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.

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.

Safety and success of precut biliary sphincterotomy: Is it linked to experience or expertise?

AIM： To determine the rates of success and complications of precut biliary sphincterotomy （PBS） based on prior experience and to compare the complication rates between PBS and standard endoscopic sphincterotomy （ES）. METHODS： A retrospective evaluation of prospectively collected non-randomized data at an academic tertiary referral center, The study included all patients in an eight-year period who underwent PBS and ES by a single endoscopist who had no formal training in PBS. The main outcorne measures of the study were success and complications of PBS with a comparison to complications of ES.RESULTS： A total of 2939 endoscopic retrograde chola ngiopancreatographies （ERCPs） were performed during the study period, including 818 （28%） ES and 150 （5%） PBS procedures. Selective biliary cannulation via PBS was successful at the first attempt in 75% of the patients. Cannulation was achieved in an additional 13% of the patients at a subsequent attempt （total 87%）. Complication rate from PBS was 45% higher than ES, but did not differ significantly [7% （10/50） vs 5% （38/818）, P = 0.29]. None of the complications from PBS was severe. A significant trend towards increasing success existed with regard to the endoscopist＇s first attempt at precut （P = 0.0393, Cochran-Armitage exact test for trend, Z = -1.7588）. CONCLUSION： Despite the lack of specific training in this technique, PBS was performed with a high success rate and a complication rate similar to or less than reports from other experienced centers. These results suggest that endoscopic experience and perhaps innate endoscopic skill may play an important role in the outcome of this procedure.

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.

Double guidewire technique vs transpancreatic precut sphincterotomy in difficult biliary cannulation

AIM:To compare the outcomes between doubleguidewire technique(DGT) and transpancreatic precut sphincterotomy(TPS) in patients with difficult biliary cannulation.METHODS:This was a prospective,randomized study conducted in single tertiary referral hospital in Korea.Between January 2005 and September 2010.A total of 71 patients,who bile duct cannulation was not possible and selective pancreatic duct cannulation was achieved,were randomized into DGT(n = 34) and TPS(n = 37) groups.DGT or TPS was done for selective biliary cannulation.We measured the technical success rates of biliary cannulation,median cannulation time,and procedure related complications.RESULTS:The distribution of patients after randomization was balanced,and both groups were comparable in baseline characteristics,except the higher percentage of endoscopic nasobiliary drainage in the DGT group(55.9% vs 13.5%,P < 0.001).Successful cannulation rate and mean cannulation times in DGT and TPS groups were 91.2% vs 91.9% and 14.1 ± 13.2 min vs 15.4 ± 17.9 min,P = 0.732,respectively.There was no significant difference between the two groups.The overall incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) pancreatitis was 38.2% vs 10.8%,P < 0.011 in the DGT group and the TPS group;post-procedure pancreatitis was significantly higher in the DGT group.But the overall incidence of post-ERCP hyperamylasemia was no significant difference between the two groups;DGT group vs TPS group:14.7% vs 16.2%,P < 1.0.CONCLUSION:When free bile duct cannulation was difficult and selective pancreatic duct cannulation was achieved,DGT and TPS facilitated biliary cannulation and showed similar success rates.However,post-procedure pancreatitis was significantly higher in the DGT group.

Small sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation versus sphincterotomy

AIM： To compare small sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation （SES ＋ ELBD） and endoscopic sphincterotomy （EST） for large bile duct stones. METHODS： We compared prospectively SES ＋ ELBD （group A, n = 27） with conventional EST （group B, n = 28） for the treatment of large bile duct stones （≥ 15 mm）. When the stone could not be removed with a normal basket, mechanical lithotripsy was performed. We compared the rates of complete stone removal with one session and application of mechanical lithotripsy. RESULTS： No significant differences were observed in the mean largest stone size （A： 20.8 mm, B： 21.3 mm）, bile duct diameter （A： 21.4 turn, B： 20.5 ram）, number of stones （A： 2.2, B： 2.3）, or procedure time （A： 18 min, B： 19 rain） between the two groups. The rates of complete stone removal with one session was 85% in group A and 86% in group B （P = 0.473）. Mechanical lithotripsy was required for stone removal in nine of 27 patients （33%） in group A and nine of 28 patients （32%, P = 0.527） in group B.CONCLUSION： SES ＋ ELBD did not show significant benefits compared to conventional EST, especially for the removal of large （≥ 15 mm） bile duct stones.

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

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.

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.

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.

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).

Precut sphincterotomy:A reliable salvage for difficult biliary cannulation

Even experienced endoscopists have 90% success in achieving deep biliary cannulation with standard methods. Biliary cannulation may become difficult in 10%-15% of patients with biliary obstruction and pre- cut (access) sphincterotomy is frequently chosen as a rescue treatment in these cases. Generally, precut sphincterotomy ensures a rate of 90%-100% success- ful deep biliary cannulation. The precut technique has been performed as either a fistulotomy with a needle knife sphincterotome or as a transpapillary septotomy with a standard sphincterotome. Both methods have similar efficacy and complication rates when adminis- tered to the proper patient. Although precut sphincter- otomy ensures over 90% success of biliary cannula- tion, it has been characterized as an independent risk factor for pancreatitis. The complications of the precut technique are not limited to pancreatitis. Two more important ones, bleeding and perforation, are also re- ported in some publications as being observed more commonly than during standard sphincterotomy. It is also reported that precut sphincterotomy increases morbidity when performed in patients without dilata- tion of their biliary tract. Nevertheless, precut sphinc- terotomy is a good alternative as a rescue method in the setting of a failed standard cannulation method. This paper discusses the technical details, timing, ef- ficacy and potential complications of precut sphincter- otomy.

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.

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.

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.

Small sphincterotomy combined with papillary dilation with large balloon permits retrieval of large stones without mechanical lithotripsy

AIM： TO introduce a new method： small endoscopic sphincterotomy （ES） combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation （SES ＋ EPLBD） to treat patients with large biliary stones.METHODS： Retrieval of large biliary stones was performed in 88 patients. Mean stone size was 14 ± 3 mm and mean number of stones was 2.5 ± 3.5. Firstly, ES with a small incision was performed. Next, endoscopic papillary dilation was performed with a large balloon to slowly match the size of the bile duct. Stones were then retrieved from the biliary duct with a balloon and a basket.RESULTS： Stone retrieval was successful in all cases except one cystic duct stone case without the need to crush large stones. Mean procedure time was 30 ± 5 min. Dilating the papillary orifice with a large balloon made it possible to remove large stones smoothly without crushing them. After dilation with the large balloon, there were some instances of oozing, but no perforations. One instance of post-procedural pancreatitis （1%） occurred. CONCLUSION： SES ＋ EPLBD was effective for the retrieval of large biliary stones without the use of mechanical lithotripsy.

Biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy: Techniques and complications

Biliary endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) refers to the cutting of the biliary sphincter and intraduodenal segment of the common bile duct following selective cannulation, using a high frequency current applied with a special knife, sphincterotome, inserted into the papilla. EST is either used solely for the treatment of diseases of the papilla of Vater, such as sphincter of Oddi dysfunction or to facilitate subsequent therapeutic biliary interventions, such as stone extraction, stenting, etc. It is a prerequisite for biliary interventions, thus every practitioner who performs endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography needs to know different techniques and the clinical and anatomic parameters related to the efficacy and safety of the procedure. In this manuscript, we will review the indications, contraindications and techniques of biliary EST and the management of its complications.

Closure of a persistent sphincterotomy-related duodenal perforation by placement of a covered self-expandable metallic biliary stent

Retroperitoneal duodenal perforation as a result of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy is a rare complication, but it is associated with a relatively high mortality risk, if left untreated. Recently, several endoscopic techniques have been described to close a variety of perforations. In this case report, we describe the closure of a persistent sphincterotomy-related duodenal perforation by using a covered self-expandable metallic biliary (CEMB) stent. A 61-year-old Greek woman underwent an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and sphincterotomy for suspected choledo-cholithiasis, and a retroperitoneal duodenal perforation (sphincterotomy-related) occurred. Despite initial conservative management, the patient underwent a laparotomy and drainage of the retroperitoneal space. After that, a high volume duodenal fistula developed. Six weeks after the initial ERCP, the patient underwent a repeat endoscopy and placement of a CEMB stent with an indwelling nasobiliary drain. The fistula healed completely and the stent was removed two weeks later. We suggest the transient use of CEMB stents for the closure of sphincterotomy-related duodenal perforations. They can be placed either during the initial ERCP or even later if there is radiographic or clinical evidence that the leakage persists.