AIM:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) + endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)vs isolated EST.METHODS:We conducted a retrospective single center study over two years,fro...AIM:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) + endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)vs isolated EST.METHODS:We conducted a retrospective single center study over two years,from February 2010 to January 2012.Patients with large(≥ 10 mm),single or multiple bile duct stones(BDS),submitted to endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography(ERCP) were included.Patients in Group A underwent papillary large balloon dilation after limited sphincterotomy(EST+EPLBD),using a through-the-scope balloon catheter gradually inflated to 12-18 mm according to the size of the largest stone and the maximal diameter of the distal bile duct on the cholangiogram.Patients in Group B(control group) underwent isolated sphincterotomy.Stones were removed using a retrieval balloon catheter and/or a dormia basket.When necessary,mechanical lithotripsy was performed.Complete clearance of the bile duct was documented with a balloon catheter cholangiogram at the end of the procedure.In case of residual lithiasis,a double pigtail plastic stent was placed and a second ERCP was planned within 4-6 wk.Some patients were sent for extracorporeal lithotripsy prior to subsequent ERCP.Outcomes of EST+EPLBD(Group A) vs isolated EST(Group B) were compared regarding efficacy(complete stone clearance,number of therapeutic sessions,mechanical and/or extracorporeal lithotripsy,biliary stent placement) and safety(frequency,type and grade of complications).Statistical analysis was performed using χ 2 or Fisher’s exact tests for the analysis of categorical parameters and Student’s t test for continuous variables.A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.RESULTS:One hundred and eleven patients were included,68(61.3%) in Group A and 43(38.7%) in Group B.The mean diameter of the stones was similar in the two groups(16.8 ± 4.4 and 16.0 ± 6.7 in Groups A and B,respectively).Forty-eight(70.6%) patients in Group A and 21(48.8%) in Group B had multiple BDS(P = 0.005).Overall,balloon dilation was performed up to 12 mm in 10(14.7%) patients,13.5 mm in 17(25.0%),15 mm in 33(48.6%),16.5 mm in 2(2.9%) and 18 mm in 6(8.8%) patients,taking into account the diameter of the largest stone and that of the bile duct.Complete stone clearance was achieved in sixty-five(95.6%) patients in Group A vs 30(69.8%) patients in Group B,and was attained within the first therapeutic session in 82.4% of patients in Group A vs 44.2% in Group B(P 【 0.001).Patients submitted to EST+EPLBD underwent fewer therapeutic sessions(1.1 ± 0.3 vs 1.8 ± 1.1,P 【 0.001),and fewer required mechanical(14.7% vs 37.2%,P = 0.007) or extracorporeal(0 vs 18.6%,P 【 0.001) lithotripsy,as well as biliary stenting(17.6% vs 60.5%,P 【 0.001).The rate of complications was not significantly different between the two groups.CONCLUSION:EST+EPLBD is a safe and effective technique for treatment of difficult BDS,leading to high rates of complete stone clearance and reducing the need for lithotripsy and biliary stenting.展开更多
AIM:To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation after biliary sphincterotomy for difficult bile duct stones retrieval.METHODS:Retrospective review of consecutive patients submitted...AIM:To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation after biliary sphincterotomy for difficult bile duct stones retrieval.METHODS:Retrospective review of consecutive patients submitted to the technique during 18 mo.The main outcomes considered were:efficacy of the procedure(complete stone clearance;number of sessions;need of lithotripsy) and complications.RESULTS:A total of 30 patients with a mean age of 68 ± 10 years,23 female(77%) and 7 male(23%) were enrolled.In 10 patients,a single stone was found in the common bile duct(33%) and in 20 patients multiple stones(67%) were found.The median diameter of the stones was 17 mm(12-30 mm).Dilations were performed with progressive diameter Through-TheScope balloons(up to 12,15) or 18 mm.Complete retrieval of stones was achieved in a single session in 25 patients(84%) and in two sessions in 4 patients(13%).Failure occurred in 1 case(6%).Mechanical lithotripsywas performed in 6 cases(20%).No severe complications occurred.One patient(3%) had mild-grade post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) pancreatitis.CONCLUSION:Endoscopic balloon dilatation with a large balloon after endoscopic sphincterotomy is a safe and effective technique that could be considered an alternative choice in therapeutic ERCP.展开更多
AIM:To evaluate small bowel cleansing quality,diagnostic yield and transit time,comparing three cleansing protocols prior to capsule endoscopy.METHODS:Sixty patients were prospectively enrolled and randomized to one o...AIM:To evaluate small bowel cleansing quality,diagnostic yield and transit time,comparing three cleansing protocols prior to capsule endoscopy.METHODS:Sixty patients were prospectively enrolled and randomized to one of the following cleansing protocols:patients in Group A underwent a 24 h liquid diet and overnight fasting;patients in Group B followed protocol A and subsequently were administered 2 L of polyethylene glycol(PEG) the evening before the procedure;patients in Group C followed protocol B and were additionally administered 100 mg of simethicone 30 min prior to capsule ingestion.Small bowel cleansing was independently assessed by two experienced endoscopists and classified as poor,fair,good or excellent according to the proportion of small bowel mucosa under perfect conditions for visualization.When there was no agreement between the two endoscopists,the images were reviewed and discussed until a consensus was reached.The preparation was considered acceptable if > 50% or adequate if > 75% of the mucosa was in perfect cleansing condition.The amount of bubbles was assessed independently and it was considered significant if it prevented a correct interpretation of the images.Positive endoscopic findings,gastric emptying time(GET) and small bowel transit time(SBTT) were recorded for each examination.RESULTS:There was a trend favoring Group B in achieving an acceptable(including fair,good or excellent) level of cleansing(Group A:65%;Group B:83.3%;Group C:68.4%) [P = not significant(NS)] and favoring Group C in attaining an excellent level of cleansing(Group A:10%;Group B:16.7%;Group C:21.1%)(P = NS).The number of patients with an adequate cleansing of the small bowel,corresponding to an excellent or good classification,was 5(25%) in Group A,5(27.8%) in Group B and 4(21.1%) in Group C(P = 0.892).Conversely,7 patients(35%) in Group A,3 patients(16.7%) in Group B and 6 patients(31.6%) in Group C were considered to have poor small bowel cleansing(P = 0.417),with significant fluid or debris such that the examination was unreliable.The proportion of patients with a significant amount of bubbles was 50% in Group A,27.8% in Group B and 15.8% in Group C(P = 0.065).This was significantly lower in Group C when compared to Group A(P = 0.026).The mean GET was 27.8 min for Group A,27.2 min for Group B and 40.7 min for Group C(P = 0.381).The mean SBTT was 256.4 min for Group A,256.1 min for Group B and 258.1 min for Group C(P = 0.998).Regarding to the rate of complete examinations,the capsule reached the cecum in 20 patients(100%) in Group A,16 patients(88.9%) in Group B and 17 patients(89.5%) in Group C(P = 0.312).A definite diagnosis based on relevant small bowel endoscopic lesions was established in 60% of the patients in Group A(12 patients),44.4% in Group B(8 patients) and 57.8% in Group C(11 patients)(P = 0.587).CONCLUSION:Preparation with 2 L of PEG before small bowel capsule endoscopy(SBCE) may improve small bowel cleansing and the quality of visualization.Simethicone may further reduce intraluminal bubbles.No significant differences were found regarding GET,SBTT and the proportion of complete exploration or diagnostic yield among the three different cleansing protocols.展开更多
文摘AIM:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) + endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)vs isolated EST.METHODS:We conducted a retrospective single center study over two years,from February 2010 to January 2012.Patients with large(≥ 10 mm),single or multiple bile duct stones(BDS),submitted to endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography(ERCP) were included.Patients in Group A underwent papillary large balloon dilation after limited sphincterotomy(EST+EPLBD),using a through-the-scope balloon catheter gradually inflated to 12-18 mm according to the size of the largest stone and the maximal diameter of the distal bile duct on the cholangiogram.Patients in Group B(control group) underwent isolated sphincterotomy.Stones were removed using a retrieval balloon catheter and/or a dormia basket.When necessary,mechanical lithotripsy was performed.Complete clearance of the bile duct was documented with a balloon catheter cholangiogram at the end of the procedure.In case of residual lithiasis,a double pigtail plastic stent was placed and a second ERCP was planned within 4-6 wk.Some patients were sent for extracorporeal lithotripsy prior to subsequent ERCP.Outcomes of EST+EPLBD(Group A) vs isolated EST(Group B) were compared regarding efficacy(complete stone clearance,number of therapeutic sessions,mechanical and/or extracorporeal lithotripsy,biliary stent placement) and safety(frequency,type and grade of complications).Statistical analysis was performed using χ 2 or Fisher’s exact tests for the analysis of categorical parameters and Student’s t test for continuous variables.A P-value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.RESULTS:One hundred and eleven patients were included,68(61.3%) in Group A and 43(38.7%) in Group B.The mean diameter of the stones was similar in the two groups(16.8 ± 4.4 and 16.0 ± 6.7 in Groups A and B,respectively).Forty-eight(70.6%) patients in Group A and 21(48.8%) in Group B had multiple BDS(P = 0.005).Overall,balloon dilation was performed up to 12 mm in 10(14.7%) patients,13.5 mm in 17(25.0%),15 mm in 33(48.6%),16.5 mm in 2(2.9%) and 18 mm in 6(8.8%) patients,taking into account the diameter of the largest stone and that of the bile duct.Complete stone clearance was achieved in sixty-five(95.6%) patients in Group A vs 30(69.8%) patients in Group B,and was attained within the first therapeutic session in 82.4% of patients in Group A vs 44.2% in Group B(P 【 0.001).Patients submitted to EST+EPLBD underwent fewer therapeutic sessions(1.1 ± 0.3 vs 1.8 ± 1.1,P 【 0.001),and fewer required mechanical(14.7% vs 37.2%,P = 0.007) or extracorporeal(0 vs 18.6%,P 【 0.001) lithotripsy,as well as biliary stenting(17.6% vs 60.5%,P 【 0.001).The rate of complications was not significantly different between the two groups.CONCLUSION:EST+EPLBD is a safe and effective technique for treatment of difficult BDS,leading to high rates of complete stone clearance and reducing the need for lithotripsy and biliary stenting.
文摘AIM:To assess the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation after biliary sphincterotomy for difficult bile duct stones retrieval.METHODS:Retrospective review of consecutive patients submitted to the technique during 18 mo.The main outcomes considered were:efficacy of the procedure(complete stone clearance;number of sessions;need of lithotripsy) and complications.RESULTS:A total of 30 patients with a mean age of 68 ± 10 years,23 female(77%) and 7 male(23%) were enrolled.In 10 patients,a single stone was found in the common bile duct(33%) and in 20 patients multiple stones(67%) were found.The median diameter of the stones was 17 mm(12-30 mm).Dilations were performed with progressive diameter Through-TheScope balloons(up to 12,15) or 18 mm.Complete retrieval of stones was achieved in a single session in 25 patients(84%) and in two sessions in 4 patients(13%).Failure occurred in 1 case(6%).Mechanical lithotripsywas performed in 6 cases(20%).No severe complications occurred.One patient(3%) had mild-grade post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) pancreatitis.CONCLUSION:Endoscopic balloon dilatation with a large balloon after endoscopic sphincterotomy is a safe and effective technique that could be considered an alternative choice in therapeutic ERCP.
文摘AIM:To evaluate small bowel cleansing quality,diagnostic yield and transit time,comparing three cleansing protocols prior to capsule endoscopy.METHODS:Sixty patients were prospectively enrolled and randomized to one of the following cleansing protocols:patients in Group A underwent a 24 h liquid diet and overnight fasting;patients in Group B followed protocol A and subsequently were administered 2 L of polyethylene glycol(PEG) the evening before the procedure;patients in Group C followed protocol B and were additionally administered 100 mg of simethicone 30 min prior to capsule ingestion.Small bowel cleansing was independently assessed by two experienced endoscopists and classified as poor,fair,good or excellent according to the proportion of small bowel mucosa under perfect conditions for visualization.When there was no agreement between the two endoscopists,the images were reviewed and discussed until a consensus was reached.The preparation was considered acceptable if > 50% or adequate if > 75% of the mucosa was in perfect cleansing condition.The amount of bubbles was assessed independently and it was considered significant if it prevented a correct interpretation of the images.Positive endoscopic findings,gastric emptying time(GET) and small bowel transit time(SBTT) were recorded for each examination.RESULTS:There was a trend favoring Group B in achieving an acceptable(including fair,good or excellent) level of cleansing(Group A:65%;Group B:83.3%;Group C:68.4%) [P = not significant(NS)] and favoring Group C in attaining an excellent level of cleansing(Group A:10%;Group B:16.7%;Group C:21.1%)(P = NS).The number of patients with an adequate cleansing of the small bowel,corresponding to an excellent or good classification,was 5(25%) in Group A,5(27.8%) in Group B and 4(21.1%) in Group C(P = 0.892).Conversely,7 patients(35%) in Group A,3 patients(16.7%) in Group B and 6 patients(31.6%) in Group C were considered to have poor small bowel cleansing(P = 0.417),with significant fluid or debris such that the examination was unreliable.The proportion of patients with a significant amount of bubbles was 50% in Group A,27.8% in Group B and 15.8% in Group C(P = 0.065).This was significantly lower in Group C when compared to Group A(P = 0.026).The mean GET was 27.8 min for Group A,27.2 min for Group B and 40.7 min for Group C(P = 0.381).The mean SBTT was 256.4 min for Group A,256.1 min for Group B and 258.1 min for Group C(P = 0.998).Regarding to the rate of complete examinations,the capsule reached the cecum in 20 patients(100%) in Group A,16 patients(88.9%) in Group B and 17 patients(89.5%) in Group C(P = 0.312).A definite diagnosis based on relevant small bowel endoscopic lesions was established in 60% of the patients in Group A(12 patients),44.4% in Group B(8 patients) and 57.8% in Group C(11 patients)(P = 0.587).CONCLUSION:Preparation with 2 L of PEG before small bowel capsule endoscopy(SBCE) may improve small bowel cleansing and the quality of visualization.Simethicone may further reduce intraluminal bubbles.No significant differences were found regarding GET,SBTT and the proportion of complete exploration or diagnostic yield among the three different cleansing protocols.
