Copyright
©2013 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Dec 7, 2013; 19(45): 8258-8268
Published online Dec 7, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i45.8258
Published online Dec 7, 2013. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i45.8258
Table 1 Comparison of endoscopic balloon dilation methods according to balloon diameter
Small-balloon EPBD | Large-balloon EPBD | |
Balloon diameter used | ≤ 10 mm (6-10 mm) | ≥ 12 mm (12-20 mm) |
Target stone | Small to moderate sized stones in no or minimally dilated CBD | Large stones in considerably dilated CBD |
Endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy | Not performed | Mostly, in conjunction with a small EST1 |
Table 2 Techniques and outcomes of small balloon-endoscopic papillary balloon dilation in randomized controlled trials
Ref. | Patients (n) | Balloon diameter (mm) | Maximum pressure of inflation (atm) | Time of inflation (s) | duration of maximal dilation (s) | Number of ballooning | Overall success rate | Post-EPBD pancreatitis | Bleeding | Perforation | Infection | Death (n) |
Arnold et al[7] | 30 | 8 | 10 | 60 | 2 | 77% | 20% | 0% | 0% | 10% | 0 | |
Bergman et al[49] | 101 | 8 | Waist | 60-120 | 45-60 | 1 | 89% | 7% | 0% | 2% | 4% | 1 for perforation |
DiSario et al[8] | 117 | 8 or less | 60 | 1 | 97.4% | 15.4% | 10.5% | 0% | 1% | 2 for pancreatitis | ||
Fujita et al[2] | 138 | 4-8 | Waist | 180 | 15 | 1 | 99% | 10.8% | 0% | 0% | 2.9% | 0 |
Lin et al[53] | 51 | 8-12 | 8-12 | 120/300 | 1 | 94.1% | 0% | 2% | 0% | 0% | 0 | |
Natsui et al[58] | 41 | 8 | 3 | 120 | 1 | 93% | 5% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0 | |
Ochi et al[11] | 51 | 8 | 60-80 mmHg | 60 | 3 | 93% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 2% | 0 | |
Tanaka et al[59] | 16 | 8 | 8 | 120 | 1 | 100% | 19% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0 | |
Vlavianos et al[60] | 103 | 10 | 12 | 30 or more | Repeated until satisfaction | 87.4% | 4.8% | 0% | 0% | 1.9% | 0 | |
Yasuda et al[44] | 35 | 8 | 6 | 60 | 2 | 100% | 5.7% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Table 3 Techniques and outcomes of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation in various studies
Ref. | Patients (n) | Extent of EST | Balloon diameter (mm) | duration of balloon dilation (s) | Overall success rate | Use of ML | Post-EPBD pancreatitis | Bleeding | Perforation | Infection | Death (n) |
Ersoz et al[9] | 58 | Full | 12-20 | 20-45 | 100% | 6.9% | 3% | 9% | 0% | 3% | 0 |
Bang et al[21] | 22 | small | 10-15 | 40 | 100% | 9.1% | 4.5% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Heo et al[28] | 100 | small | 12-20 | 60 | 97% | 8% | 4% | 0% | 0% | 1% | 0 |
García-Cano et al[35] | 30 | Variable | 10-18 | 60 | 94.5% | 10% | 10% | 0% | 3.3% | 0 | |
Stefanidis et al[30] | 44 | full | 15-20 | 10-12 | 97.7% | 0% | 2.2% | 2.2% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Attasaranya et al[20] | 103 | Full | 12-18 | 95% | 27.2% | 0% | 2% | 1% | 0% | 0 | |
Kochhar et al[18] | 74 | small | 10-18 | 60 | 91.9% | 2.7% | 2.7% | 8.1% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Lee et al[14] | 55 | small | 15-20 | 30-60 | 100% | 5.5% | 0% | 3.6% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Misra et al[22] | 50 | Full | 15-20 | 30-45 | 100% | 10% | 8% | 6% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Minami et al[61] | 88 | small | 20 | 98.9% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 0% | 1% | 0 | |
Maydeo et al[23] | 60 | Full | 12-15 | 30 | 100% | 5% | 0% | 8.3% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Itoi et al[24] | 53 | Full | 15-20 | 15-30 | 100% | 5.6% | 1.9% | 0% | 0% | 1.9% | 0 |
Park et al[50] | 946 | Variable | 12-20 | 30-180 | 96.9% | 10.0% | 2.5% | 5.9% | 0.9% | 0.6% | 4 (1 for bleeding, 3 for perforation) |
Jeong et al[16] | 38 | Without EST | 15-18 | 10-60 | 97.4% | 21.1% | 2.6% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0 |
Table 4 Indications for endoscopic balloon dilation according to balloon diameter
Small-balloon EPBD | Large-balloon EPBD | |
Absolute indication | Patients with coagulopathy and need for anticoagulation to avoid sphincterotomy-induced bleeding | No indication |
Relative indication | Patients with anatomical abnormalities including gastric bypass surgery (Billroth II gastrectomy) or periampullary diverticulum | Patients with altered anatomy, such as gastric bypass surgery (Billroth II gastrectomy), periampullary diverticulum and prior biliary sphincterotomy |
Possible indication | To preserve SO functions | To reduce the use of ML for removal of large CBD stonesTo avoid full EST-induced bleeding |
Table 5 Tips for avoiding severe complications of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation
EPBD | EPLBD |
1. A balloon smaller than the diameter of the CBD is recommended to reduce damage to the SO and pancreatic orifice. 2. Graded balloon inflation may significantly reduce the incidence of post-EPBD pancreatitis. 3. If the balloon’s waist remains after 2–3 s at maximal balloon inflation, balloon dilation must be stopped immediately. | 1. Maximal inflated diameter of balloon should not exceed the CBD diameter. 2. A small extent of EST followed by large balloon dilation may be recommended, rather than large balloon dilation without EST. 3. The balloon should be inflated gradually to avoid perforation and bleeding. 4. If the balloon’s waist remains at 80% of the maximum inflation capacity, balloon dilation must be stopped immediately and change to alternative procedures, such as EST and ML. 5. Close monitoring must be necessary after EPLBD to detect the delayed complications, such as perforation and delayed bleeding. |
- Citation: Jeong SU, Moon SH, Kim MH. Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation: Revival of the old technique. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19(45): 8258-8268
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v19/i45/8258.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i45.8258