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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |