Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology
Home About us Instructions Submission Subscribe Advertise Contact Login    Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
Users Online: 809 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 26  |  Issue : 6  |  Page : 344-350

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of minimal endoscopic sphincterotomy followed by papillary balloon dilation for the removal of common bile duct stones


Department of Gastroenterology, Juntendo University Graduate School of Medicine, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Hiroyuki Isayama
2-1-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8421
Japan
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/sjg.SJG_162_20

Rights and Permissions

Background/Aim: A sufficiently open papilla is needed to remove common bile duct stones (CBDS) but endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) requires a high level of skill and is difficult with endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD). The main adverse event of EST is bleeding and perforation and that of EPBD is post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis. To reduce these adverse events we employed minimal EST followed by papillary dilation (ESBD), and retrospectively evaluated its efficacy and safety compared with EST. Patients and Methods: CBDS patients who underwent EST (n = 114) or ESBD (n = 321) at Juntendo University Hospital from January 2009 to December 2018 were consecutively enrolled, retrospectively. The exclusion criteria were large-balloon dilation (≥ 12 mm), large CBDS (>12 mm), and previous EST/EPBD. We compared the overall stone removal rate, incidence of adverse event, procedure time, number of ERCP procedures, and rate of mechanical lithotripsy (ML) between the two groups. Results: Complete stone removal was successful in both ESBD and EST group. However, the rate of multiple ERCP sessions was significantly lower (35.1% vs. 12.8%, P < 0.001), procedure time was shorter (31.6 vs. 25.8 min, P = 0.01), and rate of ML was lower (16.7% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.01) in ESBD group. Bleeding was significantly more frequent in the EST group (9.6% vs. 1.2%, P < 0.001), particularly acute bleeding (7.9% vs. 0.9%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: ESBD is more efficient and safer in the management of CBD stones than EST. A prospective randomized study comparing ESBD with EST is needed to establish this combination technique.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1071    
    Printed20    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded93    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal