Literature DB >> 15641153

Outcome of simple use of mechanical lithotripsy of difficult common bile duct stones.

Wen-Hsiung Chang1, Cheng-Hsin Chu, Tsang-En Wang, Ming-Jen Chen, Ching-Chung Lin.   

Abstract

AIM: The usual bile duct stone may be removed by means of Dormia basket or balloon catheter, and results are quite good. However, the degree of difficulty is increased when stones are larger. Studies on the subject reported many cases where mechanical lithotripsy is combined with a second technique, e.g. electrohydraulic lithotripsy (EHL), where stones are crushed using baby-mother scope electric shock. The extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (ESWL) or laser lithotripsy also yields an excellent success rate of greater than 90%. However, the equipment for these techniques are very expensive; hence we opted for the simple mechanical lithotripsy and evaluated its performance.
METHODS: During the period from August 1996 to December 2002, Mackay Memorial Hospital treated 304 patients suffering from difficult bile duct stones (stone >1.5 cm or stones that could not be removed by the ordinary Dormia basket or balloon catheter). These patients underwent endoscopic papillotomy (EPT) procedure, and stones were removed by means of the Olympus BML-4Q lithotripsy. A follow-up was conducted on the post-treatment conditions and complications of the patients.
RESULTS: Out of the 304 patients, bile duct stones were successfully removed from 272 patients, a success rate of about 90%. The procedure failed in 32 patients, for whom surgery was needed. Out of the 272 successfully treated patients, 8 developed cholangitis, 21 developed pancreatitis, and 10 patients had delayed bleeding, and no patient died. Among these 272 successful removal cases, successful bile duct stone removal was achieved after the first lithotripsy in 211 patients, whereas 61 patients underwent multiple sessions of lithotripsy. As for the 61 patients that underwent multiple sessions of mechanical lithotripsy, 6 (9.8%) had post-procedure cholangitis, 12 (19.6%) had pancreatitis, and 9 patients (14.7%) had delayed bleeding. Compared with the 211 patients undergoing a single session of mechanical lithotripsy, 3 (1.4%) had cholangitis, 1 (0.4%) had delayed bleeding, and 7 patients (3.3%) had pancreatitis. Statistical deviation was present in post-procedure cholangitis, delayed bleeding, and pancreatitis of both groups.
CONCLUSION: Mechanical bile stone lithotripsy on difficult bile duct stones could produce around 90% successful rate. Moreover, complications are minimal. This finding further confirms the significance of mechanical lithotripsy in the treatment of patients with difficult bile duct stones.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15641153      PMCID: PMC4250818          DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v11.i4.593

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1007-9327            Impact factor:   5.742


  39 in total

1.  Endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones in patients 90 years of age and older.

Authors:  M Sugiyama; Y Atomi
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Risk factors for recurrence of primary bile duct stones after endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy.

Authors:  D I Kim; M H Kim; S K Lee; D W Seo; W B Choi; S S Lee; H J Park; Y H Joo; K S Yoo; H J Kim; Y I Min; W B Chol
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis: a prospective single-center study on the short-term and long-term treatment results in 483 patients.

Authors:  S Wojtun; J Gil; W Gietka; M Gil
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 10.093

4.  Randomized study of intracorporeal laser lithotripsy versus extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy for difficult bile duct stones.

Authors:  H Neuhaus; C Zillinger; P Born; R Ott; H Allescher; T Rösch; M Classen
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Do patients with recurrent choledocholithiasis after endoscopic sphincterotomy benefit from regular follow-up?

Authors:  Kwok-Hung Lai; Gin-Ho Lo; Chiun-Ku Lin; Ping-I Hsu; Hoi-Hung Chan; Jin-Shiung Cheng; E-Ming Wang
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Changes in biliary bacteria after endoscopic cholangiography and sphincterotomy.

Authors:  J Sand; I Airo; K M Hiltunen; J Mattila; I Nordback
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 0.688

7.  Endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy of difficult common bile duct stones.

Authors:  L Cipolletta; G Costamagna; M A Bianco; G Rotondano; R Piscopo; M Mutignani; R Marmo
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Mechanical lithotripsy of large common bile duct stones using a basket.

Authors:  S C Chung; J W Leung; H T Leong; A K Li
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1991-12       Impact factor: 6.939

9.  Treatment of difficult bile duct stones using mechanical, electrohydraulic and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy.

Authors:  K F Binmoeller; M Brückner; F Thonke; N Soehendra
Journal:  Endoscopy       Date:  1993-03       Impact factor: 10.093

10.  Prognostic factors for recurrence of bile duct stones after endoscopic treatment by sphincter dilation.

Authors:  Norio Ueno; Yoshifumi Ozawa; Toshiyuki Aizawa
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 9.427

View more
  33 in total

1.  How Should Biliary Stones be Managed?

Authors:  Chan Sup Shim
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 4.519

2.  Long-term follow-up after peroral cholangioscopy-directed lithotripsy in patients with difficult bile duct stones, including Mirizzi syndrome: an analysis of risk factors predicting stone recurrence.

Authors:  Toshio Tsuyuguchi; Yuji Sakai; Harutoshi Sugiyama; Takeshi Ishihara; Osamu Yokosuka
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Can a small endoscopic sphincterotomy plus a large-balloon dilation reduce the use of mechanical lithotripsy in patients with large bile duct stones?

Authors:  Tae Hyeon Kim; Hyo Jeong Oh; Jun Young Lee; Young Woo Sohn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-04-30       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for removal of bile duct stones.

Authors:  Yuji Sakai; Toshio Tsuyuguchi; Yoshiaki Kawaguchi; Nobuto Hirata; So Nakaji; Katsuya Kitamura; Shigeru Mikami; Tatsuya Fujimoto; Masashi Ijima; Eishin Kurihara; Shuhei Oana; Takayoshi Nishino; Ryo Tamura; Dai Sakamoto; Masato Nakamura; Takao Nishikawa; Harutoshi Sugiyama; Hitoshi Yoshida; Tetsuya Mine; Osamu Yokosuka
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Safely stretching our options for removing large CBD stones.

Authors:  R Daniel Lawson; Thomas Savides
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 6.  Endoscopic Papillary Large Balloon Dilation Versus Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Treatment of Bile Duct Stones.

Authors:  Abdul Haseeb; Martin L Freeman
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-06

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

Authors:  Gerasimos Stefanidis; Christos Christodoulou; Spilios Manolakopoulos; Ram Chuttani
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-05-16

Review 8.  Endoscopic Management of Difficult Bile Duct Stones.

Authors:  Murad Aburajab; Kulwinder Dua
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2018-03-23

Review 9.  Endoscopic management of biliary stone disease.

Authors:  P Wilson; Gjm Webster
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-02-10

10.  Surgical treatment of incarcerated calculi via laparoscopic bile duct exploration using laparotomy biliary lithotomy forceps.

Authors:  H Jiang; S Y Wang; X L Jin; J C Jin; H B Gu; F M Zhang
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 2.447

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.