Removal Of Large Common Bile Duct Stones Research Articles

Sphincterotomy plus balloon dilation versus sphincterotomy alone for choledocholithiasis: a meta-analysis.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus balloon dilation (ESBD) is considered to be a promising method for the removal of large common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, when compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) alone, the efficacy and safety of ESBD remain controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ESBD vs. EST for the removal of large CBD stones. Electronic databases were searched up to 15 July 2018 for literature that compared ESBD with EST for the removal of CBD stones. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) of the stone clearance rate and the complication rate were used to compare the efficacy and safety of ESBD vs. EST. A total of 18 studies with 2789 patients were included. The results showed that the stone removal rate was much higher in the ESBD group than in the EST group, both across all endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) sessions (OR 2.68, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.79 to 4.01) and during the first ERCP session (OR 2.07, 95 %CI 1.37 to 3.12). The ESBD group had fewer complications than EST alone (OR 0.63, 95 %CI 0.47 to 0.85). Moreover, the ESBD group needed less mechanical lithotripsy (OR 0.38, 95 %CI 0.24 to 0.61) and had a shorter procedure time (mean difference - 4.05, 95 %CI - 7.02 to - 1.09) than EST alone. The efficacy and safety of ESBD were superior to those of EST for the removal of large CBD stones. Moreover, less mechanical lithotripsy and shorter procedure times were needed with ESBD to manage large stones.

Percutaneous papillary large balloon dilation during percutaneous cholangioscopic lithotripsy for the treatment of large bile-duct stones: a feasibility study.

When access to a major duodenal papilla or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography has failed, percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopic lithotripsy (PTCS-L) may be useful for removing common bile duct (CBD) stones. However, the feasibility and usefulness of percutaneous transhepatic papillary large-balloon dilation (PPLBD) during PTCS-L for the removal of large CBD stones has not been established. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of PPLBD for the treatment of large CBD stones. Eleven patients with large CBD stones in whom the access to the major papilla or bile duct had failed were enrolled prospectively. Papillary dilation was performed using a large (12-20 mm) dilation balloon catheter via the percutaneous transhepatic route. Post-procedure adverse events and efficacy of the stone retrieval were measured. The initial success rate of PPLBD was 100%. No patient required a basket to remove a stone after PPLBD. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy was required in 2 (18.2%) patients. The median time to complete stone removal after PPLBD was 17.8 min and no adverse events occurred after PPLBD. Asymptomatic hyperamylasemia was not encountered in any patients. This study indicates that PPLBD is safe and effective for removal of large CBD stones.

Reappraisal of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for the management of common bile duct stones.

Although endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is still considered as a gold standard treatment for common bile duct (CBD) stones in western guideline, endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is commonly used by the endoscopists in Asia as the first-line treatment for CBD stones. Besides the advantages of a technical easy procedure, endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) can facilitate the removal of large CBD stones. The indication of EPBD is now extended from removal of the small stones by using traditional balloon, to removal of large stones and avoidance of lithotripsy by using large balloon alone or after EST. According to the reports of antegrade papillary balloon dilatation, balloon dilation itself is not the cause of pancreatitis. On the contrary, adequate dilation of papillary orifice can reduce the trauma to the papilla and pancreas by the basket or lithotripter during the procedure of stone extraction. EPLBD alone is as effective as EPLBD with limited EST. Longer ballooning time may be beneficial in EPLBD alone to achieve adequate loosening of papillary orifice. The longer ballooning time does not increase the risk of pancreatitis but may reduce the bleeding episodes in patients with coagulopathy. Slowly inflation of the balloon, but not exceed the diameter of bile duct and tolerance of the patients are important to prevent the complication of perforation. EPBLD alone or with EST are not the sphincter preserved procedures, regular follow up is necessary for early detection and management of CBD stones recurrence.

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 (≥ 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 balloon dilatation in comparison with endoscopic sphincterotomy for the treatment of large common bile duct stone

Background:There are concerns on the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD) as an alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of choledocholithiasis. We compared the efficacy and safety of EPBD and EST for removing large common bile duct (CBD) stones.Materials and Methods:One hundred sixty patients with CBD stones of 10-20 mm were randomized to undergo EPBD or EST. A 15-mm dilatation balloon was used for EPBD. Cotton's criteria were used to determine the incidence of post-EPBD or post-EST complications. CBD stone removal and complications were compared between the two methods.Results:CBD stones were completely removed in 97.5% of the EPBD and 96.2% of the EST group (P = 0.5). The incidence of postoperative pancreatitis (11.2% vs 8.7%) and bleeding (1.2% vs 1.2%) were similar between the EPBD and EST groups (P > 0.05). Perforation did not occur in any patient.Conclusions:EPBD with 15-mm dilator balloon appears to be equally safe and effective compared with EST for removal of large CBD stones. So because of low complication and high success rate we recommend EPBD as the preferred method for removal of large (10-20 mm) CBD stones.

Failure of sequential biliary stenting for unsuccessful common bile duct stone removal

To determine the factors associated with the failure of stone removal by a biliary stenting strategy. We retrospectively reviewed 645 patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for stone removal in Siriraj GI Endoscopy center, Siriraj Hospital from June 2009 to June 2012. A total of 42 patients with unsuccessful initial removal of large CBD stones that underwent sequential biliary stenting were enrolled in the present study. The demographic data, laboratory results, stone characteristics, procedure details, and clinical outcomes were recorded and analyzed. In addition, the patients were classified into two groups based on outcome, successful or failed sequential biliary stenting, and the above factors were compared. Among the initial 42 patients with unsuccessful initial removal of large CBD stones, there were 37 successful biliary stenting cases and five failed cases. Complete CBD clearance was achieved in 88.0% of cases. The average number of sessions needed before complete stone removal was achieved was 2.43 at an average of 25 wk after the first procedure. Complications during the follow-up period occurred in 19.1% of cases, comprising ascending cholangitis (14.3%) and pancreatitis (4.8%). The factors associated with failure of complete CBD stone clearance in the biliary stenting group were unchanged CBD stone size after the first biliary stenting attempt (10.2 wk) and a greater number of endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography sessions performed (4.2 sessions). The sequential biliary stenting is an effective management strategy for the failure of initial large CBD stone removal.

ENDOSCOPIC PAPILLARY LARGE BALLOON DILATION AFTER ENDOSCOPIC SPHINCTEROTOMY FOR TREATMENT OF LARGE COMMON BILE DUCT STONE

The extraction of large common bile duct (CBD) stones after an endoscopic sphincterotomy is successful in most cases. However, the procedure often requires a prolonged time and repeated trials, therefore, subsequent occurrence of procedure‐related complications are not uncommon. The purpose of the present paper was to investigate the utility of a combined endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) preceded by a mid‐incision endoscopic sphincterotomy for the removal of large CBD stones. Stone removal was surprisingly effective with EPLBD in patients with large CBD stones. Occurrence of major complication, such as pancreatitis, bleeding, and perforation, was not observed in any patients who were treated with EPLBD. EPLBD also can be safely carried out on patients with anatomic alteration, such as a periampullary diverticulum, and on patients who have undergone a Billroth II operation. EPLBD is a landmark method of removing a large CBD stone, the impact of which is comparable to that of the introduction of endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy. However, further investigation is required to address the applications and potential outcomes of this procedure. Also, procedure guidelines should be established to avoid major complications.