[Recurrent common bile duct stone and endoscopic treatment after endoscopic papillary large balloon dilatation with minor endoscopic sphincterotomy]

Analysis of symptomatic recurrences of common bile ducts stones after endoscopic removal: Factors related to early or multiple recurrences

Early or multiple recurrences of symptomatic common bile duct (CBD) stones are troublesome late complications after endoscopic stone removal. We aimed to determine the factors related to early or multiple recurrences of CBD stones.We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent endoscopic CBD stone extraction in a single institute between January 2006 and December 2015. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the number and interval of CBD stone recurrences: single versus multiple (≥2) and early (<1.5 years) versus late (≥1.5 years) recurrence.After exclusion, 78 patients were enrolled and followed up for a median of 1974 (IQR: 938-3239) days. Twenty-seven (34.6%) patients experienced multiple recurrences (≥2 times), and 26 (33.3%) patients experienced early first recurrence (<1.5 years). In the multivariate analysis, CBD angulation was independently related to multiple CBD stone recurrence (OR: 4.689, P = .016), and endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation was independently related to late first CBD stone recurrence (OR: 3.783, P = .025). The mean CBD angles were more angulated with increasing instances of recurrence (0, 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 times) with corresponding values of 150.3°, 148.2°, 143.6°, 142.2°, and 126.7°, respectively (P = .011). The period between the initial treatment and first recurrence was significantly longer than the period between the first and second recurrence (P = .048).In conclusion, greater CBD angulation is associated with the increased number of CBD stone recurrence, and EPLBD delays the recurrence of CBD stones after endoscopic CBD stone removal.

Impact of endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation on sphincter of Oddi function: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (≤8 mm in diameter) preserves sphincter of Oddi (SO) function. However, it is still unknown whether papillary function is preserved after endoscopic papillary large-balloon dilation (EPLBD, ≥12 mm in diameter). We investigated SO function after EPLBD with or without endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) by endoscopic manometry, up to 1 year after the procedure.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized study involving patients with bile duct stones ≥12 mm. Eighty-six patients who met the inclusion criteria were assigned randomly to either EPLBD alone or EST with EPLBD, and endoscopic manometric studies were performed. The primary outcome was comparison of the manometric data between the 2 groups and within each group both 1 week and 1 year after the procedure.

RESULTS

One week after EPLBD alone and EST with EPLBD, the basal pressure of SO dropped from 30.4 (8.2) to 6.4 (8.4) mm Hg (P < .001) and 29.5 (18.9) to 2.9 (3.6) mm Hg (P < .001), respectively. SO function was not recovered at 1 year; the manometric measurements were similar to those taken at the 1-week time point in both groups. Similar outcomes were obtained in patients with EPLBD alone compared with those with EST and EPLBD, including the initial stone clearance rate (95.2% vs 97.7%, P = .612), the frequency of mechanical lithotripsy (21.4% vs 13.6%), and overall adverse events (11.9% vs 13.6%, P = 1.0) including the rate of pancreatitis after the procedure (7.1% vs 11.4%, P = .714). During an overall median follow-up of 17.8 months, the recurrence rate of bile duct stones was 16.7% in patients who underwent EPLBD alone and 15.9% in patients who underwent EST with EPLBD (P = .924).

CONCLUSIONS

Both EPLBD alone and EST + EPLBD resulted in persistent and comparable loss of SO function after 1 year. EPLBD alone has similar efficacy and safety to those of EST with EPLBD with respect to removal of large stones.

Risk factors for postoperative recurrence of choledocholithiasis

AIM: To idenfiy the risk factors for postoperative recurrence of choledocholithiasis to guide the therapy of this disease.

METHODS: In this retrospective study, 523 patients with choledocholithiasis who were admitted to our department from January 2002 to January 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. Factors that may influence postoperative choledocholithiasis recurrence were analyzed using the Cox's proportional hazards regression model.

RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of choledocholithiasis recurrence was 6.5% at 3 years, 9.5% at 5 years and 15.1% at 10 years after surgery. The postoperative recurrence did not significantly relate to the patient's gender, age, the number of stones, and the presence of cholecystolithiasis or not. The recurrence risk in cases with juxtapapillary duodenal diverticulum was 1.37 times as much as those without diverticulum (95%CI: 1.02-4.04, P < 0.05); the recurrence risk of cases with the common bile duct ≥ 15 mm in diameter was 2.16 times of those with a common bile duct diameter < 15 mm (95%CI: 1.12-5.08, P < 0.01). The recurrence risk in patients receiving endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) was 2.2 times than those receiving traditional operations (95%CI: 1.13-6.87, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Juxtapapillary duodenal diverticulum, common bile duct > 15 mm in diameter and EST could significantly increase the risk of postoperative choledocholithiasis recurrence.

Which is the better treatment for the removal of large biliary stones? Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy

Background/Aims

We evaluated the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) for large common bile duct (CBD) stone removal compared with endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST).

Methods

A total of 1,580 patients who underwent endoscopic CBD stone extraction between January 2001 and July 2010 were reviewed. The following inclusion criteria were applied: choledocholithiasis treated by EPLBD with minor EST or EST with mechanical lithotripsy; and follow-up >9 months after treatment.

Results

Forty-nine patients with EPLBD and 41 with EST were compared. There was no significant difference in the complication rates and stone recurrence rates between the two groups. However, significantly more endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) sessions were required in the EST group to achieve the complete removal of stones (1.7 times vs 1.3 times; p=0.03). The mean cost required for complete stone removal per patient was significantly higher in the EST group compared to the EPLBD group (USD $1,644 vs $1,225, respectively; p=0.04). Dilated CBD was the only significant factor associated with recurrent biliary stones (relative risk, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.17; p=0.02).

Conclusions

EPLBD is the better treatment (compared to EST) for removing large CBD stones because EPLBD requires fewer ERCP sessions and is less expensive.

Chinese medicinal herbs for cholelithiasis

BACKGROUND

Cholelithiasis is a common disease of the biliary tract. Chinese medicinal herbs are being used widely as an alternative treatment in people with cholelithiasis, but their beneficial or harmful effects have not been assessed systematically.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of Chinese medicinal herbs in people with cholelithiasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted searches in the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, Chinese Medicine Conference Disc, and Chinese Bio-Medicine Disc to January 2013. We handsearched four Chinese journals. No language or year of publication restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials studying Chinese medicinal herbs for treatment of cholelithiasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (SJ, TG) independently extracted data. For dichotomous data, we estimated the risk ratio (RR), and for continuous data, we calculated the mean difference. We also calculated 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven randomised trials with 1205 participants with asymptomatic or mild-to-moderate cholelithiasis were included. None of the randomised clinical trials compared a single Chinese medicinal herb with a Western medicine or with surgery. No placebo-controlled trials were identified. In the trials comparing one Chinese herbal medicine (Gandanxiaoshi tablet) versus another (Aihuodantong tablet), there was no significant difference in the improvement of upper abdominal pain after the end of treatment (RR 1.21; 95% CI 0.71 to 2.05), and the heterogeneity among trials was not substantial. No other outcomes could be assessed. The remaining trials of Chinese medicinal herbs (Qingdan capsule, Danshu capsule, Paishi capsule, Rongdanpaishi capsule), did not offer specific data on symptoms, signs, or change in gallstones that would permit assessment of significant differences in curative effects between the treatment and control groups. No serious adverse events were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review reveals no strong evidence that the analysed Chinese medicinal herbs have any beneficial effects on asymptomatic or mild-to-moderate cholelithiasis. Definitive conclusions will require much better designed randomised trials to reduce risk of bias and allow detailed assessment of clinical outcomes.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy plus balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for choledocholithiasis: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) alone and EST combined with balloon dilation (ESBD) are important endoscopic techniques for stone extraction. We were to conduct a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of ESBD and EST.

METHODS

Meta-analysis was performed respectively on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies comparing the efficacy and safety of ESBD and EST.

RESULTS

The results of three RCTs showed that stone removal in first session (relative risk [RR] 1.01, 0.92-1.11, P=0.85) and the utility of endoscopic mechanical lithotripsy (EML) (RR 0.78, 0.49-1.23, P=0.29) were equivalent between ESBD and EST. ESBD has equivalent complications (RR 0.61, 0.17-2.25, P=0.46) and post-ERCP pancreatitis (Peto odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 0.37-3.35, P=0.86), but less bleeding (Peto OR 0.10, 0.03-0.30, P<0.0001). The analysis of six retrospective studies suggested higher initial success in stone removal (RR 1.11, 1.02-1.20, P=0.01) and less EML (RR 0.32, 0.22-0.46, P<0.00001) in ESBD group. Less complications (RR 0.60, 0.44-0.83, P=0.02) happened in ESBD group, but equivalent post-ERCP pancreatitis (Peto OR 0.65, 0.37-1.15, P=0.14) and bleeding (Peto OR 0.60, 0.29-1.26, P=0.18). For patients with stones ≥ 15 mm, ESBD required less EML (RR 0.35, 0.24-0.51, P<0.00001) and caused fewer complications (RR 0.67, 0.38-0.92, P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

ESBD is feasible for the treatment of choledocholithiasis without increased risk of complications, causing less bleeding. However, it warrants more clinical trials to compare the efficacy and safety of ESBD and EST.

Severe acute cholangitis after endoscopic sphincterotomy induced by barium examination: A case report

Endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) is considered as a possible etiological factor for severe cholangitis. We herein report a case of severe cholangitis after endoscopic sphincterotomy induced by barium examination. An adult male patient presented with epigastric pain was diagnosed as having choledocholithiasis by ultrasonography. EST was performed and the stone was completely cleaned. Barium examination was done 3 d after EST and severe cholangitis appeared 4 h later. The patient was recovered after treated with tienam for 4 d. Barium examination may induce severe cholangitis in patients after EST, although rare, barium examination should be chosen cautiously. Cautions should be also used when EST is performed in patients younger than 50 years to avoid the damage to the sphincter of Oddi.

Prospective comparative study of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of large bile duct stones in patients above 45 years of age

OBJECTIVE

Although endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) with limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) showed excellent outcomes for treatment of large bile duct stones, hemorrhage and recurrence of stones are problematic complications. Recent studies suggest that EPLBD alone is safe and effective for removal of large bile duct stones. This study aimed to determine the therapeutic outcomes and safety of EPLBD, compared with ES, for removal of large bile duct stones.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighty-three patients above 45 years of age with bile duct stones >1 cm in diameter were randomized to EPLBD and ES groups for removal of common bile duct stones from September 2010 to August 2011. Prophylactic gabexate mesilate was given to all patients.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were not significantly different, except diabetes and gallbladder stones between the EPLBD group (n = 40) and ES group (n = 43). The overall complete stone removal rate in each group was 97.5% (39/40) and 95.3% (41/43), respectively (p = 0.600). Requirement of mechanical lithotripsy was not significantly different between the EPLBD and ES group (10% vs. 21%, p = 0.171). Complete ductal clearance in one session was achieved in 82.4% and 81.4% of cases in each group, respectively (p = 0.577). There were no differences in complication rates between the EPLBD and ES group; pancreatitis, 5.0% vs. 7.0%; hemorrhage, 10.0% vs. 16.3%; acute cholangitis, 5.0% vs. 2.3%, and perforation, 2.5% vs. 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The therapeutic outcomes and complications of EPLBD for removal of large bile duct stones are comparable to those of ES.