Todd H Baron1, Gavin C Harewood. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Medical Center, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect of endoscopic balloon dilation (EPBD) of the papilla with that of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of patients with common bile duct stones. METHODS: Searches of computerized bibliographic and scientific citations, and review of citations in relevant primary articles. Eight fully published prospective, randomized trials in English that compared EPBD with EST for the removal of common bile duct stones were subjected to metaanalysis. RESULTS: EPBD compared with EST resulted in similar outcomes with regards to overall successful stone removal (94.3% vs 96.5%) and overall complications (10.5% vs 10.3%). Bleeding occurred less frequently with EPBD (0% vs 2.0%, p = 0.001). Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred more commonly in the EPBD group (7.4% vs 4.3%, p = 0.05). No significant differences were seen in the rates of perforation or infection. Patients undergoing EPBD were more likely to require mechanical lithotripsy for stone extraction (20.9% vs 14.8%, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of lower rates of bleeding, EPBD should be the preferred strategy over EST for endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones in patients with coagulopathy. Although EPBD is theoretically attractive for use in young patients for biliary sphincter preservation, the rate of pancreatitis is higher with EPBD and cannot be routinely recommended at this time. Copyright 2004 American College of Gastroenterology
OBJECTIVES: To compare the effect of endoscopic balloon dilation (EPBD) of the papilla with that of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EST) in the treatment of patients with common bile duct stones. METHODS: Searches of computerized bibliographic and scientific citations, and review of citations in relevant primary articles. Eight fully published prospective, randomized trials in English that compared EPBD with EST for the removal of common bile duct stones were subjected to metaanalysis. RESULTS: EPBD compared with EST resulted in similar outcomes with regards to overall successful stone removal (94.3% vs 96.5%) and overall complications (10.5% vs 10.3%). Bleeding occurred less frequently with EPBD (0% vs 2.0%, p = 0.001). Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred more commonly in the EPBD group (7.4% vs 4.3%, p = 0.05). No significant differences were seen in the rates of perforation or infection. Patients undergoing EPBD were more likely to require mechanical lithotripsy for stone extraction (20.9% vs 14.8%, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of lower rates of bleeding, EPBD should be the preferred strategy over EST for endoscopic removal of common bile duct stones in patients with coagulopathy. Although EPBD is theoretically attractive for use in young patients for biliary sphincter preservation, the rate of pancreatitis is higher with EPBD and cannot be routinely recommended at this time. Copyright 2004 American College of Gastroenterology
Authors: Gaetano La Greca; Michele Di Blasi; Francesco Barbagallo; Manuela Di Stefano; Saverio Latteri; Domenico Russello Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-03-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Soo Jung Park; Jin Hong Kim; Jae Chul Hwang; Ho Gak Kim; Don Haeng Lee; Seok Jeong; Sang-Woo Cha; Young Deok Cho; Hong Ja Kim; Jong Hyeok Kim; Jong Ho Moon; Sang-Heum Park; Takao Itoi; Hiroyuki Isayama; Hirofumi Kogure; Se Joon Lee; Kyo Tae Jung; Hye Sun Lee; Todd H Baron; Dong Ki Lee Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2012-12-08 Impact factor: 3.199