Cargando…

Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety

Background: Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones (CBDS) is standard; however, various techniques are performed via the papilla, and the best procedure in terms of both efficacy and safety has not been determined. Methods: Endoscopic procedures were classified into five categories accordi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ishii, Shigeto, Isayama, Hiroyuki, Ushio, Mako, Takahashi, Sho, Yamagata, Wataru, Takasaki, Yusuke, Suzuki, Akinori, Ochiai, Kazushige, Tomishima, Ko, Kanazawa, Ryo, Saito, Hiroaki, Fujisawa, Toshio, Shiina, Shuichiro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7760048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33255554
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9123808
_version_ 1783627240310833152
author Ishii, Shigeto
Isayama, Hiroyuki
Ushio, Mako
Takahashi, Sho
Yamagata, Wataru
Takasaki, Yusuke
Suzuki, Akinori
Ochiai, Kazushige
Tomishima, Ko
Kanazawa, Ryo
Saito, Hiroaki
Fujisawa, Toshio
Shiina, Shuichiro
author_facet Ishii, Shigeto
Isayama, Hiroyuki
Ushio, Mako
Takahashi, Sho
Yamagata, Wataru
Takasaki, Yusuke
Suzuki, Akinori
Ochiai, Kazushige
Tomishima, Ko
Kanazawa, Ryo
Saito, Hiroaki
Fujisawa, Toshio
Shiina, Shuichiro
author_sort Ishii, Shigeto
collection PubMed
description Background: Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones (CBDS) is standard; however, various techniques are performed via the papilla, and the best procedure in terms of both efficacy and safety has not been determined. Methods: Endoscopic procedures were classified into five categories according to endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and balloon dilation (BD): (1) EST, (2) endoscopic papillary BD (≤10 mm) (EPBD), (3) EST followed by BD (≤10 mm) (ESBD), (4) endoscopic papillary large BD (≥12 mm) (EPLBD), and (5) EST followed by large BD (≥12 mm) (ESLBD). We performed a literature review of prospective and retrospective studies to compare efficacy and adverse events (AEs). Each procedure was associated with different efficacy and AE profiles. Results: In total, 19 prospective and seven retrospective studies with a total of 3930 patients were included in this study. For EST, the complete stone removal rate at the first session, rate of mechanical lithotripsy (ML), and rate of overall AEs in EST were superior to EPBD, but a higher rate of bleeding was found for EST. Based on one retrospective study, complete stone removal rate at the first session, rate of ML, and rate of overall AEs were superior for ESBD vs. EST, and the rate of bleeding for the former was also lower. Complete stone removal rate at the first session and rate of ML for ESLBD were superior to those for EST, with no significant difference in rate of AEs. For EST vs. EPLBD, complete stone removal rate at the first session and rate of ML were superior for the latter. For EPLBD vs. ESLBD, the efficacy and safety were similar. Conclusions: ESBD is considered the best procedure for the management of small CBDS, but strong evidence is lacking. For large CBDS, both ESLBD and EPLBD are similar.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7760048
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77600482020-12-26 Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety Ishii, Shigeto Isayama, Hiroyuki Ushio, Mako Takahashi, Sho Yamagata, Wataru Takasaki, Yusuke Suzuki, Akinori Ochiai, Kazushige Tomishima, Ko Kanazawa, Ryo Saito, Hiroaki Fujisawa, Toshio Shiina, Shuichiro J Clin Med Review Background: Endoscopic management of common bile duct stones (CBDS) is standard; however, various techniques are performed via the papilla, and the best procedure in terms of both efficacy and safety has not been determined. Methods: Endoscopic procedures were classified into five categories according to endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and balloon dilation (BD): (1) EST, (2) endoscopic papillary BD (≤10 mm) (EPBD), (3) EST followed by BD (≤10 mm) (ESBD), (4) endoscopic papillary large BD (≥12 mm) (EPLBD), and (5) EST followed by large BD (≥12 mm) (ESLBD). We performed a literature review of prospective and retrospective studies to compare efficacy and adverse events (AEs). Each procedure was associated with different efficacy and AE profiles. Results: In total, 19 prospective and seven retrospective studies with a total of 3930 patients were included in this study. For EST, the complete stone removal rate at the first session, rate of mechanical lithotripsy (ML), and rate of overall AEs in EST were superior to EPBD, but a higher rate of bleeding was found for EST. Based on one retrospective study, complete stone removal rate at the first session, rate of ML, and rate of overall AEs were superior for ESBD vs. EST, and the rate of bleeding for the former was also lower. Complete stone removal rate at the first session and rate of ML for ESLBD were superior to those for EST, with no significant difference in rate of AEs. For EST vs. EPLBD, complete stone removal rate at the first session and rate of ML were superior for the latter. For EPLBD vs. ESLBD, the efficacy and safety were similar. Conclusions: ESBD is considered the best procedure for the management of small CBDS, but strong evidence is lacking. For large CBDS, both ESLBD and EPLBD are similar. MDPI 2020-11-25 /pmc/articles/PMC7760048/ /pubmed/33255554 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9123808 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Ishii, Shigeto
Isayama, Hiroyuki
Ushio, Mako
Takahashi, Sho
Yamagata, Wataru
Takasaki, Yusuke
Suzuki, Akinori
Ochiai, Kazushige
Tomishima, Ko
Kanazawa, Ryo
Saito, Hiroaki
Fujisawa, Toshio
Shiina, Shuichiro
Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety
title Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety
title_full Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety
title_fullStr Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety
title_full_unstemmed Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety
title_short Best Procedure for the Management of Common Bile Duct Stones via the Papilla: Literature Review and Analysis of Procedural Efficacy and Safety
title_sort best procedure for the management of common bile duct stones via the papilla: literature review and analysis of procedural efficacy and safety
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7760048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33255554
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm9123808
work_keys_str_mv AT ishiishigeto bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT isayamahiroyuki bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT ushiomako bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT takahashisho bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT yamagatawataru bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT takasakiyusuke bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT suzukiakinori bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT ochiaikazushige bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT tomishimako bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT kanazawaryo bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT saitohiroaki bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT fujisawatoshio bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety
AT shiinashuichiro bestprocedureforthemanagementofcommonbileductstonesviathepapillaliteraturereviewandanalysisofproceduralefficacyandsafety