Cargando…

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND/AIM: A sufficiently open papilla is needed to remove common bile duct stones (CBDS) but endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) requires a high level of skill and is difficult with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD). The main adverse event of EST is bleeding and perforation and that of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ishii, Shigeto, Fujisawa, Toshio, Ushio, Mako, Takahashi, Sho, Yamagata, Wataru, Takasaki, Yusuke, Suzuki, Akinori, Okawa, Yoshihiro, Ochiai, Kazushige, Tomishima, Ko, Kanazawa, Ryo, Saito, Hiroaki, Shiina, Shuichiro, Isayama, Hiroyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8019135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32719239
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sjg.SJG_162_20
_version_ 1783674320091873280
author Ishii, Shigeto
Fujisawa, Toshio
Ushio, Mako
Takahashi, Sho
Yamagata, Wataru
Takasaki, Yusuke
Suzuki, Akinori
Okawa, Yoshihiro
Ochiai, Kazushige
Tomishima, Ko
Kanazawa, Ryo
Saito, Hiroaki
Shiina, Shuichiro
Isayama, Hiroyuki
author_facet Ishii, Shigeto
Fujisawa, Toshio
Ushio, Mako
Takahashi, Sho
Yamagata, Wataru
Takasaki, Yusuke
Suzuki, Akinori
Okawa, Yoshihiro
Ochiai, Kazushige
Tomishima, Ko
Kanazawa, Ryo
Saito, Hiroaki
Shiina, Shuichiro
Isayama, Hiroyuki
author_sort Ishii, Shigeto
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND/AIM: A sufficiently open papilla is needed to remove common bile duct stones (CBDS) but endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) requires a high level of skill and is difficult with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD). The main adverse event of EST is bleeding and perforation and that of EPBD is post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. To reduce these adverse events we employed minimal EST followed by papillary dilation (ESBD), and retrospectively evaluated its efficacy and safety compared with EST. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CBDS patients who underwent EST (n = 114) or ESBD (n = 321) at Juntendo University Hospital from January 2009 to December 2018 were consecutively enrolled, retrospectively. The exclusion criteria were large-balloon dilation (≥ 12 mm), large CBDS (>12 mm), and previous EST/EPBD. We compared the overall stone removal rate, incidence of adverse event, procedure time, number of ERCP procedures, and rate of mechanical lithotripsy (ML) between the two groups. RESULTS: Complete stone removal was successful in both ESBD and EST group. However, the rate of multiple ERCP sessions was significantly lower (35.1% vs. 12.8%, P < 0.001), procedure time was shorter (31.6 vs. 25.8 min, P = 0.01), and rate of ML was lower (16.7% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.01) in ESBD group. Bleeding was significantly more frequent in the EST group (9.6% vs. 1.2%, P < 0.001), particularly acute bleeding (7.9% vs. 0.9%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ESBD is more efficient and safer in the management of CBD stones than EST. A prospective randomized study comparing ESBD with EST is needed to establish this combination technique.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8019135
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80191352021-04-05 Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones Ishii, Shigeto Fujisawa, Toshio Ushio, Mako Takahashi, Sho Yamagata, Wataru Takasaki, Yusuke Suzuki, Akinori Okawa, Yoshihiro Ochiai, Kazushige Tomishima, Ko Kanazawa, Ryo Saito, Hiroaki Shiina, Shuichiro Isayama, Hiroyuki Saudi J Gastroenterol Original Article BACKGROUND/AIM: A sufficiently open papilla is needed to remove common bile duct stones (CBDS) but endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) requires a high level of skill and is difficult with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD). The main adverse event of EST is bleeding and perforation and that of EPBD is post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. To reduce these adverse events we employed minimal EST followed by papillary dilation (ESBD), and retrospectively evaluated its efficacy and safety compared with EST. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CBDS patients who underwent EST (n = 114) or ESBD (n = 321) at Juntendo University Hospital from January 2009 to December 2018 were consecutively enrolled, retrospectively. The exclusion criteria were large-balloon dilation (≥ 12 mm), large CBDS (>12 mm), and previous EST/EPBD. We compared the overall stone removal rate, incidence of adverse event, procedure time, number of ERCP procedures, and rate of mechanical lithotripsy (ML) between the two groups. RESULTS: Complete stone removal was successful in both ESBD and EST group. However, the rate of multiple ERCP sessions was significantly lower (35.1% vs. 12.8%, P < 0.001), procedure time was shorter (31.6 vs. 25.8 min, P = 0.01), and rate of ML was lower (16.7% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.01) in ESBD group. Bleeding was significantly more frequent in the EST group (9.6% vs. 1.2%, P < 0.001), particularly acute bleeding (7.9% vs. 0.9%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ESBD is more efficient and safer in the management of CBD stones than EST. A prospective randomized study comparing ESBD with EST is needed to establish this combination technique. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020-07-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8019135/ /pubmed/32719239 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sjg.SJG_162_20 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Ishii, Shigeto
Fujisawa, Toshio
Ushio, Mako
Takahashi, Sho
Yamagata, Wataru
Takasaki, Yusuke
Suzuki, Akinori
Okawa, Yoshihiro
Ochiai, Kazushige
Tomishima, Ko
Kanazawa, Ryo
Saito, Hiroaki
Shiina, Shuichiro
Isayama, Hiroyuki
Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones
title Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones
title_full Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones
title_fullStr Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones
title_short Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones
title_sort evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8019135/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32719239
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sjg.SJG_162_20
work_keys_str_mv AT ishiishigeto evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT fujisawatoshio evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT ushiomako evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT takahashisho evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT yamagatawataru evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT takasakiyusuke evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT suzukiakinori evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT okawayoshihiro evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT ochiaikazushige evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT tomishimako evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT kanazawaryo evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT saitohiroaki evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT shiinashuichiro evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones
AT isayamahiroyuki evaluationofthesafetyandefficacyofminimalendoscopicsphincterotomyfollowedbypapillaryballoondilationfortheremovalofcommonbileductstones