Cargando…

Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) combined with large-balloon dilation (LBD) has been proposed as an alternative to manage large bile duct stones. However, recent reports indicate that LBD without EST may be safe and effective in this setting. METHODS: One hundred thirty-one patients with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hwang, Jae Chul, Kim, Jin Hong, Lim, Sun Gyo, Kim, Soon Sun, Shin, Sung Jae, Lee, Kee Myung, Yoo, Byung Moo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3556067/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23324454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-230X-13-15
_version_ 1782257136558931968
author Hwang, Jae Chul
Kim, Jin Hong
Lim, Sun Gyo
Kim, Soon Sun
Shin, Sung Jae
Lee, Kee Myung
Yoo, Byung Moo
author_facet Hwang, Jae Chul
Kim, Jin Hong
Lim, Sun Gyo
Kim, Soon Sun
Shin, Sung Jae
Lee, Kee Myung
Yoo, Byung Moo
author_sort Hwang, Jae Chul
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) combined with large-balloon dilation (LBD) has been proposed as an alternative to manage large bile duct stones. However, recent reports indicate that LBD without EST may be safe and effective in this setting. METHODS: One hundred thirty-one patients with large common bile duct (CBD) stones 12 mm in size or larger underwent LBD alone (n = 62) or EST plus LBD (n = 69) for lithotripsy. The therapeutic outcome and complications were reviewed and compared. RESULTS: There were no differences between the two groups with regard to age, size and number of stones, or bile duct diameter. The LBD alone group (mean age, 70.4 years) and the EST plus LBD group (mean age, 68.2 years) had similar outcomes in terms of overall successful stone removal (96.8% vs. 95.7%, P = 0.738) and complete stone removal without the need for mechanical lithotripsy (80.6% vs. 73.9%, P = 0.360). Complications in the LBD alone and EST plus LBD groups were as follows: pancreatitis (6.5% vs. 4.3%, P = 0.593), impaction of basket and stone (0% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.341), and perforation (0% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.341). CONCLUSIONS: LBD alone may be a simple, safe, and effective alternative to EST plus LBD in relatively aged patients with large CBD stones, and it can simplify the procedure compared with EST plus LBD.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3556067
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35560672013-01-31 Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones Hwang, Jae Chul Kim, Jin Hong Lim, Sun Gyo Kim, Soon Sun Shin, Sung Jae Lee, Kee Myung Yoo, Byung Moo BMC Gastroenterol Research Article BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) combined with large-balloon dilation (LBD) has been proposed as an alternative to manage large bile duct stones. However, recent reports indicate that LBD without EST may be safe and effective in this setting. METHODS: One hundred thirty-one patients with large common bile duct (CBD) stones 12 mm in size or larger underwent LBD alone (n = 62) or EST plus LBD (n = 69) for lithotripsy. The therapeutic outcome and complications were reviewed and compared. RESULTS: There were no differences between the two groups with regard to age, size and number of stones, or bile duct diameter. The LBD alone group (mean age, 70.4 years) and the EST plus LBD group (mean age, 68.2 years) had similar outcomes in terms of overall successful stone removal (96.8% vs. 95.7%, P = 0.738) and complete stone removal without the need for mechanical lithotripsy (80.6% vs. 73.9%, P = 0.360). Complications in the LBD alone and EST plus LBD groups were as follows: pancreatitis (6.5% vs. 4.3%, P = 0.593), impaction of basket and stone (0% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.341), and perforation (0% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.341). CONCLUSIONS: LBD alone may be a simple, safe, and effective alternative to EST plus LBD in relatively aged patients with large CBD stones, and it can simplify the procedure compared with EST plus LBD. BioMed Central 2013-01-17 /pmc/articles/PMC3556067/ /pubmed/23324454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-230X-13-15 Text en Copyright ©2013 Hwang et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hwang, Jae Chul
Kim, Jin Hong
Lim, Sun Gyo
Kim, Soon Sun
Shin, Sung Jae
Lee, Kee Myung
Yoo, Byung Moo
Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones
title Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones
title_full Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones
title_fullStr Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones
title_full_unstemmed Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones
title_short Endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones
title_sort endoscopic large-balloon dilation alone versus endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation for the treatment of large bile duct stones
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3556067/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23324454
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-230X-13-15
work_keys_str_mv AT hwangjaechul endoscopiclargeballoondilationaloneversusendoscopicsphincterotomypluslargeballoondilationforthetreatmentoflargebileductstones
AT kimjinhong endoscopiclargeballoondilationaloneversusendoscopicsphincterotomypluslargeballoondilationforthetreatmentoflargebileductstones
AT limsungyo endoscopiclargeballoondilationaloneversusendoscopicsphincterotomypluslargeballoondilationforthetreatmentoflargebileductstones
AT kimsoonsun endoscopiclargeballoondilationaloneversusendoscopicsphincterotomypluslargeballoondilationforthetreatmentoflargebileductstones
AT shinsungjae endoscopiclargeballoondilationaloneversusendoscopicsphincterotomypluslargeballoondilationforthetreatmentoflargebileductstones
AT leekeemyung endoscopiclargeballoondilationaloneversusendoscopicsphincterotomypluslargeballoondilationforthetreatmentoflargebileductstones
AT yoobyungmoo endoscopiclargeballoondilationaloneversusendoscopicsphincterotomypluslargeballoondilationforthetreatmentoflargebileductstones