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 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.

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.

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.

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.

Clinical efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation in treatment of gallbladder stones with common bile duct stones: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND The incidence of cholelithiasis has been on the rise in recent years,but the choice of procedure is controversial.AIM To investigate the efficacy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy(LC)combined with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation(EPBD)in patients with gallbladder stones(GS)with common bile duct stones(CBDS).METHODS The clinical data of 102 patients with GS combined with CBDS were selected for retrospective analysis and divided into either an LC+EPBD group(n=50)or an LC+endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST)group(n=52)according to surgical methods.Surgery-related indexes,postoperative recovery,postoperative complications,and expression levels of inflammatory response indexes were compared between the two groups.RESULTS Total surgical time,stone free rate,rate of conversion to laparotomy,and successful stone extraction rate did not differ significantly between the LC+EPBD group and LC+EST group.Intraoperative hemorrhage,time to ambulation,and length of hospitalization in the LC+EPBD group were lower than those of the LC+EST group(P<0.05).The rate of total complications of the two groups was 9.80%and 17.65%,respectively,and the difference was not statistically significant.No serious complications occurred in either group.At 48 h postoperatively,the expression levels of interleukin-6,tumor necrosis factor-α,high-sensitivity Creactive protein,and procalcitonin were lower in the LC+EPBD group than in the LC+EST group(P<0.05).At 3 d postoperatively,the expression levels of aspartate transaminase,alanine transaminase,and total bilirubin were lower in the LC+EPBD group than in the LC+EST group(P<0.05).CONCLUSION LC combined with EPBD and LC combined with EST are both effective procedures for the treatment of GS with CBDS,in which LC combined with EPBD is beneficial to shorten the patient’s hospitalization time,reduce the magnitude of elevated inflammatory response indexes,and promote postoperative recovery.

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation in patients with periampullary diverticula

AIM:To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)for bile duct stone extraction in patients with periampullary diverticula.METHODS:The records of 223 patients with large common bile duct stones(≥10 mm)who underwent EPLBD(12-20 mm balloon diameter)with or without limited endoscopic sphincterotomy(ES)from July 2006to April 2011 were retrospectively reviewed.Of these patients,93(41.7%)had periampullary diverticula(PAD),which was categorized into three types.The clinical variables of EPLBD with limited ES(EPLBD+ES)and EPLBD alone were analyzed according to the presence of PAD.RESULTS:Patients with PAD were significantly older than those without(75.2±8.8 years vs 69.7±10.9years,P=0.000).The rates of overall stone removal and complete stone removal in the first session were not significantly different between the PAD and nonPAD groups,however,there was significantly less need for mechanical lithotripsy in the PAD group(3.2%vs 11.5%,P=0.026).Overall stone removal rates,complete stone removal rates in the first session and the use of mechanical lithotripsy were not significantly different between EPLBD+ES and EPLBD alone in patients with PAD(96.6%vs 97.1%;72.9%vs 88.2%;and 5.1%vs 0%,respectively).No significant differences with respect to the rates of pancreatitis,perforation,and bleeding were observed between EPLBD+ES and EPLBD alone in the PAD group(3.4%vs 14.7%,P=0.095;0%vs 0%;and 3.4%vs 8.8%,P=0.351,respectively).CONCLUSION:EPLBD with limited ES and EPLBD alone are safe and effective modalities for common bile duct stone removal in patients with PAD,regardless of PAD subtypes.

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.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation with sphincterotomy is safe and effective for biliary stone removal independent of timing and size of sphincterotomy

AIM To describe the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation(EPLBD) in the management of bile duct stones in a Western population. METHODS Data was collected from the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) and Radiology electronic database along with a review of case notes over a period of six years from 1 st August 2009 to 31 st July 2015 and incorporated into Microsoft excel. Statistical analyses were performed using Med Calc for Windows,version 12.5(Med Calc Software,Ostend,Belgium). Simple statistical applications were applied in order to determine whether significant differences exist in comparison groups. We initially used simple proportions to describe the study populations. Furthermore,we used chi-square test to compare proportions and categorical variables. Non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test was applied in order to compare continuous variables. All comparisons were deemed to be statistically significant if P values were less than 0.05.RESULTS EPLBD was performed in 229 patients(46 females) with mean age of 68 ± 14.3 years. 115/229(50%) patients had failed duct clearance at previous ERCP referred from elsewhere with standard techniques. Duct clearance at the Index* ERCP(1 st ERCP at our centre) was 72.5%. Final duct clearance rate was 98%. EPLBD after fresh sphincterotomy was performed in 81(35.4%). Median balloon size was 13.5 mm(10-18). In addition to EPLBD,per-oral cholangioscopy(POC) and electrohydraulic lithotripsy(EHL) was performed in 35(15%) patients at index* ERCP. 63(27.5%) required repeat ERCP for stone clearance. 28(44.5%) required POC and EHL and 11(17.4%) had repeat EPLBD for complete duct clearance. Larger stone size(12.4 mm vs 17.4 mm,P < 0.000001),multiple stones(2,range(1-13) vs 3,range(1-12),P < 0.006) and dilated common bile duct(CBD)(12.4 mm vs 18.3 mm,P < 0.001) were significant predictors of failed duct clearance at index ERCP. 47 patients(20%) had ampullary or peri-ampullary diverticula. Procedure related adverse events included 2 cases of bleeding and pancreatitis(0.87%) each.CONCLUSION EPLBD is a safe and effective technique for CBDS removal. There is no difference in outcomes whether it is performed at the time of sphincterotomy or at a later procedure or whether there is a full or limited sphincterotomy.

Is endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation without endoscopic sphincterotomy effective?

AIM: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation(EPLBD) without endoscopic sphincterotomy in a prospective study.METHODS: From July 2011 to August 2013, we performed EPLBD on 41 patients with nae papillae prospectively. For sphincteroplasty of EPLBD,endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) was not performed,and balloon diameter selection was based on the distal common bile duct diameter. The balloon was inflated to the desired pressure. If the balloon waist did not disappear, and the desired pressure was satisfied, we judged the dilatation as complete. We used a retrieval balloon catheter or mechanical lithotripter(ML) to remove stones and assessed the rates of complete stone removal, number of sessions, use of ML and adverse events. Furthermore, we compared the presence or absence of balloon waist disappearance with clinical characteristics and endoscopic outcome.RESULTS: The mean diameters of the distal and maximum common bile duct were 13.5 ± 2.4 mm and16.4 ± 3.1 mm, respectively. The mean maximum transverse-diameter of the stones was 13.4 ± 3.4mm, and the mean number of stones was 3.0 ± 2.4.Complete stone removal was achieved in 97.5%(40/41)of cases, and ML was used in 12.2%(5/41) of cases.The mean number of sessions required was 1.2 ± 0.62.Pancreatitis developed in two patients and perforation in one. The rate of balloon waist disappearance was73.1%(30/41). No significant differences were noted in procedure time, rate of complete stone removal(100% vs 100%), number of sessions(1.1 vs 1.3, P= 0.22), application of ML(13% vs 9%, P = 0.71),or occurrence of pancreatitis(3.3% vs 9.1%, P =0.45) between cases with and without balloon waist disappearance.CONCLUSION: EST before sphincteroplasty may be unnecessary in EPLBD. Further investigations are needed to verify the relationship between the presence or absence of balloon waist disappearance.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for bile duct stones in elderly patients

AIM: To investigate whether endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD) can be safety and effectively performed in patients aged ≥ 80 years. METHODS: Lithotomy by EPLBD was conducted in 106 patients with bile duct stones ≥ 13 mm in size or with three or more bile duct stones ≥ 10 mm. The patients were divided into group A(< 80 years) and group B(≥ 80 years). Procedure success rate, number of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographies(ERCP), and incidence of complications were examined in both groups.RESULTS: Group B tended to include significantly more patients with peripapillary diverticulum, hypertension, hyperlipemia, cerebrovascular disease/dementia, respiratory disease/cardiac disease, and patients administered an anticoagulant or antiplatelet agent(P < 0.05). The success rate of the initial lithotomy was 88.7(94/106)%. The final lithotomy rate was 100(106/106)%. Complications due to treatment procedure occurred in 4.72(5/106)% of the patients. There was no significant difference in procedure success rate, number of ERCP, or incidence of complications between group A and group B.CONCLUSION: EPLBD can be safely performed in elderly patients, the same as in younger patients.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for removal of bile duct stones

AIM: To investigate the efficacy and outcomes of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) for bile duct stones in a multicenter prospective study.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for the removal of bile duct stones

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)with endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST)has been widely used as the alternative to EST along with endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy(EML)for the removal of large or difficult bile duct stones.Furthermore,EPLBD without EST was recently introduced as its simplified alternative technique.Thus,we systematically searched PubMed,Medline,the Cochrane Library and EMBASE,and analyzed all gathered data of EPLBD with and without EST,respectively,by using a single standardized definition,reviewing relevant literatures,published between 2003and June 2013,where it was performed with largediameter balloons(12-20 mm).The outcomes,including the initial success rate,the rate of needs for EML,and the overall success rate,and adverse events were assessed in each and compared between both of two procedures:"EPLBD with EST"and"EPLBD without EST".A total of 2511 procedures from 30 published articles were included in EPLBD with EST,while a total of413 procedures from 3 published articles were included in EPLBD without EST.In the results of outcomes,the overall success rate was 96.5%in EPLBD with EST and97.2%in EPLBD without EST,showing no significant difference between both of them.The initial success rate(84.0%vs 76.2%,P<0.001)and the success rate of EPLBD without EML(83.2%vs 76.7%,P=0.001)was significantly higher,while the rate of use of EML was significantly lower(14.1%vs 21.6%,P<0.001),in EPLBD with EST.The rate of overall adverse events,pancreatitis,bleeding,perforation,other adverse events,surgery for adverse events,and fatal adverse events were 8.3%,2.4%,3.6%,0.6%,1.7%,0.2%and 0.2%in EPLBD with EST and 7.0%,3.9%,1.9%,0.5%,0.7%,0%and 0%in EPLBD without EST,respectively,showing no significant difference between both of them.In conclusion,recent accumulated results of EPLBD with or even without EST suggest that it is a safe and effective procedure for the removal of large or difficult bile duct stones without any additional risk of severe adverse events,when performed under appropriate guidelines.

Immediate balloon deflation method in endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for extraction of difficult bile duct stones

Background/Aims: Recently, endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) using a large balloon (12 - 20 mm) for extraction of difficult common bile duct (CBD) stones has been widely accepted with favorable outcomes. However, there is no consensus with regard to the ballooning time. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of immediate balloon deflation in EPLBD for the treatment of difficult bile duct stone. Methods: This was a retrospective study of 80 consecutive patients with bile duct stones who were treated with an immediate balloon deflation method in EPLBD combined with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) between January 2010 and December 2012. Overall success rate, success rate at first ERCP, and the frequency of mechanical lithotripsy for complete stone removal were assessed for efficacy and safety was evaluated by assessing major complications. Results: Overall success rate for complete stone removal was high (78/80, 97.5%) and success rate for complete stone removal at first ERCP was 86.3% (69/80). The use of mechanical lithotripsy was 0% (0/80). The overall complication rate was favorable (5/80, 6.3%). PostERCP pancreatitis was observed in 3 patients (two: mild, one: moderate). In subgroup analysis, the presence of periampullary diverticulum was the only factor affecting the success rate at first ERCP. Conclusion: This study demonstrated the favorable outcome of immediate balloon deflation for treatment of difficult CBD stones and can be considered for clinical application.

Case of arterial hemorrhage after endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for choledocholithiases using a covered self-expandable metallic stent

A 78-year-old male was admitted to our hospital because of choledocholithiasis.ERC demonstrated choledocholithiases with a maximum diameter of 13 mm, and we performed endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD) with a size of 15 mm.Immediately following the balloon deflation, spurting hemorrhage occurred from the orifice of the duodenal papilla.Although we performed endoscopic hemostasis by compressing the bleeding point with the large balloon catheter, we could not achieve hemostasis.Therefore, we placed a 10 mm fully covered selfexpandable metallic stent(SEMS) across the duodenal papilla, and the hemorrhage stopped immediately.After 1 wk of SEMS placement, duodenal endoscopy revealed ulcerative lesions in both the orifice of the duodenal papilla and the lower bile duct.A direct peroral cholangioscopy using an ultra-slim upper endoscope revealed a visible vessel with a longitudinal mucosal tear in the ulceration of the lower bile duct.We believe that the mucosal tear and subsequent ruptured vessel were caused by the EPLBD procedure.