内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌小切开术联合球囊扩张术治疗胆管结石的疗效观察

目的 探讨内镜下乳头括约肌小切开术（smallendoscopicsphincterotomy,SEST）联合球囊扩张术（endo—scopicpapillaryballoondilatation,EPBD）治疗胆管结石的远期疗效和并发症。方法选择青岛市海慈医疗集团消化内科2009年3月至2011年12月住院治疗的127例结石直径〉10mm的胆管结石患者,随机分为4组,SEST＋EPBD组33例,先行乳头括约肌小切开（切开范围小于乳头肌三分之一）,然后球囊扩张,再碎石取石;EPBD＋SEST组32例,先行球囊扩张术,再行乳头括约肌小切开,再碎石取石;EST组32例,仅行十二指肠乳头括约肌大切开（切开范围大于乳头肌三分之二）取石;EPBD组30例,仅行球囊扩张碎石取石。比较4组的疗效和并发症发生率。结果SEST＋EPBD组术后结石取净率为93．93％（31／33）,EPBD＋SEST组为93．75％（30／32）,EST组为96．77％（30／31）,EPBD组为66．67％（20／30）,EPBD组与其他三组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;SEST＋EPBD组和EPBD＋SEST组均无远期并发症发生,EST组远期并发症发生率为16．67％,EPBD组为3．57％,EST组与其他三组比较有显著性差异（P〈0．05）。结论SEST与EPBD联合治疗胆管结石安全有效,可有效降低经内镜治疗胆管结石的远期并发症发生率,提高胆管结石患者术后的生活质量。     

十二指肠镜下乳头括约肌切开术及气囊扩张术治疗非扩张性肝外胆管结石的疗效分析

目的 比较十二指肠镜下乳头括约肌切开术(EST)、十二指肠镜下乳头气囊扩张术(EPBD)以及EST+EPBD治疗非扩张性肝外胆管结石的临床疗效和安全性。方法 回顾性分析2020年9月至2022年1月因非扩张性肝外胆管结石在山西医科大学第一医院行内镜下治疗的患者118例,根据手术方式将患者分为EST组(n=45)、EPBD组(n=35)和EST+EPBD组(n=38),比较三组患者术后近、远期并发症的发生率、围术期指标、治疗前与治疗后7 d的相关血清学指标。结果 EPBD组高淀粉酶血症、胰腺炎发生率高于EST组(40.0%vs 15.6%,42.9%vs 13.3%,均P<0.05);EPBD组高淀粉酶血症、胰腺炎发生率高于EST+EPBD组(40.0%vs 10.5%,42.9%vs 13.2%,均P<0.05);三组术后穿孔、出血、胆道感染发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);EST+EPBD组胆道逆行感染、结石复发发生率低于EST组(5.3%vs 26.7%,2.6%vs 20.0%,均P<0.05)。EST+EPBD组一次取石成功率高于EST组(...     

十二指肠乳头切开术联合球囊扩张术在肝外胆管结石内镜治疗中的作用

目的 探讨十二指肠乳头切开术(EST)联合十二指肠乳头球囊扩张术(EPBD)在肝外胆管结石内镜治疗中的安全性及其疗效.方法 164例肝外胆管结石患者接受内镜取石治疗,其中78例取石前进行EST联合EPBD治疗(EST+ EPBD组),其余86例取石前进行单一EST治疗(EST组),对比分析2组并发症发生率、结石取净率和碎石发生率.结果 EST+ EPBD组出现高淀粉酶血症3例、轻症急性胰腺炎2例,EST组出现高淀粉酶血症5例、轻症急性胰腺炎3例、出血2例,2组均未出现重症急性胰腺炎、穿孔等严重并发症.EST+ EPBD组并发症发生率为6.4％( 5/78),略低于EST组的11.6％ (10/86)(x2=1.340,P=0.288);结石取净率为100.0％ (78/78),明显高于EST组的93.0％( 80/86)(x2=5.649,P=0.030);碎石发生率为33.3％( 26/78),明显低于EST组的60.5％(52/86)(x2=12.073,P=0.001).结论 EST联合EPBD应用肝外胆管结石内镜治疗中安全、有效,对于结石大、乳头条件差的患者效果尤其明显.     

ESPBD与EST治疗肝硬化合并胆总管结石患者疗效比较

目的 研究采用内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌小切开联合球囊扩张术(ESPBD)与内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术(EST)治疗肝硬化合并胆总管结石患者的疗效。方法 2018年3月～2022年3月我院收治的代偿期肝硬化合并胆总管结石患者112例,其中56例对照组接受EST治疗,另56例观察组接受ESPBD治疗。采用ELISA法检测血清皮质醇(COR)、去甲肾上腺素(NE)和肾上腺素(E)水平。结果 观察组一次取石成功率为96.4%,显著高于对照组为80.4%(P<0.05);观察组术中出血量、手术时间、肛门排气时间和术后住院时间分别为(25.3±3.1)mL、41.8±5.1)min、(24.3±4.6)h和(8.1±1.6)d,与对照组【分别为(27.9±2.8)mL、(44.9±4.9)min、(25.7±6.9)h和(7.8±2.1)d】比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);在术后7 d,观察组血清TBIL、ALT、ALB和GGT水平分别为(15.4±3.6)μmol/L、(29.6±5.7)U/L、(36.3±6.9)g/L和(94.2±5.2)U/L,与对照组的(14.8±...     

两种胆总管结石手术的临床疗效比较

目的观察内镜下乳头小切开术(EST)联合球囊扩张术(EPBD)治疗胆总管结石的效果。方法选取192例胆总管结石患者随机分为EST组和EST+EPBD手术组各96例。对这两种手术的疗效进行评价。结果两组间平均手术时间、住院时间比较,EST+EPBD组均明显减少;一次性取石成功率及总取石成功率比较,EST+EPBD组均明显高于EST组。两组出血、胰腺炎、胆管内钡剂反流、结石复发等多项并发症比较,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05),EST+EPBD组术中、术后并发症显著减少。结论EST联合EPBD可极大地提高胆总管结石取石成功率和减少术后并发症,安全且疗效满意。     

十二指肠乳头旁憩室对内镜十二指肠乳头切开术治疗胆总管结石及其并发症的影响

目的 探讨十二指肠乳头旁憩室（juxtapapillary duodenal diverticulum,JPDD）与胆总管结石的关系,以及对内镜乳头括约肌切开术（EST）治疗胆总管结石和术后并发症的影响.方法 回顾性分析513例ERCP病例,其中行EST治疗胆总管结石253例,合并JPDD的胆总管结石51例.分析JPDD与胆总管结石发生的关系;比较合并JPDD胆总管结石组与未合并JPDD胆总管结石组ERCP插管成功率、EST胆总管取石成功率及其并发症发生率的差异.结果 JPDD组原发性胆总管结石发生率显著高于无JPDD组（18.4％ VS 8.9％,P＜0.01）.与未合并JPDD胆总管结石组比较,合并JPDD胆总管结石组ERCP插管成功率无显著性差异（96.1％ VS 99.5％,P＞0.05）,而EST取石成功率明显降低（91.8％ VS 99.5％,P＜0.05）,EST术后创口出血显著增多（11.1％ VS 1.9％,P＜0.01）,其他近期并发症及远期并发症发生率均无显著性差异（P＞0.05）.结论 JPDD与原发性胆总管结石的发生相关;JPDD对EST治疗胆总管结石有一定影响;EST仍是治疗合并JPDD胆总管结石的一种相对安全、有效的治疗手段.     

肝内胆管结石十二指肠镜下治疗体会

胆石症是临床常见病,尽管目前在消化内镜、微创外科及传统手术方式改进等方面有较多研究并有较大突破,特别是肝外胆管结石疗效确切,但肝内胆管结石仍然是复杂而最难治的非恶性疾病。我院2007年12月至2009年12月间对59例肝内胆管结石患者行经内镜乳头括约肌切开术（EST）后网篮、气囊等取石器械取石治疗,报道如下。     

内镜下乳头球囊扩张术和乳头括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石的比较

目的 探讨内镜下乳头球囊扩张术(EPBD)治疗胆总管结石的有效性和安全性.方法 2005年6月至2007年5月山东大学齐鲁医院320例拟行内镜下取石的胆总管结石患者,随机分为EPBD组及内镜下乳头括约肌切开术(EST)组,每组160例.EPBD组在乳头球囊扩张后用取石网篮或气囊取石,当结石较大时先行机械碎石网篮碎石后再取石;EST组按常规操作.两组术后均常规鼻胆管引流3 d,并造影复查.结果 EST组及EPBD组分别有156例(97.5%)及157例(98.1%)成功取净结石,其中各有112例(70.0%)及104例(65.0%)一次完成;机械碎石网篮应用比例分别为20.0%(32/160)和22.5%(36/160);术后早期并发症的总发生率分别为5.6%及8.1%,无死亡病例.随访3年,EST组胆管结石复发率(7.5%)高于EPBD组(2.5%),P＜0.05.结论 EPBD取石具有与EST取石相近的成功率,经术后常规鼻胆管引流处理后,胰腺炎发生率无明显升高.EPBD可以作为胆总管结石的备选治疗措施,尤其是对不适于EST的患者.

Abstract：

Objective To explore the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation( EPBD ) for the removal of common bile duct stones. Methods Three hundred and twenty consecutive patients with common bile duct stones on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) who met all eligibility criteria were randomly assigned endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) or EPBD.Complications were classified by an expert panel unaware of treatment allocation and outcome. Results After a single ERCP, all stones were removed from 112 patients ( 70% ) assigned EST and 104 ( 65% )assigned EPBD. Mechanical lithotripsy was used to fragment stones in 36 (22. 5% ) EPBD procedures and 32 ( 20. 0% ) EST procedures. Early complications occurred in 5.6% EST patients and 8.1% EPBD patients. No patient died. Gallstone disease recurrence, which is a long-term complication, is 7. 5% ( 12/160) in EST patients and 2.5% (4/160) in EPBD patients, P ＜0. 05. Conclusions The success rate of EPBD was similar to that of EST. We found no evidence of previously suggested higher risk of pancreatitis with EPBD, and suggest that EPBD is preferred in patients who are not suitable for EST, such as those with high risk of bleeding. This procedure is a valuable alternative to EST in patients with bile duct stones.     

内镜下乳头小切开加球囊扩张术治疗胆总管大结石80例

目的:探讨内镜下乳头小切开加球囊扩张术治疗胆总管大结石的有效性和安全性.方法:2010-01/2011-10我院消化内科住院行内镜下取石的胆总管结石直径>1.2cm的患者,随机分为内镜下乳头括约肌切开术(EST)组及内镜下乳头小切开加球囊扩张术(ESBD)组,每组40例.ESBD组在先行乳头小切开后行乳头球囊扩张;EST组按常规操作.结果:EST组及ESBD组分别有36例(90%)及38例(95%)成功取净结石;机械碎石网篮应用比例分别37.5%(15/40)和10%(4/40),P<0.05;取石时间分别为41.78min±10.41min和36.28min±8.64min,P<0.05;术中EST组有2例出现切开后出血,ESBD组无出血病例;EST组各有1例出现发热和腹痛患者,有2例出现胰腺炎,ESBD组有2例腹痛,无发热患者,1例出现胰腺炎.术后早期并发症总发生率分别为10%(4/40)和7.5%(3/40),P>0.05;无死亡病例.结论:对较大胆总管结石,ESBD取石有与EST取石相近的成功率,术后并发症无明显升高,但在操作时间及碎石网篮使用上,ESBD组更有优势.     

乳头括约肌小切开合并气囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石532例分析

目的探讨乳头小切口合并气囊扩张术治疗总胆管结石的应用体会。方法对2008年1月至2009年1月沈阳军区总医院收治的532例诊断总胆管结石明确的患者先行EST乳头小切开,再行EPBD,然后行胆总管取石术。结果所有患者行EST、EPBD、胆总管取石治疗均一次成功,术后无出血、穿孔发生。结论乳头小切开合并气囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石操作容易,安全性高,副反应小,术后合并症少,值得广泛在临床工作中推广应用。     

Endoscopic balloon dilatation is a safe method in the management of common bile duct stones

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS: Endoscopic sphincterotomy is a widely accepted treatment for patients with common bile duct stones. Despite improvement in this technique, endoscopic sphincterotomy is still associated with some biliary complications. Endoscopic balloon dilatation is a less traumatic and sphincter preserving method for removal of common bile duct stones. However, the results of controlled studies in comparison with these two methods are contradictory. The aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of endoscopic balloon dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy in Chinese patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 104 patients with common bile duct stones on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography were enrolled. They were randomly assigned to endoscopic balloon dilatation or endoscopic sphincterotomy. Endoscopic balloon dilatation was performed by using a balloon dilator to dilate the sphincter for 5 min. The common bile duct stones were then removed by a Dormia basket after endoscopic balloon dilatation or endoscopic sphincterotomy. Mechanical lithotripsy was performed if the stones were difficult to remove by Dormia basket. After discharge, patients were regularly followed up for biliary complications. RESULTS: The successful bile duct stone clearance rate was 94.1% in endoscopic balloon dilatation group and 100% in endoscopic sphincterotomy group. Post-procedural significant haemorrhage was higher in endoscopic sphincterotomy group than in endoscopic balloon dilatation group (14/53 versus 1/48, P < 0.001). The bleeding patient from endoscopic balloon dilatation group was a case of uremia and bleeding occurred 48 h after endoscopic balloon dilatation. All the patients with post-procedural haemorrhage were controlled endoscopically. The post-procedural serum amylase level showed no significant difference in both groups and none of them developed clinical pancreatitis. After a mean 16 months follow-up, three patients (6.3%) in endoscopic balloon dilatation group and four patients (7.5%) in endoscopic sphincterotomy group developed recurrent common bile duct stones. The recurrent common bile duct stones were multiple and muddy in consistency. They were successfully removed endoscopically. CONCLUSION: Both endoscopic balloon dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy are safe and effective techniques for the treatment of common bile duct stones. Endoscopic balloon dilatation can be safely applied in patients with coagulopathy and does not increase the incidence of pancreatitis or bleeding.     

Comparison of endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones

Endoscopic treatment for bile duct stones is low-invasive and currently considered as the first choice of the treatment. For the treatment of bile duct stones, papillary treatment is necessary, and the treatments used at the time are broadly classified into two types; endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation where bile duct closing part is dilated with a balloon and endoscopic sphincterotomy(EST) where bile duct closing part is incised. Both procedures have advantages and disadvantages. Golden standard is EST, however, there are patients with difficulty for EST, thus we must select the procedure based on understanding of the characteristics of the procedure, and patient backgrounds.     

内镜下十二指肠乳头小切开后球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石的临床研究

目的探讨内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌小切开后球囊扩张术在胆总管结石治疗中的有效性和安全性。方法将150例临床确诊为胆总管结石的患者随机分为乳头括约肌切开组(EST组)和乳头括约肌小切开后球囊扩张术组(SEST+EPBD组),比较两组疗效及并发症的发生率。结果 EST组和SEST+EPBD组取石成功率分别为92%和97%(χ2=1.19,P0.05)。EST组术后出现急性胰腺炎2例,出血4例,结石复发11例,逆行性胆道感染15例。SEST+EPBD组术后出现急性胰腺炎1例,出血1例,结石复发2例,逆行性胆道感染6例。两组取石成功率及近期并发症比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),远期并发症比较差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论内镜下乳头括约肌小切开后球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石安全、有效,并发症少,并且尽可能的保留了十二指肠乳头括约肌的功能,值得临床推广。     

Innovation of endoscopic management in difficult common bile duct stone in the era of laparoscopic surgery

Common bile duct(CBD) stone is a common biliary problem, which often requires endoscopic approach as the initial treatment option. Roughly, 7%-12% of the subjects who experience cholecystectomy were subsequently referred to biliary endoscopist for further management. In general, there are three classifications of difficult CBD stone, which are based on the characteristics of the stone(larger than 15 mm, barrel or square-shaped stones, and hard consistency), accessibility to papilla related to anatomical variations, and other clinical conditions or comorbidities of the patients. Currently, endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD) of a previous sphincterotomy and EPLBD combined with limited sphincterotomy performed on the same session is still recommended by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy as the main approach in difficult CBD stones with history of failed sphincterotomy and balloon and/or basket attempts. If failed extraction is still encountered, mechanical lithotripsy or cholangioscopy-assisted lithotripsy or extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy can be considered. Surgical approach can be considered when stone extraction is still failed or the facilities to perform lithotripsy are not available. To our knowledge, conflicting evidence are still found from previous studies related to the comparison between endoscopic and surgical approaches. The availability of experienced operator and resources needs to be considered in creating individualized treatment strategies for managing difficult biliary stones.     

Endoscopic papillary balloon intermittent dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for bile duct stones

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.     

LONG‐TERM PROGNOSIS OF BILE DUCT STONES: ENDOSCOPIC PAPILLARY BALLOON DILATATION VERSUS ENDOSCOPIC SPHINCTEROTOMY

Aim: Endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation (EPBD), which allows preservation of papillary functions, is used as the first‐line therapy in our hospital for common bile duct (CBD) stones to reduce biliary complications. In the present study, we investigated causal factors for CBD stones and compared long‐term prognosis between EPBD and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST). Methods: A total of 453 EPBD and 233 EST cases treated between April 1996 and May 2007 were examined. They were categorized into four groups: group 1, gallbladder (GB) with stones was resected after CBD stones were extracted (cholecystectomy for GB with stones); group 2, GB with stones was not resected after CBD stones were extracted (no cholecystectomy for GB with stones); group 3, only CBD stones were extracted while the GB without stones was not resected (GB without stones); and group 4, CBD stones with a history of cholecystectomy (absence of GB). Then, postoperative recurrence of CBD stones was compared. To examine changes in papillary functions by EPBD, Oddi's sphincter pressure was measured before and after EPBD. Results: Recurrence was observed in 31 EPBD and 40 EST cases. When recurrence rates by EPBD/EST were compared among the four treatment groups, they were lower with EPBD than with EST in all groups. Oddi's sphincter functions were preserved by 70% after EPBD. Conclusion: Low‐pressure EPBD in combination with isosorbide dinitrate enabled preservation of papillary functions by 70%, which would improve a long‐term prognosis.     

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for removal of bile duct stones

AIM:To investigate the efficacy and outcomes of endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation(EPLBD)for bile duct stones in a multicenter prospective study.METHODS:Lithotomy by EPLBD was conducted in 124patients with bile duct stones≥13 mm in size or with three or more bile duct stones≥10 mm.After endoscopic sphincterotomy,the papilla was dilated using balloons 12-20 mm in diameter fitting the bile duct diameter.RESULTS:The success rate of first-time lithotomy was 86.3%(107/124)and the final lithotomy success rate was 100%(124/124).Lithotripsy was needed in10 of the 124(13.6%)patients.Adverse events due to the treatment procedure occurred in 6(4.8%)patients,all of which were mild.Performing large balloon dilation after endoscopic sphincterotomy in patients with large stones or multiple stones in the bile duct is considered to ensure the safety of treatment and to reduce the need for lithotripsy.CONCLUSION:It is suggested that treatment by EPLBD for large bile duct stones may be safe and useful.     

EST术联合EPBD术治疗非扩张性肝外胆管结石患者临床研究*

目的 探讨采用十二指肠镜下乳头括约肌切开（EST）联合十二指肠镜下乳头气囊扩张（EPBD）术治疗非扩张性肝外胆管结石患者的临床效果。方法 回顾性分析我院诊治的124例非扩张性肝外胆管结石患者的临床资料,联合组采用EST术联合EPBD术（n=49）、观察组采用单纯EST术（n=31）和对照组采用胆总管切开T管引流术（n=44）治疗。结果 术后48 h时,联合组血清淀粉酶水平为（107.1±34.6） U/L,超敏C-反应蛋白水平为（37.2±8.9） mg/L,观察组分别为（113.9±35.2） U/L和（38.1±9.4） mg/L,均显著低于对照组[分别为（221.5±54.8） U/L和（73.2±16.2） mg/L,P<0.05];联合组手术时间为（95.2±14.8） min,观察组为（113.6±12.7） min,均显著长于对照组[（84.8±12.1）,P<0.05];联合组胰腺炎和反流性胆管炎发生率分别为2.0%和4.1%,显著低于观察组的19.4%和22.6%或对照组的18.2%和22.7%（P<0.05）。结论 采用EST联合EPBD术治疗非扩张性肝外胆管结石患者操作易行,效果好,术后恢复快,近远期并发症发生率低,有较高的临床应用价值。     

JUXTAPAPILLARY DIVERTICULA AND ENDOSCOPIC TREATMENT OF BILE DUCT STONES

Aim: To assess the influence of juxtapapillary diverticula on endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones. Methods: Two hundred and fifty‐eight consecutive patients with bile duct stones who had undergone endoscopic treatment at our department were included in this study. Comparison was done between a group that had a juxtapapillary diverticulum (Group D) and a group that did not (Group N). Results: Deep cannulation was achieved in 98% and 100% of Group D and Group N, respectively. The time required for cannulation was 18 min in both groups. Deep cannulation of the bile duct tended to be difficult in cases with the papilla located at the edge of or in the diverticulum in Group D. Complete removal of stones was achieved in 97.7% and 96.9% of the respective groups. The number of sessions and the total time required for removal of stones in Group D and Group N were 1.6 and 47 min, and 1.5 and 47 min, respectively (n.s.). The occurrence rate of complications was not statistically different (12.4%vs 10.1%); however, it was higher (50%) in those who had a papilla inside the diverticulum. Conclusions: Although the presence of juxtapapillary diverticula has only a subtle influence on endoscopic treatment of bile duct stones, caution is necessary when treating patients with a papilla in a diverticulum because of the high incidence of complications in such patients.