Effect of endoscopic sphincterotomy and endoscopic papillary balloon dilation endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies on the sphincter of Oddi

BACKGROUND Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP),with its clinical ad-vantages of less trauma and faster recovery,has become the primary treatment for choledocholithiasis.AIM To investigate the effects of different ERCP procedures on the sphincter of Oddi.METHODS The clinical data of 91 patients who underwent ERCP at Yixing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine between February 2018 and February 2021 were analyzed retrospectively.The patients were divided into endoscopic sphinc-terotomy(EST,n=24)and endoscopic papillary balloon dilation(EPBD,n=67)groups.The duration of operation,pancreatic development,pancreatic sphinc-terotomy,intubation difficulties,stone recurrence,and incidence of reflux cho-langitis and cholecystitis were statistically analyzed in patients with a history of choledocholithiasis,pancreatitis,and Oddi sphincter dysfunction in the EST and EPBD groups.RESULTS Differences in hypertension,diabetes,increased bilirubin,small diameter of the common bile duct,or ampullary diverticulum between the two groups were not significant.Statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups concerning sex and age(<60 years).Patients with a history of choledocholithiasis,pancreatitis,and Oddi sphincter dysfunction were higher in the EST group than in the EPBD group.The number of cases of pancreatic development,pancreatic duct sphincterotomy,and difficult intubation were higher in the EST group than in the EPBD group.The number of Oddi’s sphincter manometries,ERCP surgical outcomes,and guidewires entering the pancreatic duct several times in EST group were lower than those in the EPBD group.The numbers of stone recurrences,reflux cholangitis,and cholecystitis were higher in the EST group than in the EPBD group.CONCLUSION In summary,common bile duct stones,pancreatitis history,and multiple guided wire introductions into the pancreatic duct are independent risk factors for EST and EPBD.Based on this evidence,this study can provide actionable insights for clinicians and researchers.

Endoscopic hemostasis using self-expandable metal stent combinedwith PuraStat® for patient with high risk of post-endoscopicsphincterotomy bleeding (with video)

To the Editor:Endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST)is an established technique for removal of bile duct stones and self-expandable metal stent(SEMS)deployment.However,bleeding can be considered an adverse event after EST,particularly for patients with high risk of bleeding such as those on hemodialysis.Among the various techniques reported for obtaining endoscopic hemostasis[1-3].

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation(12-15 mm)with or without limited sphincterotomy for removal of bile duct stones

Background:Limited endoscopic sphincterotomy with large balloon dilation(ES-LBD)and endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation(EPLBD)have been proven safe and effective for removal of bile duct stones.However,the long-term outcomes are not clear.The aim of this study was to assess the long-term outcomes of EPLBD(12-15 mm)with or without limited sphincterotomy for removal of common bile duct(CBD)stones.Methods:Patients with EPLBD or ES-LBD referred for the removal of bile-duct stones between June 2008 and August 2020 were retrospectively reviewed.Complete stone clearance,endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)-related adverse events,and late biliary complications during long-term follow-up were analyzed.Results:Basic patient characteristics were not significantly different between the groups that underwent EPLBD(n=168)and ES-LBD(n=57).EPLBD compared with ES-LBD resulted in similar outcomes in terms of overall successful stone removal(99.4%vs.100%,P=1.00)and ERCP-related adverse events(7.7%vs.5.3%,P=0.77).The mean duration of the follow-up were 113.6 months and 106.7 months for patients with EPLBD and ES-LBD,respectively(P=0.13).There was no significant difference between EPLBD and ES-LBD in the incidence of stone recurrence[20(11.9%)vs.9(15.8%);P=0.49].Multivariate analysis showed that a diameter of CBD≥15 mm(OR=3.001;95%CI:1.357-6.640;P=0.007)was an independent risk factor for stone recurrence.Conclusions:The application of a large balloon(12-15 mm)via EPLBD is an effective and safe alternative to ES-LBD for extraction of large CBD stones.Endoscopic sphincterotomy prior to EPLBD may be unnec-essary.A diameter of CBD≥15 mm is a risk factor of stone recurrence.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation alone or combined with small or complete sphincterotomy for the removal of large common bile duct stones

Background:Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)has been proposed as an alternative to manage large bile duct stones.However,EPLBD alone or combined with sphincterotomy remains controversial.Methods:Between Jan.2014 and Dec.2017,195 consecutive patients with proven large common bile duct stones(size≥10 mm)were retrospectively analyzed.We compared the baseline characteristics,procedure time,success rate of stone removal and morbidity outcomes in different groups.Results:There were no significant difference between baseline characteristics of the groups compared.A total of 89.2%,95.4%,and 93.8% of the patients in the EPLBD,EPLBD+small sphincterotomy(SES),and EPLBD+complete sphincterotomy(CES)groups had stones cleared(P=0.473),respectively.There was no difference in terms of procedure time(33.5±10.2,34.8±9.0,34.9±8.2,in the EPLBD,EPLBD+SES,and EPLBD+CES groups,respectively).However,when assigned to tvvo groups according to bile duct stones diameter(bile duct stones<13 mm,bile duct stones≥13 mm).in the bile duct stones<13 mm group,the procedure time was significantly less in the EPLBD group than the EPLBD+SES group and the EPLBD+CES group(P=0.028).In the bile duct stones≥13 mm group,the mechanical lithotripsy rate of EPLBD was significantly higher compared to EPLBD+SES or EPLBD+CES(P=0.032).The complication rates were similar among all groups.Conclusions:The diameter of bile duct stones should be taken into consideration when choosing EPLBD alone or combined with small sphincterotomy for the removal of common bile duct stones.

Small sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation vs sphincterotomy alone for removal of common bile duct stones

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large diameter balloon dilation (EPLBD) following limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and EST alone for removal of large common bile duct (CBD) stones.

Large balloon dilation post endoscopic sphincterotomy in removal of difficult common bile duct stones:A literature review

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is the standard therapy in common bile duct (CBD) stones extraction. Large stones (&#x02265; 12 mm) or multiple stones extraction may be challenging after ES alone. Endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by large balloon dilation (ESLBD) has been described as an alternative to ES in these indications. Efficacy, safety, cost-effectiveness and technical aspects of the procedure have been here reviewed. PubMed and Google Scholar search resulted in forty-one articles dealing with CBD stone extraction with 12 mm or more dilation balloons after ES. ESLBD is at least as effective as ES, and reduces the need for additional mechanical lithotripsy. Adverse events rates are not statistically different after ESLBD compared to ES for pancreatitis, bleeding and perforation. However, particular attention should be paid in patients with CBD strictures, which is identified as a risk factor of perforation. ESLBD is slightly cost-effective compared to ES. A small sphincterotomy is usually performed, and may reduce bleeding rates compared to full sphincterotomy. Dilation is performed with 12-20 mm enteral balloons. Optimal inflation time is yet to be determined. The procedure can be performed safely even in patients with peri-ampullary diverticula and surgically altered anatomy. ESLBD is effective and safe in the removal of large CBD stones, however, small sphincterotomy might be preferred and CBD strictures should be considered as a relative contraindication.

Minor endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by large balloon dilation for large choledocholith treatment

AIM To evaluate early and late outcomes of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD) with minor endoscopic sphincterotomy(m EST) for stone removal.METHODS A total of 149 consecutive patients with difficult common bile duct(CBD) stones(diameter ≥ 10 mm or ≥ 3 stones) underwent conventional endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) or m EST plus EPLBD from May 2012 to April 2016. Their demographic, laboratory and procedural data were collected, and pancreaticobiliary complications were recorded.RESULTS Sixty-nine(94.5%) of the patients in the EPLBD + m EST group and 64(84.2%) in the conventional EST group achieved stone clearance following the first session(P = 0.0421). The procedure time for EPLBD + m EST was shorter than for EST alone(42.1 ± 13.6 min vs 47.3 ± 11.8 min, P = 0.0128). The overall rate of early complications in the EPLBD + m EST group(11%) was lower than in the EST group(21.1%); however, the difference was not significant(P = 0.0938). The cumulative recurrence rate of cholangitis and CBD stones between the two groups was also similar. The procedure time was independently associated with post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis(OR = 6.374, 95%CI: 1.193-22.624, P = 0.023), CBD stone diameter ≥ 16 mm(OR = 7.463, 95%CI: 2.705-21.246, P = 0.0452) and use of mechanical lithotripsy(OR = 9.913, 95%CI: 3.446-23.154, P = 0.0133) were independent risk factors for stone recurrence. CONCLUSION EPLBD with m EST is more effective than EST alone for difficult CBD stone removal, with shorter procedure time and fewer early complications.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation vs endoscopic sphincterotomy for retrieval of common bile duct stones:A meta-analysis

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in retrieval of common bile duct stones (&#x02265; 10 mm).

Efficacy and safety of limited endoscopic sphincterotomy before self-expandable metal stent insertion for malignant biliary obstruction

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) before placement of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS).METHODSThis was a retrospective analysis of 244 consecutive patients with unresectable malignant biliary obstruction, who underwent placement of SEMSs following limited ES from December 2008 to February 2015. The diagnosis of malignant biliary obstruction and assessment of patient eligibility for the study was established by a combination of clinical findings, laboratory investigations, imaging and pathological results. All patients were monitored in the hospital for at least 24 h following endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP). The incidence of immediate or early post-ERCP complications such as post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) and bleeding related to limited ES were considered as primary outcomes. Also, characteristics and complications according to the cancer type were classified.RESULTSAmong the 244 patients included, the underlying diagnosis was cholangiocarcinoma in 118 patients, pancreatic cancer in 79, and non-pancreatic or non-biliary malignancies in the remaining 47 patients. Early post-ERCP complications occurred in 9 patients (3.7%), with PEP in 7 patients (2.9%; mild, 6; moderate, 1) and mild bleeding in 2 patients (0.8%). There was no significant association between the incidence of post-ERCP complications and the type of malignancy (cholangiocarcinoma vs pancreatic cancer vs others, P = 0.696) or the type of SEMS used (uncovered vs covered, P = 1.000). Patients who had more than one SEMS placed at the first instance were at a significantly higher risk of post-ERCP complications (one SEMS vs two SEMS, P = 0.031). No other factors were predictive of post-ERCP complications.CONCLUSIONLimited ES is feasible and safe, and effectively facilitates the placement of SEMS, without any significant risk of PEP or severe bleeding.

Risk factors for delayed hemorrhage after endoscopic sphincterotomy

Background:Hemorrhage is one of the most serious complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST).The risk factors for delayed hemorrhage are not clear.This study aimed to explore the risk factors for post-EST delayed hemorrhage and suggest some precautionary measures.Methods:This study analyzed 8477 patients who successfully underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)and EST between January 2007 and June 2015 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University.Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to find the risk factors for delayed hemorrhage after EST.Results:Of the 8477 patients screened,137(1.62%)experienced delayed hemorrhage.Univariate analysis showed that male,the severity of jaundice,duodenal papillary adenoma and carcinoma,diabetes,intraoperative bleeding,moderate and large incisions,and directional deviation of incision were risk factors for post-EST delayed hemorrhage(P<0.05).Multivariate analysis showed that intraoperative bleeding[odds ratio(OR)=3.326;95%CI:1.785–6.196;P<0.001]and directional deviation of incision(OR=2.184;95%CI:1.266–3.767;P=0.005)were independent risk factors for post-EST delayed hemorrhage.Conclusions:Delayed hemorrhage is the most common and dangerous complication of EST.Intraoperative bleeding and directional deviation of incision are independent risk factors for post-EST delayed hemorrhage.

Treating delayed endoscopic sphincterotomy-induced bleeding:Epinephrine injection with or without thermotherapy

AIM： To compare the hemostatic efficacy between epinephrine injection alone and epinephrine injection combined with thermotherapy for delayed postendoscopic sphincterotomy （ES） bleeding. METHODS： Cases with delayed post-ES bleeding undergoing epinephrine injection alone （epinephrine injection group, n = 26） or epinephrine combined with thermotherapy （combination therapy group, n = 33） in our institution between 1999 and 2007 were retrospectively investigated. The main outcome measurements were： initial endoscopic hemostasis, rebleeding, complications, requirement of angiographic embolization or surgery, requirement for blood transfusion, and mortality. RESULTS： The initial hemostatic efficacy was 96.2% for epinephrine injection alone and 100% for combination therapy （P = 0.44）. There were four patients with re-bleeding in each group （16.0% vs 12.1%, P = 0.72）. There was only one complication of pancreatitis from the combination therapy group. Three patients （11.5%） in the epinephrine injection group and one patient （3%） in the combination therapy group required angiographic embolization or surgery （P = 0.31）. The total number of blood transfusions was not significantly different between the two groups （3.5 ± 4.6 U vs 3.5 ± 4.5 U, P = 0.94）. There was no bleeding-related death in either group. CONCLUSION： Epinephrine injection alone is as effective as epinephrine injection combined with thermotherapy for the management of delayed post- ES bleeding.

Repeat endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography after failed initial precut sphincterotomy for biliary cannulation

AIM: To investigate the outcome of repeating endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) after initially failed precut sphincterotomy to achieve biliary cannulation.

Application of endoscopic sphincterotomy in acute pancreatitis with fluid collection:A prospective study

AIM: To elucidate the role of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of acute pancreatitis. METHODS: Ninety patients with acute pancreatitis were randomly divided into two groups: EST group and control group. All the patients underwent pancreatitis routine therapy, additionally the EST group was treated with EST and endoscopic naso-bile drainage (ENBD).The time of disappearance of abdominal symptoms and signs,normalization of amylase, hospitalization and absorption of acute fluid was recorded for all patients.RESULTS: The time of disappearance of abdominal pain,normalization of blood and urine amylase and hospitalization was significantly shorter in EST group than in control group. The ratios of disappearance of fluid in mild acute pancreatitis patients was significantly higher in EST group (51.52%, 84.85%, 90.91%,93.94%) than in the control group (0%, 30.30%, 69.70%, 72.73%, P＜0.01 or P＜0.05).When the ratios of reduction of fluid in severe acute pancreatitis patients of the EST group were compared (8.33%, 58.33%, 83.33%, 91.67%) with those in the control group (0%, 8.33%, 25% and 41.67%), there were significant differences. CONCLUSION: The effect of EST+ENBD on acute pancreatitis with fluid is rather good.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large-balloon dilation vs endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis:A meta-analysis

AIM:To perform a meta-analysis of large-balloon dilation(LBD)plus endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST)vs EST alone for removal of bile duct stones.METHODS:Databases including PubMed,EMBASE,the Cochrane Library,the Science Citation Index,and important meeting abstracts were searched and evaluated by two reviewers independently.The main outcome measures included:complete stone removal,stone removal in the first session,use of mechanical lithotripsy,procedure time,and procedure-related complications.A fixed-effects model weighted by the Mantel-Haenszel method was used for pooling the odds ratio(OR)when heterogeneity was not significant among the studies.When a Q test or I2statistic indicated substantial heterogeneity,a random-effects model weighted by the DerSimonian-Laird method was used.RESULTS:Six randomized controlled trials involving835 patients were analyzed.There was no significant heterogeneity for most results;we analyzed these using a fixed-effects model.Meta-analysis showed EST plus LBD caused fewer overall complications than EST alone(OR=0.53,95%CI:0.33-0.85,P=0.008);sub-category analysis indicated a significantly lower risk of perforation in the EST plus LBD group(Peto OR=0.14,95%CI:0.20-0.98,P=0.05).Use of mechanical lithotripsy in the EST plus LBD group decreased significantly(OR=0.26,95%CI:0.08-0.82,P=0.02),especially in patients with a stone size larger than 15 mm(OR=0.15,95%CI:0.03-0.68,P=0.01).There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding complete stone removal,stone removal in the first session,post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis,bleeding,infection of biliary tract,and procedure time.CONCLUSION:EST plus LBD is an effective approach for the removal of large bile duct stones,causing fewer complications than EST alone.

Intraoperative endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy

INTRODUCTION The advent of laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC)inthe late 1980s gained widespread acceptance withina short period of time and has become the preferredtreatment for symptomatic gallstones,but themanagement of coexisting gallbladder and commonbile duct(CBD)stones has remained controversialbecause the various strategies proposed have theirlimitations.In fact,choledocholithiasis

Limited endoscopic sphincterotomy plus large balloon dilation for choledocholithiasis with periampullary diverticula

AIM: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) plus large balloon dilation (LBD) for removing choledocholithiasis in patients with periampullary diverticula (PAD). METHODS: A total of 139 patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones were treated with LBD (10-20 mm balloon diameter) after limited EST. Of this total, 73 patients had PAD and 66 patients did not have PAD (controls). The results of stone removal and complications were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the PAD and the control groups in overall successful stone removal (94.5% vs 93.9%), stone removal in first session (69.9% vs 81.8%), mechanical lithotripsy (12.3% vs 13.6%), and complications (11.0% vs 7.6%). Clinical outcomes were also similar between the types of PAD, but the rate of stone removal in first session and the number of sessions were significantly lower and more frequent, respectively, in type B PAD (papilla located near the diverticulum) than controls [23/38 (60.5%) vs 54/66 (81.8%), P = 0.021; and 1 (1-2) vs 1 (1-3), P = 0.037, respectively] and the frequency of pancreatitis was significantly higher in type A PAD (papilla located inside or in the margin of the diverticulum) than in controls (16.1% vs 3.0%, P = 0.047). CONCLUSION: Limited EST plus LBD was an effective and safe procedure for removing choledocholithiasis in patients with PAD. However, some types of PAD should be managed with caution.

Outcomes of endoscopic sphincterotomy vs open choledochotomy for common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND Endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) for the management of common bile duct stones(CBDS) is used increasingly widely because it is a minimally invasive procedure. However, some clinical practitioners argued that EST may be complicated by post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP)pancreatitis(PEP) and accompanied by a higher recurrence of CBDS than open choledochotomy(OCT). Whether any differences in outcomes exist between these two approaches for treating CBDS has not been thoroughly elucidated to date.AIM To compare the outcomes of EST vs OCT for the management of CBDS and to clarify the risk factors associated with stone recurrence.METHODS Patients who underwent EST or OCT for CBDS between January 2010 and December 2012 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Follow-up data were obtained through telephone or by searching the medical records. Statistical analysis was carried out for 302 patients who had a follow-up period of at least 5 years or had a recurrence. Propensity score matching(1:1) was performed to adjust for clinical differences. A logistic regression model was used to identify potential risk factors for recurrence, and a receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve was generated for qualifying independent risk factors.RESULTS In total, 302 patients undergoing successful EST(n = 168) or OCT(n = 134) were enrolled in the study and were followed for a median of 6.3 years. After propensity score matching, 176 patients remained, and all covariates were balanced. EST was associated with significantly shorter time to relieving biliary obstruction, anesthetic duration, procedure time, and hospital stay than OCT(P <0.001). The number of complete stone clearance sessions increased significantly in the EST group(P = 0.009). The overall incidence of complications and mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups. Recurrent CBDS occurred in18.8%(33/176) of the patients overall, but no difference was found between the EST(20.5%, 18/88) and OCT(17.0%, 15/88) groups. Factors associated with CBDS recurrence included common bile duct(CBD) diameter > 15 mm(OR =2.72; 95%CI: 1.26-5.87; P = 0.011), multiple CBDS(OR = 5.09; 95%CI: 2.58-10.07; P< 0.001), and distal CBD angle ≤ 145°(OR = 2.92; 95%CI: 1.54-5.55; P = 0.001). The prediction model incorporating these factors demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.81(95%CI: 0.76-0.87).CONCLUSION EST is superior to OCT with regard to time to biliary obstruction relief, anesthetic duration, procedure time, and hospital stay and is not associated with an increased recurrence rate or mortality compared with OCT in the management of CBDS.

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation after sphincterotomy for difficult choledocholithiasis:A case-controlled study

AIM:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) + endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)vs isolated EST.METHODS:We conducted a retrospective single center study over two years,from February 2010 to January 2012.Patients with large(≥ 10 mm),single or multiple bile duct stones(BDS),submitted to endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography(ERCP) were included.Patients in Group A underwent papillary large balloon dilation after limited sphincterotomy(EST+EPLBD),using a through-the-scope balloon catheter gradually inflated to 12-18 mm according to the size of the largest stone and the maximal diameter of the distal bile duct on the cholangiogram.Patients in Group B(control group) underwent isolated sphincterotomy.Stones were removed using a retrieval balloon catheter and/or a dormia basket.When necessary,mechanical lithotripsy was performed.Complete clearance of the bile duct was documented with a balloon catheter cholangiogram at the end of the procedure.In case of residual lithiasis,a double pigtail plastic stent was placed and a second ERCP was planned within 4-6 wk.Some patients were sent for extracorporeal lithotripsy prior to subsequent ERCP.Outcomes of EST+EPLBD(Group A) vs isolated EST(Group B) were compared regarding efficacy(complete stone clearance,number of therapeutic sessions,mechanical and/or extracorporeal lithotripsy,biliary stent placement) and safety(frequency,type and grade of complications).Statistical analysis was performed using χ 2 or Fisher’s exact tests for the analysis of categorical parameters and Student’s t test for continuous variables.A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.RESULTS:One hundred and eleven patients were included,68(61.3%) in Group A and 43(38.7%) in Group B.The mean diameter of the stones was similar in the two groups(16.8 ± 4.4 and 16.0 ± 6.7 in Groups A and B,respectively).Forty-eight(70.6%) patients in Group A and 21(48.8%) in Group B had multiple BDS(P = 0.005).Overall,balloon dilation was performed up to 12 mm in 10(14.7%) patients,13.5 mm in 17(25.0%),15 mm in 33(48.6%),16.5 mm in 2(2.9%) and 18 mm in 6(8.8%) patients,taking into account the diameter of the largest stone and that of the bile duct.Complete stone clearance was achieved in sixty-five(95.6%) patients in Group A vs 30(69.8%) patients in Group B,and was attained within the first therapeutic session in 82.4% of patients in Group A vs 44.2% in Group B(P 【 0.001).Patients submitted to EST+EPLBD underwent fewer therapeutic sessions(1.1 ± 0.3 vs 1.8 ± 1.1,P 【 0.001),and fewer required mechanical(14.7% vs 37.2%,P = 0.007) or extracorporeal(0 vs 18.6%,P 【 0.001) lithotripsy,as well as biliary stenting(17.6% vs 60.5%,P 【 0.001).The rate of complications was not significantly different between the two groups.CONCLUSION:EST+EPLBD is a safe and effective technique for treatment of difficult BDS,leading to high rates of complete stone clearance and reducing the need for lithotripsy and biliary stenting.

Predictors of re-bleeding after endoscopic hemostasis for delayed post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding

AIM: To predict the re-bleeding after endoscopic hemostasis for delayed post-endoscopic sphincterotomy(ES) bleeding.METHODS: Over a 15-year period, data from 161 patients with delayed post-ES bleeding were retrospectively collected from a single medical center. To identify risk factors for re-bleeding after initial successful endoscopic hemostasis, parameters before, during and after the procedure of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were analyzed. These included age, gender, blood biochemistry, comorbidities, endoscopic diagnosis, presence of periampullary diverticulum, occurrence of immediate postES bleeding, use of needle knife precut sphincterotomy, severity of delayed bleeding, endoscopic features on delayed bleeding, and type of endoscopic therapy.RESULTS: A total of 35 patients(21.7%) had rebleeding after initial successful endoscopic hemostasis for delayed post-ES bleeding. Univariate analysis revealed that malignant biliary stricture, serum bilirubin level of greater than 10 mg/d L, initial bleeding severity, and bleeding diathesis were significant predictors of rebleeding. By multivariate analysis, serum bilirubin level of greater than 10 mg/d L and initial bleeding severity remained significant predictors. Re-bleeding was controlled by endoscopic therapy in a single(n = 23) or multiple(range, 2-7; n = 6) sessions in 29 of the 35 patients(82.9%). Four patients required transarterial embolization and one went for surgery. These five patients had severe bleeding when delayed post-ES bleeding occurred. One patient with decompensated liver cirrhosis died from re-bleeding.CONCLUSION: Re-bleeding occurs in approximately one-fifth of patients after initial successful endoscopic hemostasis for delayed post-ES bleeding. Severity of initial bleeding and serum bilirubin level of greater than 10 mg/d L are predictors of re-bleeding.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation after limited sphincterotomy for difficult biliary stones

AIM:To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation after biliary sphincterotomy for difficult bile duct stones retrieval.METHODS:Retrospective review of consecutive patients submitted to the technique during 18 mo.The main outcomes considered were:efficacy of the procedure(complete stone clearance;number of sessions;need of lithotripsy) and complications.RESULTS:A total of 30 patients with a mean age of 68 ± 10 years,23 female(77%) and 7 male(23%) were enrolled.In 10 patients,a single stone was found in the common bile duct(33%) and in 20 patients multiple stones(67%) were found.The median diameter of the stones was 17 mm(12-30 mm).Dilations were performed with progressive diameter Through-TheScope balloons(up to 12,15) or 18 mm.Complete retrieval of stones was achieved in a single session in 25 patients(84%) and in two sessions in 4 patients(13%).Failure occurred in 1 case(6%).Mechanical lithotripsywas performed in 6 cases(20%).No severe complications occurred.One patient(3%) had mild-grade post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) pancreatitis.CONCLUSION:Endoscopic balloon dilatation with a large balloon after endoscopic sphincterotomy is a safe and effective technique that could be considered an alternative choice in therapeutic ERCP.