence of one or more of the following: more than 5 contacts with the papilla whilst attempting to cannulate; more than 5 minutes spent attempting to cannulate following visualization of the papilla; more than one unintended pancreatic duct cannulation or opacification (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 2 ESGE recommends the guidewire-assisted technique for primary biliary cannulation, since it reduces the risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 3 ESGE recommends using pancreatic guidewire (PGW)-assisted biliary cannulation in patients where biliary cannulation is difficult and repeated unintentional access to the main pancreatic duct occurs (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). ESGE recommends attempting prophylactic pancreatic stenting in all patients with PGW-assisted attempts at biliary cannulation (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 4 ESGE recommends needle-knife fistulotomy as the preferred technique for precutting (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). ESGE suggests that precutting should be used only by endoscopists who achieve selective biliary cannulation in more than 80 % of cases using standard cannulation techniques (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). When access to the pancreatic duct is easy to obtain, ESGE suggests placement of a pancreatic stent prior to precutting (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation). 5 ESGE recommends that in patients with a small papilla that is difficult to cannulate, transpancreatic biliary sphincterotomy should be considered if unintentional insertion of a guidewire into the pancreatic duct occurs (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation).In patients who have had transpancreatic sphincterotomy, ESGE suggests prophylactic pancreatic stenting (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 6 ESGE recommends that mixed current is used for sphincterotomy rather than pure cut current alone, as there is a decreased risk of mild bleeding with the former (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 7 ESGE suggests endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) as an alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) for extracting CBD stones < 8 mm in patients without anatomical or clinical contraindications, especially in the presence of coagulopathy or altered anatomy (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation). 8 ESGE does not recommend routine biliary sphincterotomy for patients undergoing pancreatic sphincterotomy, and suggests that it is reserved for patients in whom there is evidence of coexisting bile duct obstruction or biliary sphincter of Oddi dysfunction (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation). 9 In patients with periampullary diverticulum (PAD) and difficult cannulation, ESGE suggests that pancreatic duct stent placement followed by precut sphincterotomy or needle-knife fistulotomy are suitable options to achieve cannulation (low quality evidence, weak recommendation).ESGE suggests that EST is safe in patients with PAD. In cases where EST is technically difficult to complete as a result of a PAD, large stone removal can be facilitated by a small EST combined with EPBD or use of EPBD alone (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 10 For cannulation of the minor papilla, ESGE suggests using wire-guided cannulation, with or without contrast, and sphincterotomy with a pull-type sphincterotome or a needle-knife over a plastic stent (low quality evidence, weak recommendation).When cannulation of the minor papilla is difficult, ESGE suggests secretin injection, which can be preceded by methylene blue spray in the duodenum (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 11 In patients with choledocholithiasis who are scheduled for elective cholecystectomy, ESGE suggests intraoperative ERCP with laparoendoscopic rendezvous (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation). ESGE suggests that when biliary cannulation is unsuccessful with a standard retrograde approach, anterograde guidewire insertion either by a percutaneous or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided approach can be used to achieve biliary access (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). 12 ESGE suggests that in patients with Billroth II gastrectomy ERCP should be performed in referral centers, with the side-viewing endoscope as a first option; forward-viewing endoscopes are the second choice in cases of failure (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). A straight standard ERCP catheter or an inverted sphincterotome, with or without the guidewire, is recommended by ESGE for biliopancreatic cannulation in patients who have undergone Billroth II gastrectomy (low quality evidence, strong recommendation). Endoscopic papillary ballon dilation (EPBD) is suggested as an alternative to sphincterotomy for stone extraction in the setting of patients with Billroth II gastrectomy (low quality evidence, weak recommendation).In patients with complex post-surgical anatomy ESGE suggests referral to a center where device-assisted enteroscopy techniques are available (very low quality evidence, weak recommendation).
Endoscopy | 2012
Earl J. Williams; Reuben Ogollah; Peter Thomas; Richard F. Logan; Derrick Martin; Mark Wilkinson; Martin Lombard
UNLABELLED STUDY BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Predicting outcome at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) remains difficult. Our aim was to identify the risk factors for failed ERCP. PATIENTS AND METHODS A prospective multicenter study of ERCP was performed in 66 hospitals across England. Data on 4561 patients were collected using a structured questionnaire completed at the time of ERCP. RESULTS In total 3209 patients had not had an ERCP prior to the study period. Considering their first ever ERCP, 2683 (84 %) were successfully cannulated, 2241(70 %) had all intended therapy completed, 360 (11 %) had some intended therapy completed, and 608 (19 %) were considered to have had a failed procedure. For first ever ERCP, factors associated with incomplete procedure (odds ratio and 95 % confidence interval) were: Billroth surgery (9.2, 3.2 - 26.7), precutting (2.0, 1.6 - 2.7), common bile duct (CBD) stone size and number (3.2, 2.1 - 4.8 for multiple, large stones), interventions in the pancreatic duct (3.4, 1.6 - 7.0), and CBD stenting (2.8, 2.2 - 3.5). Analysis of the 1352 patients who had undergone an ERCP prior to the study period indicated previous failed ERCP was also predictive of incomplete therapy (1.5, 1.1 - 2.1). The modified Schutz score correlated with ERCP completion, as did the Morriston score, even when modified to include only variables measurable before the procedure. CONCLUSION This study confirms that patient- and procedure-based variables are key predictors of technical success and validates current methods of rating ERCP difficulty. Of note, a correlation between outcome and institutional factors, such as unit and endoscopist caseload, was not demonstrated.
Gut | 2012
S Al-Shamma; S. McLaughlin; Raymond McCrudden; Sean Weaver; Earl J. Williams
We congratulate Gleeson and Heneghan1 on their detailed and comprehensive guidelines on the management of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). A noteworthy area for comment relates to the use of azathioprine (AZA) in the management of AIH and the utilisation of thiopurine metabolites to detect hepatotoxicity. As general hepatologists we are most familiar and comfortable with the use of AZA compared with other immunosuppressive agents and feel that every effort should be made to maintain our patients on these well-studied and established agents. …
Gut | 2011
P C Boger; Bineeta Foria; D Collins; Clare L. Bent; J McCutcheon; Earl J. Williams; Raymond McCrudden
Introduction Published sensitivities for biliary brush cytology range between 18% and 77%.1 2 Cellular yield is frequently the limiting factor. This study aims to compare diagnostic accuracy of a new technique of tissue acquisition and cytological assessment against historical techniques employed at a single centre. Methods Bile duct brushings performed at endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography between January 2008 and October 2010 were included in this study. Cytological analysis was performed using two techniques. Technique A (new technique) involved presence of a dedicated cytotechnician during tissue acquisition, use of a long biliary brush cut directly into buffered methanol, preparation of slide using ThinPrep and final analysis by dedicated Consultant Cytopathologists. Technique B involved tissue acquisition using a standard brush, smeared directly onto a slide and transported to the laboratory for analysis. Cytological diagnosis was classified as either negative (including reactive), or malignant (suspicious for or definite cancer). Cytology results were compared with final diagnosis as determined by histopathologic diagnosis, clinical follow-up, or autopsy data. Results During this period, 111 bile duct brushings were obtained. Four patients lacked a final diagnosis and were excluded from the study, leaving a final cohort of 107 patients. Technique A was employed in 48 cases (mean age: 72.6±10.1 years). Statistical analysis provided sensitivity of 73%, specificity of 91% and a positive predictive value of 96%. Technique B was used in 59 cases (mean age: 71.1±16.0 years). Statistical analysis provided sensitivity of 31%, specificity of 100% and a positive predictive value of 100%. Conclusion The introduction of this new technique of tissue acquisition and cytological assessment during biliary brushings has dramatically increased sensitivity from 31% to 73%, improving cancer detection rates.
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2006
Earl J. Williams
Gut | 2013
B Patel; S. McLaughlin; Earl J. Williams; S Al-Shamma
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2011
Philip C. Boger; Bineeta Foria; Debbie Collins; Clare L. Bent; Joan M. McCutcheon; Earl J. Williams; Raymond McCrudden
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2010
Adil Ahmed; Sarah Prendergast; Ashish Sinha; Raymond McCrudden; Earl J. Williams
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy | 2006
Earl J. Williams