Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for the management of common bile duct stones: experience of 226 cases

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 was 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 unnecessary. A diameter of CBD ≥ 15 mm is a risk factor of stone recurrence.

Gallstone Disease in Cirrhosis-Pathogenesis and Management

Gallstones are more common in patients with cirrhosis of the liver, and the incidence increases with severity of liver disease. Pigment stones are the most frequent type of gallstones (GSs) in cirrhotics, and majority remain asymptomatic. Hepatitis C virus infection and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease are the underlying etiologies of liver diseases that most often associated with GSs. Multiple altered mechanisms in cirrhosis such as chronic hemolysis due to hypersplenism, reduced bile acid synthesis and transport, decreased cholesterol secretion, decreased apolipoprotein A-I and A-II secretion, gallbladder hypo-motility, autonomic dysfunction, and portal hypertension collectively lead to increased risk of lithogenesis. Asymptomatic GSs should be followed up closely and offered laparoscopic cholecystectomy once symptomatic in Child-Pugh class A and B patients. The model for the end-stage liver disease score is the best predictor of the outcome after cholecystectomy. In patients of Child-Pugh class C, conservative or minimally invasive approaches should be used to treat complications of GSs.

Management of Difficult Bile Duct Stones by Large Balloon, Cholangioscopy, Enteroscopy and Endosonography

Endoscopic management of bile duct stones is now the standard of care, but challenges remain with difficult bile duct stones. There are some known factors associated with technically difficult bile duct stones, such as large size and surgically altered anatomy. Endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy is now the standard technique used to remove large bile duct stones, but the efficacy of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) and cholangioscopy with intraductal lithotripsy has been increasingly reported. In patients with surgically altered anatomy, biliary access before stone removal can be technically difficult. Endotherapy using two new endoscopes is now utilized in clinical practice: enteroscopy-assisted endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound-guided antegrade treatment. These new approaches can be combined with EPLBD and/or cholangioscopy to remove large bile duct stones from patients with surgically altered anatomy. Since various endoscopic procedures are now available, endoscopists should learn the indications, advantages and disadvantages of each technique for better management of bile duct stones.

Multicenter randomized trial of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation without sphincterotomy versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of bile duct stones: MARVELOUS trial

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) has been increasingly used for the management of large common bile duct (CBD) stones. Although EPLBD is often preceded by endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), EPLBD alone without EST has been increasingly reported as an alternative to EST for large CBD stones. METHODS : This multicenter randomized trial was conducted at 19 Japanese institutions to compare the efficacy and safety of EPLBD alone versus EST for the removal of large (≥ 10 mm) CBD stones. The primary end point was complete stone removal in a single session. The secondary end points included: overall complete stone removal, lithotripsy use, procedure time, adverse events, and cost. RESULTS:  171 patients with large CBD stones were included in the analysis. The rate of single-session complete stone removal was significantly higher in the EPLBD-alone group than in the EST group (90.7 % vs. 78.8 %; P = 0.04). Lithotripsy use was significantly less frequent in the EPLBD group than in the EST group (30.2 % vs. 48.2 %; P = 0.02). The rates of early adverse events were comparable between the two groups: rates of overall adverse events were 9.3 % vs. 9.4 % and of pancreatitis were 4.7 % vs. 5.9 % in the EPLBD and EST groups, respectively. The procedure costs were $1442 vs. $1661 in the EPLBD and EST groups, respectively (P = 0.12). CONCLUSION : EPLBD without EST for the endoscopic treatment of large CBD stones achieved a significantly higher rate of complete stone removal in a single session compared with EST, without increasing adverse events.

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation decreases the risk of bleeding in cirrhotic patients compared with endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy: A national population-based study

Although endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) seems to cause fewer instances of bleeding, there are insufficient data to determine the optimal methods for decreasing the risk of bleeding in cirrhotic patients.In this study, we compared the bleeding risks following endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EST) vs EPBD in cirrhotic patients and identified clinical factors associated with bleeding and 30-day mortality.Taiwan's National Health Insurance Database was used to identify 3201 cirrhotic patients who underwent EST or EPBD between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013.We enrolled 2620 patients receiving EST and 581 patients receiving EPBD. The mean age was 63.1 ± 13.9 years, and 70.4% (2252/3201) were men. The incidence of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) bleeding was higher among patients treated with EST than those treated with EPBD (EST vs EPBD: 3.5% vs 1.9%). Independent predisposing factors for bleeding included EST, renal function impairment, and antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The overall 30-day mortality was 4.0% (127/3201). Older age, renal function impairment, hepatic encephalopathy, bleeding esophageal varices, ascites, hepatocellular carcinoma, biliary malignancy, and pancreatic malignancy were associated with higher risks for 30-day mortality.To decrease post-ERCP hemorrhage, EPBD is the preferred method in patients with cirrhosis, especially for those who have renal function impairment or are receiving antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy.

Prophylactic efficacy of a novel method against postendoscopic papillary balloon dilation pancreatitis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate whether a novel method including prophylactic pancreatic stent (PS) placement prevents postendoscopic papillary balloon dilation pancreatitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study enrolled 200 consecutive patients with bile duct stones measuring up to 8 mm in diameter and retrospectively recruited 113 patients undergoing ordinary endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) without PS placement from our previous study. In the novel method, EPBD and PS placement was attempted with a guidewire left in the main pancreatic duct for patients in whom stable guidewire placement in the main pancreatic duct was possible. EST was performed for patients in whom stable guidewire placement was impossible. The incidence rate of pancreatitis was compared between the novel method and ordinary EPBD, and risk factors for pancreatitis were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 194 patients undergoing the novel method, EPBD and EST were performed in 180 and 14 patients, respectively. Following EPBD, PS placement was successful in 177/180 (98.3%) of patients. Pancreatitis occurred in 7/194 (3.6%) of patients after the novel method and 9/113 (8.0%) of patients after ordinary EPBD. There was a trend toward lower incidence rate of pancreatitis in the novel method. Stent dislodgement by the first postoperative morning and no previous endoscopic nasobiliary drainage (ENBD) were identified as risk factors for pancreatitis after EPBD with PS placement. No previous ENBD was also identified as a risk factor for pancreatitis after ordinary EPBD.

CONCLUSION

Our novel method is likely to be superior to ordinary EPBD in preventing pancreatitis. Previous ENBD may prevent post-EPBD pancreatitis regardless of PS placement.

Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilation Versus Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Treatment of Bile Duct Stones

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current literature focusing on the indications, efficacy, and safety of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) and endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of bile duct stones. • EPBD without EST is associated with a higher risk of post-procedural pancreatitis and lower rate of stone clearance than EST alone. • EPBD without EST should be at least 2 min in duration, and placement of a pancreatic stent and other measures to reduce pancreatitis risk should be considered. • EPBD without EST is most useful to reduce risk of bleeding in patients with coagulopathy. • EPLBD combined with EST can be used as an alternative or adjunct to mechanical lithotripsy in the removal of large or difficult bile duct stones. • EPLBD combined with EST results in fewer complications than EST alone for removal of bile duct stones.

Endoscopic Management of Complex Biliary Stone Disease

Choledocholithiasis is a common disorder that is managed universally by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). For difficult or complex stones, ERCP with conventional techniques may fail to achieve biliary clearance in 10% to 15% of cases. This review summarizes the literature regarding the current available endoscopic techniques for complex stone disease, including mechanical lithotripsy, endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation, cholangioscopy-guided lithotripsy, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary access.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation and endoscopic papillary balloon dilation both without sphincterotomy for removal of large bile duct stones: A propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) without endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) may facilitate extraction of large bile duct stones through achieving adequate dilation of the ampulla. However, contrary to favorable long-term outcomes after endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD), that of EPLBD without EST has been little investigated. Therefore, we conducted the current study to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of EPLBD without EST and EPBD after removal of large bile duct stones (LBDS; ≥10 mm).

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients without a previous history of EST, EPBD or EPLBD who underwent EPLBD without EST or EPBD for removal of LBDS. Each patient in the EPLBD without EST group was matched to a patient in the EPBD group using propensity scores.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients in each group were matched for the analysis. Baseline characteristics were balanced after propensity matching. Rate of complete stone removal in a single session was higher (80% vs 16%, P < 0.001), number of ERCP sessions (1.3 ± 0.7 vs 2.4 ± 1.5, P < 0.001) and rate of lithotripsy use (30% vs 80%, P < 0.001) were smaller in the matched EPLBD without EST group. Contrary to null between-group differences in early adverse events (P = 0.99), a cumulative rate of late biliary complications was higher in the EPLBD without EST group (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

EPLBD without EST showed higher efficacy for removal of LBDS but was associated with worse long-term outcomes when compared to EPBD.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for removal of bile duct stones in Billroth II gastrectomy patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) for common bile duct (CBD) stones removal in Billroth II gastrectomy patients is feasible. However, the long-term outcomes of this technique are not clear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the procedural and long-term outcomes of EPBD for removal of CBD stones in Billroth II gastrectomy patients.

METHODS

The records of patients with previous Billroth II gastrectomy referred for CBD stones removal with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) between July 1, 2008 and September 1, 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. The main outcomes of stone clearance, ERCP-related adverse events, and stone recurrence were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 83 patients with previous Billroth II gastrectomy underwent ERCP in our center were reviewed. Forty-nine consecutive patients with previous Billroth II gastrectomy referred to EPBD for removal of CBD stones underwent 59 ERCP procedures were enrolled in the end. The overall successful CBD stones clearance was achieved in 42 patients (85.7%). ERCP-related adverse events was in 3 ERCP procedures (5.1%). Severe complications, including perforation and bleeding, were not observed. Six of 49 patients (12.2%) had stone recurrence after a median period of 22.5 months (range 6-71 months) from the end of stone removal treatment. Female [odds ratio (OR) = 11.352; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.040-123.912; P = 0.046] and previous mechanical lithotripsy (OR = 13.423; 95% CI: 1.070-168.434; P = 0.044) were significantly associated with stone recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

At long-term follow-up, EPBD for removal of CBD stones appeared to be safe and effective in Billroth II gastrectomy patients. Female and previous mechanical lithotripsy may be risk factors for stone recurrence.

Comparative efficacy of various endoscopic techniques for the treatment of common bile duct stones: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although various endoscopic techniques have been introduced for successful removal of common bile duct (CBD) stones, the optimal method is not yet clear. We aimed to compare the efficacy of different endoscopic techniques for CBD stone removal.

METHODS

We searched for all relevant randomized controlled trials published until June 2017, examining the outcomes of endoscopic techniques for CBD stone removal, including endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD), and EST with balloon dilatation (ESBD). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies with 3726 patients were included in the meta-analysis. ESBD had a higher successful rate of stone removal in the first endoscopic session than EPBD (odds ratio [OR] [95% credible interval {CrI}], 2.09 [1.07-4.16]). Mechanical lithotripsy was less common in ESBD than in EPBD (OR [95% CrI], .45 [.25-.83]). EPBD revealed a lower risk of bleeding than both EST and ESBD (OR [95% CrI], vs EST, .06 [.008-.23]; vs ESBD, .12 [.01-.64]). The pooled incidences of bleeding were 3.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8%-5.2%), 1.1% (95% CI, .6%-2.0%), and 2.0% (95% CI, .9%-4.4%) in the EST, EPBD, and ESBD groups, respectively. Pancreatitis tended to be more common in EPBD than in both EST and ESBD (OR [95% CrI]: vs EST, 1.49 [.84-2.59]; vs ESBD, 1.49 [.61-3.57]).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of ESBD in stone removal during the first endoscopic session was superior to that of EPBD. Pancreatitis in ESBD and EST tended to be less common than in EPBD, although this difference was not statistically significant. However, ESBD and EST carried a higher risk of bleeding than EPBD.

Multicenter retrospective and comparative study of 5-minute versus 15-second endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for removal of bile duct stones

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is a method of bile duct stone removal that has a better long-term outcome but a high risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP). Recent studies have suggested that 5-minute EPBD can reduce the incidence of PEP. This study aimed to examine the safety and effectiveness of longer duration EPBD compared with shorter duration EPBD (5 minutes vs. 15 seconds after disappearance of the waist of a dilation catheter).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Patients without a history of endoscopic sphincterotomy or EPBD who underwent EPBD to remove bile duct stones were selected retrospectively from five centers. The incidence of PEP, other early adverse events, and outcomes of EPBD were compared between the groups. A multivariable analysis of risk factors for PEP was performed.

RESULTS

 A total of 607 patients (157 and 450 in the 5-minute and 15-second EPBD groups, respectively) were included. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of the incidence of PEP (8.3 % and 8.9 % in the 5-minute and 15-second EPBD groups, respectively; P  = 0.871) and the incidence of overall early adverse events ( P  = 0.999). Although 5-minute EPBD elongated the procedure time (45 vs. 37 minutes, P  < 0.001), it increased the rate of complete stone removal during a single session ( P  < 0.001) and decreased the use of lithotripsy ( P  < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

 Compared with 15-second EPBD, 5-minute EPBD did not reduce the incidence of PEP.

Endoscopic management of acute cholangitis as a result of common bile duct stones

Acute cholangitis is infectious disease of the biliary system and potentially can cause significant morbidity and mortality. With advances in intensive care, antibiotic therapy advances and endoscopic and other modalities of biliary drainage, mortality rates have significantly come down of late. Although most cases respond to antibiotics alone, definitive therapy is required later in most of the patients. Increased biliary pressure leads to biliovenous reflux of bacteria and purulent bile into the circulation leading to systemic inflammation and sepsis with subsequent organ dysfunction. Biliary decompression increases antibiotic penetration in bile. Therefore, patients with high-risk factors and organ dysfunction require early and urgent biliary drainage, respectively, as they are unlikely to respond with antibiotics alone. Biliary decompression is best achieved by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) compared to percutaneous and surgical decompression. ERCP can be technically difficult and sometimes unsuccessful especially in patients with altered anatomy and upper gastrointestinal obstruction. Earlier percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and surgery were the only viable options in those patients. PTBD requires a dilated biliary system, is more invasive and cannot achieve ductal clearance in cholangitis as a result of choledocholithiasis, whereas surgery is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Advances in therapeutic endoscopy such as balloon enteroscopy-guided biliary drainage or endoscopic ultrasound guided-biliary drainage have added new dimensions to endoscopic management of acute cholangitis as a result of choledocholithiasis obviating the need for more invasive procedures.

Endoscopic management of acute cholangitis according to the TG13

The Tokyo Guidelines 2013 (TG13) recommend that endoscopic drainage should be the first-choice treatment for biliary decompression in patients with acute cholangitis. Timing of biliary drainage for acute cholangitis should be based on the severity of the disease. For patients with severe acute cholangitis, appropriate organ support and urgent biliary drainage are needed. For patients with moderate acute cholangitis, early biliary drainage is needed. For patients with mild acute cholangitis, biliary drainage is needed when initial treatment such as antimicrobial therapy is ineffective. There are three methods of biliary drainage: endoscopic drainage, percutaneous transhepatic drainage, and surgical drainage. Endoscopic drainage is less invasive than the other two drainage methods. The drainage method (endoscopic nasobiliary drainage and stenting) depends on the endoscopist's preference but endoscopic sphincterotomy should be selected rather than endoscopic papillary balloon dilation from the aspect of procedure-related complications. In the TG13, balloon enteroscopy-assisted and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainages have been newly added as specific drainage methods. Recent studies have demonstrated their usefulness and safety. These drainage methods will become more widespread in the future.

Safety and efficacy of minimal biliary sphincterotomy with papillary balloon dilation (m-EBS+EPBD) in patients using clopidogrel or anticoagulation

Background and study aims Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS) or endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) are common techniques of biliary decompression. Potential risks include gastrointestinal hemorrhage, which can be increased by antiplatelet agents, anticoagulants (AC) and/or novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) (ie. apixaban, dabigatran and rivaroxaban). The study aim is to evaluate the safety/efficacy of an alternative technique, minimal-EBS plus EPBD (m-EBS + EPBD), in individuals for whom clopidogrel, AC, and/or NOACs cannot be interrupted due to high cardiovascular or thromboembolic risk. Patients and methods Patients undergoing m-EBS + EPBD while taking clopidogrel and/or AC were retrospectively evaluated at two United States tertiary care centers for efficacy, GIB and procedure-related, cardiovascular and thromboembolic adverse events (AE). Results Ninety-five patients were identified [55 = clopidogrel and 45 = AC (31.1 % NOACs)]. The main indication for ERCP was choledocholithiasis (34 %). 100 % clinical improvement and 97.9 % endoscopic success were found. The incidence of AE was 5.3 %. There was a 4.2 % incidence of gastrointestinal hemorrhage (2 cases requiring endoscopic intervention). Both severe gastrointestinal hemorrhages also experienced the cases of post-ERCP pancreatitis, and 2 /3 of cholangitis (all aspirin + AC). There was 1cardiovascular event (non-ST elevation myocardial infarction), and no thromboembolic events. Conclusions Minimal-EBS + EPBD is an effective and safe therapy with an incidence of gastrointestinal hemorrhage of 4.2 %, (2.1 % requiring endoscopic intervention), for patients on clopidogrel and/or AC, with a high risk for cardiovascular/thromboembolic events.

Late Complications After Endoscopic Sphincterotomy

The introduction of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) has changed the treatment of choledocholithiasis. An increasing number of young patients are requiring ES, and this raises concern regarding any potential long-term complications arising from irreversibly altering the anatomy of the sphincter of Oddi. In particular, concern has been raised regarding the risk of late cholangiocarcioma. A review was performed evaluating the relationship between ES for benign disease and the subsequent development of late complications, including biliary tract malignancy, the formation of primary duct stones, and recurring cholangitis. A systematic review of articles published between 1970 and 2013 was undertaken. Current evidence shows that ES is a safe and effective treatment for common bile duct stones. The long-term risk of subsequent cholangiocarcinoma has not been convincingly proven although in many of these studies the follow-up period was inadequate. There does appear to be an associated increased incidence of cholangiocarcinomas following sphincterotomy although this is not proven to be causative. If there is an increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma following ES, it is likely to be small in western populations. However, until longer follow-up studies are published, it may be prudent to avoid ES in the very young.

Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilatation Without Sphincterotomy for the Treatment of Large Common Bile Duct Stone: Long-Term Outcomes at a Single Center

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) without endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is an accepted, simplified endoscopic technique for large common bile duct (CBD) stone removal. However, little is known about the long-term outcomes of this technique. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of EPLBD without EST for the treatment of large CBD stones.

METHODS

This retrospective study of EPLBD without EST for a large CBD stone was conducted between June 2005 and October 2010. A total of 128 patients with a large CBD stone were included. The primary outcome measurement was complete CBD stone removal after EPLBD. Clinical data obtained from medical records were analyzed.

RESULTS

The overall complete stone removal rate was 94.5 %. Mechanical lithotripsy was needed in 18 (14.1 %) patients. Post-procedural pancreatitis and asymptomatic hyperamylasemia occurred in 1 (0.8 %) and 11 (8.6 %) patients, respectively. One (0.8 %) patient experienced minor bleeding. The rate of stone recurrence was 13.1 %, and median time to stone recurrence was 600 days (range 144-2284 days). Over a half (64.3 %) of stone recurrences occurred during the 2 years following stone removal. Recurrence tended to be more frequent in patients with a large CBD diameter and in patients requiring multiple endoscopic sessions for complete CBD stone retrieval.

CONCLUSION

EPLBD without EST may be safe and effective in patients with a large bile duct stone.

Comparison of endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones

Endoscopic treatment for bile duct stones is low-invasive and currently considered as the first choice of the treatment. For the treatment of bile duct stones, papillary treatment is necessary, and the treatments used at the time are broadly classified into two types; endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation where bile duct closing part is dilated with a balloon and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) where bile duct closing part is incised. Both procedures have advantages and disadvantages. Golden standard is EST, however, there are patients with difficulty for EST, thus we must select the procedure based on understanding of the characteristics of the procedure, and patient backgrounds.

Is endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation safe for treating large CBD stones?

In recent years, endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) has been shown to be an effective technique for the removal of large or difficult common bile duct (CBD) stones, as an alternative to EST. Reviewing the literature published since 2003, it is understood that EPLBD has fewer associated overall complications than EST. Bleeding occurred less frequently with EPLBD than with EST. There was no significant difference in postendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis or perforation. 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. Since use of a larger balloon can tear the sphincter as well as the bile duct, possibly resulting in bleeding and perforation, a balloon size that is equal to or smaller in diameter than the diameter of the native distal bile duct is recommended. The maximum transverse diameter of the stone and the balloon-stone diameter ratio have a tendency to affect the success or failure of complete removal of stones by large balloon dilation to prevent adverse effects such as perforation and bleeding. One should take into account the size of the native bile duct, the size and burden of stones, the presence of stricture of distal bile duct, and the presence of the papilla in or adjacent to a diverticulum. Even though the results of EPLBD indicate that it is a relatively safe procedure in patients with common duct stones with a dilated CBD, the recommended guidelines should be followed strictly for the prevention of major adverse events such as bleeding and perforation.

A comparative study of one minute versus five seconds endoscopic biliary balloon dilation after small sphincterotomy in choleducolithiasis

Background:

Limited sphincterotomy and endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is a low-risk method for the treatment of choleducolithiasis. Traditionally one minute ballooning time (BT) is applied; however, the effective BT is not clear. In this study, we compare five seconds and one minute ballooning time.

Materials and Methods:

In this single-blind, randomized, clinical trial 60 patients with common bile duct (CBD) stones documented in ultrasonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), with no severe hepatic, biliary or systemic diseases, enrolled in the study. The patients were randomly assigned to receive EPBD with either five seconds (n = 31) or one minute (n = 29) ballooning time (BT) after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and small sphincterotomy. Then stones were retrieved with an extractor balloon. The patients were followed for 48 hours to check the possible complications.

Results:

Successful CBD stone removal was the same in the five-second and one-minute BT groups (93.5% vs. 96.6%; P = 0.594). Pancreatitis occurred in three (9.7%) patients in the five-second BT group and in six (20.7%) patients in the one-minute BT group (P = 0.233). No hemorrhage or perforation was noted.

Conclusions:

After a small sphincterotomy, EPBD in the five-second and one-minute BT groups had a similar efficacy. Small sphincterotomy combined with very short BT is a safe and effective method for CBD stone removal.

MELD scores and Child-Pugh classifications predict the outcomes of ERCP in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis: a retrospective cohort study

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is challenging in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ERCP in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis and accessed the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores and Child-Pugh classifications for prediction of morbidity and mortality.From January 2000 to June 2014, 77 ERCP operations were performed in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. The data on operative complications were analyzed. MELD scores and Child-Pugh classifications were calculated and associated with operative outcomes and survival. Telephone follow-up was performed to determine survival situations.No death, perforation, or hemorrhage caused by gastroesophageal varices occurred as a result of the procedure. The rate of intraoperative hemorrhage was 13.0%, and the rate of postoperative morbidity was 27.3% including hemorrhage (18.2%), post-ERCP pancreatitis (6.1%), aggravated infection of the biliary tract (1.3%), hepatic encephalopathy (1.3%), and respiratory failure (1.3%). Four (5.2%) patients had both intraoperative and postoperative hemorrhage. Receiver operating characteristic analysis identified MELD scores higher than 11.5 as the best cutoff value for predicting complication incidence (95% confidence interval = 0.63-0.87). Twenty-one (44.7%) patients with a MELD score above 11.5 developed a complication, and 3 (10%) patients who had a lower MELD score developed a complication (P = 0.001). Both MELD score and Child-Pugh classification had prognostic value in patients without jaundice, although sex may result in different prognostic values based on the 2 scores. The rate of complications was not significantly different among patients with different Child-Pugh classifications. No significant difference was observed in patients with different MELD scores or Child-Pugh classifications in terms of median survival times.ERCP is an effective and safe procedure in cirrhotic patients with choledocholithiasis. MELD scores can predict the risk of operative complications, but Child-Pugh classification system scores do not predict the risk of complications.

Superiority of 10-mm-wide balloon over 8-mm-wide balloon in papillary dilation for bile duct stones: A matched cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is a possible alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) for common bile duct (CBD) stones. To date, 10- and 8-mm EPBD have not been fully compared.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent EPBD for CBD stones at two Japanese tertiary care centers between May 1994 and January 2014 were identified. Matched pairs with 10- and 8-mm EPBD were generated. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 869 patients were identified (61 and 808 patients for 10- and 8-mm EPBD, respectively), and 61 well-balanced pairs were generated. The rate of complete stone removal within a single session was higher in the 10-mm EPBD group than in the 8-mm EPBD group (69% vs. 44%, P < 0.001), and use of lithotripsy was less frequent in the 10-mm EPBD group (23% vs. 56%, P < 0.001). The rates of post-ERCP pancreatitis were similar between the 10- and 8-mm EPBD groups (11% vs. 8%). Cumulative biliary complication-free rates were not statistically different between the two groups: 88% [95% confidence interval (CI): 79-97%] and 94% (95% CI: 88-100%) at 1 year and 69% (95% CI: 56-85%) and 80% (95% CI: 69-93%) at 2 years in the 10- and 8-mm EPBD groups, respectively. In the 10-mm EPBD group, ascending cholangitis was not observed, and pneumobilia was found in 5% of cases during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

EPBD using a 10-mm balloon for CBD stones is safe and more effective than 8-mm EPBD. The sphincter function is highly preserved after 10-mm EPBD.

Balloon dilation itself may not be a major determinant of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the essential first modality for common bile duct (CBD) stone therapy. The conventional endoscopic treatment for CBD stones is stone removal after endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST). Stone removal after papillary stretching using balloon dilation instead of the conventional method has been widely adopted. There are many reports regarding endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) utilizing a small balloon (< 10 mm) instead of EST for the removal of small CBD stones. In contrast, two cases of mortality due to post-ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) were reported after an EPBD clinical trial in the Western world, and the psychological barrier caused by these incidences hinders the use of this technique in Western countries. Endoscopic papillar large balloon dilation (EPLBD), which is used to treat large CBD stones, was not widely adopted when first introduced due to concerns about perforation and severe pancreatitis from the use of a large balloon (12-20 mm). However, as experience with this procedure accumulates, the occurrence of PEP with EPLBD is confirmed to be much lower than with EPBD. This report reviews whether EPBD and EPLBD, two procedures that use balloon dilation but differ in terms of indications and concept, contribute to the occurrence of PEP.

Endoscopic minor papilla balloon dilation for the treatment of symptomatic pancreas divisum

OBJECTIVE

A subpopulation of patients with pancreas divisum experience symptomatic events such as recurrent acute pancreatitis and chronic pancreatitis. Minor papilla sphincterotomy has been reported as being an effective treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic balloon dilation for the minor papilla.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2012, 16 patients were retrospectively included in this study. After endoscopic balloon dilation for the minor papilla was received, a pancreatic stent or a nasal pancreatic drainage catheter was placed for 1 week. If a stricture or obstruction was evident, it was treated with balloon dilation followed by long-term stent placement (1 year). When an outflow of pancreatic juice was disturbed by a pancreatic stone, endoscopic stone extraction was performed.

RESULTS

Balloon dilation and stent placement were achieved and were successful in all the cases (16/16; 100%). Clinical improvement was achieved in 7 (84.7%) of the 9 patients with recurrent acute pancreatitis and in 6 (85.7%) of the 7 patients with chronic pancreatitis. Early complications were observed in 1 (6.3%) patient. Pancreatitis or bleeding related to balloon dilation was not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic balloon dilation for the minor papilla is feasible for the management of symptomatic pancreas divisum.

Comparison of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation and sphincterotomy in young patients with CBD stones and gallstones

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS) results in permanent loss of sphincter function and its long-term complications are unknown. Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is an alternative procedure that preserves sphincter function, although it is associated with a higher risk of pancreatitis than is EBS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and outcomes of EPBD with limited indications for removal of common bile duct (CBD) stones combined with gallstones in patients younger than 40 years.

METHODS

Young (age < 40 years) patients who had CBD stones combined with gallstones on imaging studies were enrolled in this study. A total of 132 patients were randomly divided into the EPBD group (n = 62) or the EBS group (n = 70) for extraction of CBD stones. The ballooning size of EPBD ranged from 6 to 10 mm.

RESULTS

Complete bile duct clearance was achieved in 98.4 % (61/62) of the EPBD group and 100 % (70/70) of the EBS group. Mechanical lithotripsy was required in 8.1 % (5/62) of the EPBD group and 8.6 % (6/70) of the EBS group. The early complication rates were 8.1 % (5/62) (five pancreatitis) in the EPBD group and 11.4 % (8/70) (five [7.1 %] pancreatitis, two bleeding and one perforation) in the EBS group. The recurrence rates of CBD stones were 1.6 % (1/62) in the EPBD group and 5.7 % (4/70) in the EBS group.

CONCLUSIONS

EPBD with limited indications was safe and effective as EBS for removal of CBD stones combined with gallstones in young patients who had a longer life expectancy.

Short- and long-term outcomes of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation with or without sphincterotomy for removal of large bile duct stones

OBJECTIVE

Removal of large bile duct stones by endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) has been proven safe and effective. Little evidence supports the benefits of a preceding EST in reducing complications. Recent studies suggest that large bile duct stone removal by EPLBD alone may be safe and effective.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We removed large bile duct stones by EPLBD with EST from March 2008 to February 2010 and without EST from March 2010 to October 2011. Efficacy and safety of EPLBD with or without EST and late biliary complication outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-two patients (men/women, 27/15; mean age, 76 years) underwent EPLBD: 14 underwent EPLBD with EST and 28 underwent EPLBD without EST. The mean stone size was 14 mm (9-30 mm). Overall complete stone removal rate was 98%, with 83% achieved in 1 session. Complete duct clearance by EPLBD alone was achieved in 79%. Mechanical lithotripsy was required in 4 (10%) patients. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and electrohydraulic lithotripsy were required in 4 (10%) and 1 (2%) patients, respectively. Pancreatitis and perforation occurred in 2 (5%) and 1 (2%) patients, respectively. Patients treated by EPLBD with EST and by EPLBD alone did not differ in complication outcomes. Six (14%) patients had recurrent bile duct stones, with a significant correlation to dilated common bile duct (p = 0.0351).

CONCLUSIONS

EPLBD is safe and effective in patients with large bile duct stones. Preceding EST may be unnecessary.

Complications of ERCP

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is performed commonly for therapy. Its role in pancreaticobiliary diagnostic imaging has significantly decreased over time. Despite advances in our knowledge of the risk factors, complications, (especially post-ERCP pancreatitis), remain a significant problem. This review highlights the risk factors as related to the patient, procedure and the endoscopist, and the possible means to prevent complications. The best way to avoid any complication is "to avoid any procedure where the indication is not strong" and especially to refrain from doing diagnostic ERCP when alternate noninvasive imaging such as magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography is available.

Endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation versus endoscopic papillary regular-balloon dilation for removal of large bile-duct stones

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation (EPLBD) became popular for the treatment of large common bile-duct stones (CBDS), and its feasibility has been reported in comparison to endoscopic sphincterotomy. However, the comparison between EPLBD and endoscopic papillary regular-balloon dilation (EPBD) has not been reported. In the present study, the efficacy and complications of EPLBD were compared with those of EPBD.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed 334 consecutive patients with CBDS of any size that were treated by either EPLBD or EPBD between January 2008 and December 2012.

RESULTS

In cases with large CBDS (>10 mm), EPLBD and EPBD had similar results in terms of the success rate of stone removal in the first (65% vs. 84%) and total attempts (100% vs. 95%), use of mechanical lithotripter (64% vs. 80%), and procedure time (48.0 ± 17.8 min vs. 44.1 ± 17.1 min). The necessity for crushing stones with a mechanical lithotripter was significantly decreased in EPLBD compared to EPBD (25% vs. 80%). In all cases with CBDS, there was no significant difference in complication rates between EPLBD and EPBD (3.3% vs. 4.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to EPBD, EPLBD appears safe and effective for removing large CBDS and decreases the necessity of lithotripsy.

TG13 indications and techniques for biliary drainage in acute cholangitis (with videos)

The Tokyo Guidelines of 2007 (TG07) described the techniques and recommendations of biliary decompression in patients with acute cholangitis. TG07 recommended that endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage should be selected as a first-choice therapy for acute cholangitis because it is associated with a low mortality rate and shorter duration of hospitalization. However, TG07 did not include the whole technique of standard endoscopic transpapillary biliary drainage, for example, biliary cannulation techniques including contrast medium-assisted cannulation, wire-guided cannulation, and treatment of duodenal major papilla using endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD). Furthermore, recently single- or double-balloon enteroscopy-assisted biliary drainage (BE-BD) and endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) have been reported as special techniques for biliary drainage. Nevertheless, the updated Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) recommends that endoscopic drainage should be first-choice treatment for biliary decompression in patients with non-surgically altered anatomy and suggests that the choice of cannulation technique or drainage method (endoscopic naso-biliary drainage and stenting) depends on the endoscopist's preference but EST should be selected rather than EPBD from the aspect of procedure-related complications. In terms of BE-BD and EUS-BD, although there are many reports on the their usefulness, they should be performed by skilled endoscopists in high-volume institutes, who are good at enteroscopy or echoendosonography, respectively, because procedures and devices are not yet established. Free full-text articles and a mobile application of TG13 are available via http://www.jshbps.jp/en/guideline/tg13.html.

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.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation alone is safe and effective for the treatment of difficult choledocholithiasis in cases of Billroth II gastrectomy: a single center experience

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment of difficult common bile duct (CBD) stones (diameter ≥ 10 mm, or four or more) is difficult in patients who have undergone Billroth II (B-II) gastrectomy. Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) can be particularly troublesome due to anatomical changes effected by the gastrectomy.

AIM

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with large-diameter dilation balloons in the treatment of difficult CBD stones in patients who have undergone B-II gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From June 2006 to April 2011, patients with difficult CBD stones and who had undergone B-II gastrectomy previously were included in this study. EPLBD was performed with a 10-18 mm balloon catheter. When selective cannulation through the sphincter was possible, EPLBD was performed without EST. EPLBD was otherwise performed after fistulotomy with needle knife.

RESULTS

A total of 40 patients (32 male) underwent EPLBD for the retrieval of CBD stones, and concurrent fistulotomy was performed in seven patients. The median diameter of CBD was 13 mm (range 10-20 mm) and the balloon was 12 mm (range 10-17 mm). CBD stones were successfully removed in all patients. In only three patients, repeated sessions of ERCP were required for complete removal of CBD stones. Mechanical lithotripsy was required in only one case. Acute complications from EPLBD included mild pancreatitis in two patients (5.0 %). Severe complications, including perforation and bleeding, were not observed. Late complications included stone recurrence in one patient (2.5 %) and cholecystitis in four patients (10.0 %).

CONCLUSIONS

In cases of B-II gastrectomy, EPLBD without EST is a safe and highly effective technique for the retrieval of difficult CBD stones. EPLBD should be considered as an alternative tool to conventional EST.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones

AIM

We recently reported that endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) might suppress biliary bacterial contamination better than endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in patients with small bile duct stones (diameter ≤8 mm). In the present study, we evaluated immediate and long-term outcomes of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation with regard to stone size.

METHODS

We allocated 474 patients alternately to the two procedures. The patients were classified according to stone diameter (≤8 mm or >8 mm) and outcomes (i.e. complete stone removal, early complications, and late complications) were compared. The predictive risk factors for late complications were also investigated.

RESULTS

In patients with small stones, complete stone removal rate and early complication rate were similar between the two procedures; the incidence of pancreatitis was higher after EPBD, although the difference was not significant. Late complication rate and stone recurrence rate were significantly lower after EPBD than after EST (5.3% vs 17.3%, P = 0.009; 4.4% vs 12.7%; P = 0.048, respectively). In patients with large stones who underwent EPBD complete stone removal rate and late complication rate were lower, but the incidence of pancreatitis was higher. However, these differences were not statistically significant. Multivariate analysis showed that the increased risk of bactobilia following EPBD for large stones or EST, and the gallbladder with stones in situ were independent risk factors for late complications.

CONCLUSIONS

EPBD produced significantly better long-term outcomes than EST in patients with small bile duct stones.

Endoscopic papillary balloon intermittent dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones

AIM: To compare the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic papillary balloon intermittent dilatation (EPBID) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of common bile duct stones.

METHODS: From March 2011 to May 2012, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was performed in 560 patients, 262 with common bile duct stones. A total of 206 patients with common bile duct stones were enrolled in the study and randomized to receive either EPBID with a 10-12 mm dilated balloon or EST (103 patients in each group). For both groups a conventional reticular basket or balloon was used to remove the stones. After the procedure, routine endoscopic nasobiliary drainage was performed.

RESULTS: First-time stone removal was successfully performed in 94 patients in the EPBID group (91.3%) and 75 patients in the EST group (72.8%). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of operation time between the two groups. The overall incidence of early complications in the EPBID and EST groups was 2.9% and 13.6%, respectively, with no deaths reported during the course of the study and follow-up. Multiple regression analysis showed that the success rate of stone removal was associated with stone removal method [odds ratio (OR): 5.35; 95%CI: 2.24-12.77; P = 0.00], the transverse diameter of the stone (OR: 2.63; 95%CI: 1.19-5.80; P = 0.02) and the presence or absence of diverticulum (OR: 2.35; 95%CI: 1.03-5.37; P = 0.04). Postoperative pancreatitis was associated with the EST method of stone removal (OR: 5.00; 95%CI: 1.23-20.28; P = 0.02) and whether or not pancreatography was performed (OR: 0.10; 95%CI: 0.03-0.35; P = 0.00).

CONCLUSION: The EPBID group had a higher success rate of stone removal with a lower incidence of pancreatitis compared with the EST group.

Ampulla dilation with different sized balloons to remove common bile duct stones

AIM: To assess the outcomes of ampulla dilation with different sized balloons to remove common bile duct (CBD) stones.

METHODS: Patients (n = 208) were divided into five groups based on the largest CBD stone size of < 5, 6-8, 8-12, 12-14, and > 14 mm. Patients underwent limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) alone or limited EST followed by endoscopic papillary balloon dilation with 8, 10, 12 and 14 mm balloons, such that the size of each balloon did not exceed the size of the CBD. Short- and long-term outcomes, such as post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis, perforation, bleeding, and pneumobilia were compared among the five groups.

RESULTS: The overall rate of successful stone removal in all groups was 100%, and all patients were cured. Eight (3.85%) patients had post-ERCP pancreatitis, none had perforations, and 6 (2.9%) had bleeding requiring transfusion. There were no significant differences in early complication rates among the five groups. We observed significant correlations between increased balloon size and the short- and long-term rates of post-ERCP pneumobilia. Post-ERCP pancreatitis and bleeding correlated significantly with age, with post-ERCP pancreatitis occurring more frequently in patients aged < 60 years, and bleeding occurring more frequently in patients aged > 70 years. We observed a significant correlation between patient age and the diameter of the largest CBD stone, with stones > 12 mm occurring more frequently in patients > 60 years old.

CONCLUSION: Choosing a balloon size based on the largest stone diameter is safe and effective for removing CBD stones. Balloon size should not exceed 15 mm.

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for removal of bile duct stones: evaluation of outcomes and complications in 298 patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is a therapeutic procedure for extraction of bile duct stones.

GOALS

To evaluate the therapeutic outcomes, postoperative complications, and associated risk factors of EPBD in patients with bile duct stones.

STUDY

A total of 298 patients with bile duct stones were treated with EPBD. Their immediate outcomes were assessed and they were followed up for late complications. The modified Cotton criteria were used to determine the incidence of post-EPBD pancreatitis.

RESULTS

Complete removal of bile duct stones was achieved in 273 patients (91.6%). Removal was successful in 94.6% of stones ≤ 1 cm and 82.9% of stones >1 cm (P=0.001). Thirty patients (10.1%) had acute pancreatitis after EPBD with bile duct stone extraction, including 20 women (P=0.044), 20 patients under 60 years old (P=0.003) and 19 who received contrast medium injection to the pancreas (P=0.016). Symptomatic bile duct stones recurred in 12 patients (4%) 1 to 65 months after EPBD. The duration of balloon dilation was >3 minutes in 11 of these 12 patients (P=0.025) and all recurrent stones were brown and black pigment stones.

CONCLUSIONS

EPBD is an effective and safe treatment for bile duct stone removal. Small bile duct stones (≤ 1 cm) can easily be extracted by EPBD. Contrast medium injection to the pancreas, female sex, and age under 60 years were significant risk factors for post-EPBD pancreatitis. Balloon dilatation duration >3 minutes was the only risk factor for recurrent symptomatic bile duct stones.

Balloon dilation with adequate duration is safer than sphincterotomy for extracting bile duct stones: a systematic review and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is the standard treatment for choledocholithiasis. Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) has a lower risk for bleeding than EST, but EPBD is reserved for patients with bleeding diathesis because some studies reported that it increases the risk for pancreatitis. A short dilation time (≤1 minute) is therefore recommended to reduce pancreatitis. However, there is evidence for an inverse relationship between EPBD duration and pancreatitis, prompting reevaluation of the optimal duration and relative safety of EPBD vs EST.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials to compare long EPBD (>1 minute), short EPBD (≤1 minute), and EST regarding pancreatitis and overall complications. In addition to pairwise meta-analyses, Bayesian network meta-analysis was undertaken to compare the 3 procedures together. Relation between duration and outcome was also analyzed by meta-regression.

RESULTS

Compared with EST, short EPBD had a higher risk for pancreatitis (odds ratio [OR] by traditional analysis, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-13.84 and OR by network meta-analysis, 4.14; 95% credible interval, 1.58-12.56), but long EPBD did not pose a higher risk than EST (1.14, 0.56-2.35 and 1.07, 0.38-2.76). Long EPBD had a lower overall rate of complications than EST (0.61, 0.36-1.04 and 0.54, 0.20-1.36). In network meta-analysis, probabilities of being the safest treatment for long EPBD/short EPBD/EST regarding pancreatitis and overall complications were 43.9%/0.2%/55.9% and 90.3%/1.3%/8.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Duration of EPBD is inversely associated with pancreatitis risk. Currently recommended ≤1-minute dilation actually increases pancreatitis. EPBD with adequate duration may be preferred over EST because of comparable pancreatitis but lower overall complication rates.

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for bile duct stones in patients on hemodialysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is a less hazardous alternative to endoscopic sphincterotomy for managing bile duct stones in patients with a coagulopathy. However, little information on EPBD is available for patients with bile duct stones who are undergoing hemodialysis (HD). We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EPBD for such patients.

PATIENTS

This was a retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data for 37consecutive patients with bile duct stones who were undergoing HD and who also underwent EPBD between December 1995 and April 2010 at four institutions in Tokyo, Japan. The main outcome was the safety and efficacy of EPBD for managing bile duct stones in patients undergoing HD.

RESULTS

The bile duct stones were completely removed in one session in 24 patients (64.8%). Overall success was achieved using EPBD alone in all patients. Complications occurred in five patients (13.5%), including two with hemorrhage (5.4%). No hemorrhage developed in any of the 33 patients who had no additional bleeding risk except for HD. Pancreatitis and perforation developed in two (5.4%) and one (2.7%) patient, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EPBD seems to be a safe and effective treatment to extract bile duct stones in patients undergoing HD. However, EPBD should be performed carefully in patients with additional bleeding risk factors, such as Child-Pugh class C liver cirrhosis and those taking anti-platelet agents at the time of EPBD.

Endoscopic extraction of large common bile duct stones: A review article

Since therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography replaced surgery as the first approach in cases of choledocolithiasis, a plethora of endoscopic techniques and devices appeared in order to facilitate rapid, safe and effective bile duct stones extraction. Nowadays, endoscopic sphincterotomy combined with balloon catheters and/or baskets is the routine endoscopic technique for stone extraction in the great majority of patients. Large common bile duct stones are treated conventionally with mechanical lithotripsy, while the most serious complication of the procedure is “basket and stone impaction” that is predominately resolved surgically. In cases of difficult, impacted, multiple or intrahepatic stones, more sophisticated procedures have been used. Electrohydraulic lithotripsy and laser lithotripsy are performed using conventional mother-baby scope systems, ultra-thin cholangioscopes, thin endoscopes and ultimately using the novel single use, single operator SpyGlass Direct Visualization System, in order to deliver intracorporeal shock wave energy to fragment the targeted stone, with very good outcomes. Recently, large balloon dilation after endoscopic sphincterotomy confirmed its effectiveness in the extraction of large stones in a plethora of trials. When compared with mechanical lithotripsy or with balloon dilation alone, it proved to be superior. Moreover, dilation is an ideal alternative in cases of altered anatomy where access to the papilla is problematic. Endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by large balloon dilation represents the onset of a new era in large bile duct stone extraction and the management of “impaction” because it seems that is an effective, inexpensive, less traumatic, safe and easy method that does not require sophisticated apparatus and can be performed widely by skillful endoscopists. When complete extraction of large stones is unsuccessful, the drainage of the common bile duct is mandatory either for bridging to the final therapy or as a curative therapy for very elderly patients with short life expectancy. Placing of more than one plastic endoprostheses is better while the administration of Ursodiol is ineffective. The great majority of patients with large stones can be treated endoscopically. In cases of unsuccessful stone extraction using balloons, baskets, mechanical lithotripsy, electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy and large balloon dilation, the patient should be referred for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy or a percutaneous approach and finally surgery.

[The effect of periampullary diverticulum on the outcome of bile duct stone treatment with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation]

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Periampullary diverticulum (PAD) causes difficulty in the extraction of common bile duct (CBD) stones with conventional endoscopic therapy. Our study was designed to evaluate the effect of PAD on endoscopic large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with/without limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) for CBD stone treatment.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed cases of 141 patients treated CBD stones by EPLBD with/without limited EST at Gachon Gil Medical Center from September 2008 to February 2010. PAD were classified into three groups according to the location of the papilla and diverticulum. Clinical parameters, endoscopic parameters, and procedure outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

PAD were identified in 46.1% (65/141), with 23 male (35.4%) and 42 female (64.6%) and a mean age of 72.9±11.1 years. Mean diameter of the stones was 14.8±6.0 mm and mean diameter of CBD was 21.6±7.7 mm. PAD group was significantly older than control group (72.9 vs. 68.6, p=0.043) and the incidence of large stone (≥15 mm) was higher in PAD group (60.0% vs. 42.1%, p=0.034). Success rate of complete removal of stones in the first session was 32/65 patients (49.2%) and overall successful complete stone removal rates was 63/65 (96.9%). There was no significant difference between the PAD and control groups in success rate. Major complications were similar between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

PAD is associated with an increased incidence of large bile duct stones and older age. PAD seems to not increase technical failure rate or complication risk on EPLBD with/without limited EST.

Current status of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for the treatment of bile duct stones

Background/purpose

While endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is performed worldwide for the removal of common bile duct stones, many biliary endoscopists hesitate to regard endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) as a standard procedure for treatment. Therefore, the aim of this review is to re-evaluate the status of EPBD for the treatment of common bile duct stones.

Results

A major benefit of EPBD is preservation of papillary function, which is not complete but may be greater than that after EST. The disadvantages of EPBD compared with EST are that EPBD is difficult to use for the removal of larger stones because of the smaller biliary opening, it requires more frequent use of mechanical lithotripsy, and it is associated with a higher incidence of pancreatitis, although the risks of bleeding and perforation are low. Since the biliary sphincter is easily dilated with a balloon catheter, EPBD may be effective for patients with anatomic anomalies, such as after gastric bypass surgery or in the presence of a periampullary diverticulum. No standard procedure exists to reduce the risk of acute pancreatitis with EPBD.

Conclusion

EPBD is feasible, however, we must pursue less hazardous techniques of papillary balloon dilation. Furthermore, we must understand the benefits and limitations of EPBD and determine whether it could provide clinical benefits for long-term complications.

Effects of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation and endoscopic sphincterotomy on bacterial contamination of the biliary tract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Although endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) has appeared with the expectation of better preserving sphincter of Oddi function than endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), whether it can more effectively prevent bacterial contamination of the biliary tract than EST is controversial. To address this issue, we investigated the bacterial flora in the bile after the two procedures.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighty-six patients were alternately allocated to EPBD or EST. Blood-liver function tests, ultrasonography, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were performed 6 months and 2 years after EPBD or EST, and the bile was sampled for bacterial culture during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Bactobilia and late complications were prospectively compared between the two procedures.

RESULTS

Overall, no significant difference was found in the incidence of bactobilia between EPBD and EST at the two examination points. Limiting stone diameter to 8 mm or less, there was a trend toward lower rate of bactobilia in the EPBD group 2 years later although the statistical significance disappeared after correction for multiple comparisons. The absence rate of late complications after EPBD was higher than that after EST, but there was no significant difference between the two procedures, both for the overall patients and for the patients with small stones.

CONCLUSION

EPBD has a possibility of suppressing bacterial contamination of the biliary tract compared with EST in patients with small stones. A large, long-term follow-up, randomized, controlled trial is necessary to clarify whether this benefit of EPBD reduces late complications.

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation alone without sphincterotomy for the treatment of large common bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Lethal pancreatitis has been reported after treatment for common bile duct stones using small endoscopic papillary balloon dilation.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the safety and efficacy of using large balloon dilation alone without the use of sphincterotomy for the treatment of large common bile duct stones in Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital. Success rate of stone clearance, procedure-related adverse events and incidents, frequency of mechanical lithotripsy use, and recurrent stones were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 247 patients were reviewed in the current study. The mean age of the patients was 71.2 years. Most of them had comorbidities. Mean stone size was 16.4 mm. Among the patients, 132 (53.4%) had an intact gallbladder and 121 (49%) had a juxtapapillary diverticulum. The mean size of dilating balloon used was 13.2 mm. The mean duration of the dilating procedure was 4.7 min. There were 39 (15.8%) patients required the help of mechanical lithotripsy while retrieving the stones. The final success rate of complete retrieval of stones was 92.7%. The rate of pancreatic duct enhancement was 26.7% (66/247). There were 3 (1.2%) adverse events and 6 (2.4%) intra-procedure bleeding incidents. All patients recovered completely after conservative and endoscopic treatment respectively, and no procedure-related mortality was noted. 172 patients had a follow-up duration of more than 6 months and among these, 25 patients had recurrent common bile duct stones. It was significantly correlated to the common bile duct size (p = 0.036)

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation alone is simple, safe, and effective in dealing with large common bile duct stones in relatively aged and debilitated patients.

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation for removal of choledocholithiasis: indications, advantages, complications, and long-term follow-up results

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) is an alternative method of endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST). Although concerns regarding post-procedure pancreatitis have been expressed, EPBD has come to be recognized as an effective and safe method for stone removal in specific cases. To analyze the proper indications, ideal methods, complications, and long-term follow-up results for EPBD, we reviewed articles about EPBD located through a search of the PubMed data base. We analyzed the ballooning methods, indications, results and complications of EPBD among the articles found and compared the results with those of EST. We considered the authors' own clinical experience and knowledge in developing recommendations for EPBD. EPBD showed similar efficacy and safety for the removal of choledocholithiasis to that of EST. Although large or multiple stones were difficult to remove by EPBD, it was safer and easier to apply in patients with coagulopathy or abnormal anatomy. To prevent severe pancreatitis, excessive ballooning and impractical cannulation should be avoided, and precut sphincterotomy or adjuvant prophylaxis should be considered. Due to its preservation of the sphincter of Oddi, EPBD is expected to have fewer long-term complications, such as stone recurrence, cholangitis and cholecystitis. In conclusion, EPBD appears to be safe and effective for the treatment of choledocholithiasis with proper selection of ballooning methods and patients.

Safety and long-term outcomes of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation in children with bile duct stones

BACKGROUND

Although experience with diagnostic and therapeutic ERCP in children is growing, little is known about the safety and technical outcomes of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) in pediatric patients with bile duct stones (BDSs).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and long-term outcomes of EPBD in pediatric patients with BDSs.

DESIGN

Case study.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

This study involved 5 children who had BDSs combined with gallstones who underwent EPBD.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Successful EPBD, successful stone removal, procedure-related complications, and long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

ERCP was successful in all cases, with cannulation and subsequent EPBD. Stone removal was performed in 1 session in all patients. No EPBD-related complications were observed in any patient. After EPBD, 1 patient subsequently underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy for gallstones. The remaining 4 were followed without surgery. In 2 patients, gallstones were spontaneously passed from the bile duct into the duodenum. During the follow-up period, over a mean of 7.1 years (range 3.7-9.3 years), no recurrence of BDSs was observed in any patient.

LIMITATIONS

Small number of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Although BDSs are rare in pediatric patients, EPBD may be a safe and effective technique for the management of such stones in some children.

New method of covered wallstents for distal malignant biliary obstruction to reduce early stent-related complications based on characteristics

AIM

We previously reported a low occlusion rate with covered Wallstents for malignant biliary obstruction, but stent-related complications other than occlusion posed a problem. A modified covered Wallstent insertion method based on stent characteristics was evaluated to reduce stent-related complications.

METHODS

A total of 138 patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction received covered Wallstent placement. From October 2001 to October 2003, 69 patients received covered Wallstent placement (Group 1). Thereafter, we modified our stent insertion method and 69 patients received stent placement using this modified method from November 2003 to January 2007 (Group 2). The modified insertion method consists of endoscopic sphincterotomy carried out in patients without pancreatic duct invasion and longer stent placement with the center of the stent located in the center of the biliary stricture to prevent pancreatitis, kinking of the bile duct, and stent dislocation. A comparative analysis was carried out using prospectively collected data in these two cohorts.

RESULTS

Tumor ingrowth was not observed, and stent occlusion rate was 18.8% in Group 1 and 23.2% in Group 2. The overall rates of stent-related complications did not differ (39.1% in Group 1 and 30.4% in Group 2), but stent-related complications within 3months decreased from 22 episodes in Group 1 to 13 episodes in Group 2. Median event-free survival was prolonged by modified stent insertion method (125days in Group 1 and 268days in Group 2, P=0.020), although cumulative survival and stent patency were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Our modified method of covered Wallstent placement showed improved event-free survival.

The increase in balloon size to over 15 mm does not affect the development of pancreatitis after endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation for bile duct stone removal

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation (EPLBD) after endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) has recently become widely used for common bile duct (CBD) stone removal, but many clinicians remain concerned about post-procedural pancreatitis with increasing the balloon size to over 15 mm.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of EPLBD with a relatively large balloon (15-20 mm) after EST and to evaluate the factors related to post-EPLBD pancreatitis.

METHODS

A retrospective review was undertaken of the endoscopic database of 101 patients with CBD stones who underwent EPLBD using a larger balloon size of over 15 mm (15-20 mm). Clinical parameters, endoscopic data, and outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age of the subjects was 69 years. All patients had a dilated CBD of over 11 mm (mean = 22.6 mm). The mean size of balloon used in EPLBD was 17.1 ± 1.9 mm (range 15-20 mm). Mechanical lithotripsy was required in seven patients (6.9%). The rate of complete stone removal in the first session was 92.1%. Post-procedural pancreatitis developed in five cases (5.4%), but none were graded as severe. The smaller dilatation of the CBD, longer cannulation time, and longer time for stone removal were associated with post-procedural pancreatitis, but larger size of balloon did not affect the development of post-EPLBD pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

EPLBD with a large balloon of over 15 mm with EST is an effective and safe procedure with a very low probability of severe post-procedural pancreatitis. Post-EPLBD pancreatitis was not associated with larger balloon size, but was associated with longer procedure time and smaller dilatation of the CBD.