Endoscopic Papillary Balloon Dilation Versus Small Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography-Related Adverse Events in Patients With Non-Dilated Distal Bile Duct.
{"title":"Endoscopic Papillary Balloon Dilation Versus Small Endoscopic Sphincterotomy for Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography-Related Adverse Events in Patients With Non-Dilated Distal Bile Duct.","authors":"Lili Gao, Huafang Yan, Limei Bu, Hao Zhang","doi":"10.1097/SLE.0000000000001200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD), small endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), and small EST plus EPBD are commonly used as rescue techniques to remove bile duct stones. However, we often encountered challenging cases with non-dilated distal bile ducts, especially in those undergoing EPBD. We aimed to explore the reasons by assessing whether patients without the dilated bile duct had a higher risk of early complications and whether it was impacted by the rescue techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study by frequency matching design in patients diagnosed with stones in non-dilated distal bile duct who received rescue techniques from July 2016 to June 2022. Besides, patients with stones and without dilatation of the distal bile duct (DDBD) were divided into 3 subgroups according to the rescue technique received. Outcomes were compared between the subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The non-DDBD group was more likely to develop post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) and hyperamylasemia (HP) than the DDBD group (P < 0.05). Some cases had mild or moderate pancreatitis, but no one in either group developed severe pancreatitis. For subgroup analysis, each technique resulted in complete stone removal; the EPBD group had a higher HP rate than the other subgroups and reached statistical significance: the EPBD group versus the small EST group (P = 0.013) and the EPBD group versus the EPBD plus small EST group (P = 0.008). Although there was no statistical significance, PEP incidence in the EPBD group was 13.7% higher than in other subgroups (P > 0.05/3).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Non-DDBD patients have a higher risk for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related pancreatic inflammation. EPBD should be used cautiously due to the significant association with increased rates of PEP and HP. Conversely, small EST and combination therapy are suitable for non-dilated bile duct stones because of their high safety profile and efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":22092,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000001200","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD), small endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST), and small EST plus EPBD are commonly used as rescue techniques to remove bile duct stones. However, we often encountered challenging cases with non-dilated distal bile ducts, especially in those undergoing EPBD. We aimed to explore the reasons by assessing whether patients without the dilated bile duct had a higher risk of early complications and whether it was impacted by the rescue techniques.
Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study by frequency matching design in patients diagnosed with stones in non-dilated distal bile duct who received rescue techniques from July 2016 to June 2022. Besides, patients with stones and without dilatation of the distal bile duct (DDBD) were divided into 3 subgroups according to the rescue technique received. Outcomes were compared between the subgroups.
Results: The non-DDBD group was more likely to develop post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP) and hyperamylasemia (HP) than the DDBD group (P < 0.05). Some cases had mild or moderate pancreatitis, but no one in either group developed severe pancreatitis. For subgroup analysis, each technique resulted in complete stone removal; the EPBD group had a higher HP rate than the other subgroups and reached statistical significance: the EPBD group versus the small EST group (P = 0.013) and the EPBD group versus the EPBD plus small EST group (P = 0.008). Although there was no statistical significance, PEP incidence in the EPBD group was 13.7% higher than in other subgroups (P > 0.05/3).
Conclusion: Non-DDBD patients have a higher risk for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related pancreatic inflammation. EPBD should be used cautiously due to the significant association with increased rates of PEP and HP. Conversely, small EST and combination therapy are suitable for non-dilated bile duct stones because of their high safety profile and efficacy.
期刊介绍:
Surgical Laparoscopy Endoscopy & Percutaneous Techniques is a primary source for peer-reviewed, original articles on the newest techniques and applications in operative laparoscopy and endoscopy. Its Editorial Board includes many of the surgeons who pioneered the use of these revolutionary techniques. The journal provides complete, timely, accurate, practical coverage of laparoscopic and endoscopic techniques and procedures; current clinical and basic science research; preoperative and postoperative patient management; complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic surgery; and new developments in instrumentation and technology.