Brief Article
Copyright ©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Apr 21, 2013; 19(15): 2425-2432
Published online Apr 21, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i15.2425
Endoscopic papillary balloon intermittent dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones
Bai-Qing Fu, Ya-Ping Xu, Li-Sheng Tao, Jun Yao, Chun-Suo Zhou
Bai-Qing Fu, Ya-Ping Xu, Li-Sheng Tao, Jun Yao, Chun-Suo Zhou, Department of Gastroenterology, the People’s Hospital, Affiliated to Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212002, Jiangsu Province, China
Author contributions: Xu YP designed the research; Yao J and Zhou CS performed the research; Tao LS analyzed the data; Fu BQ wrote the paper.
Correspondence to: Ya-Ping Xu, Chief Physician, Department of Gastroenterology, the People’s Hospital, Affiliated to Jiangsu University, 8 Dianli Road, Zhenjiang 212002, Jiangsu Province, China. yapingxu@yeah.net
Telephone: +86-511-88915641 Fax: +86-511-85234387
Received: November 6, 2012
Revised: January 25, 2013
Accepted: February 5, 2013
Published online: April 21, 2013
Processing time: 164 Days and 11.1 Hours
Abstract

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.

Keywords: Endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation; Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; Endoscopic sphincterotomy; Common bile duct stones; Success rate

Core tip: Previous studies have shown that endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation with a 8 mm dilated balloon and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) have similar success rates in terms of stone removal. The incidence of postoperative pancreatitis with these procedures is high, so its application is limited. We compared the safety and efficacy of endoscopic papillary balloon intermittent dilatation, with an increase in dilated balloon diameter (10-12 mm) and extended dilatation time, and EST in the treatment of common bile duct stones (transverse diameter ≤ 12 mm).