内镜下乳头括约肌小切开联合球囊扩张术治疗肝硬化合并胆总管结石的疗效观察

目的评价内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌小切开联合球囊扩张术（ESBD）治疗肝硬化合并胆总管结石的有效性及安全性。方法回顾性对比分析79例接受ESBD治疗（ESBD组）和42例接受十二指肠乳头球囊扩张术（EPBD）治疗（EPBD组）的肝硬化合并胆总管结石患者的结石清除情况和并发症发生情况。结果ESBD组结石完全清除率和一次性完全清除率分别为94．9％（75／79）和77．2％（61／79）,EPBD组分别为88．1％（37／42）和59．5％（25／42）,ESBD组结石完全清除率略高于EPBD组（P=0．317）,但结石一次性完全清除率明显高于EPBD组（P=0．041）。ESBD组发生ERCP相关性出血3例（3．8％）,术后高淀粉酶血症3例（3．8％）,术后急性胰腺炎2例（2．5％）;EPBD组未发生ERCP相关性出血,发生术后高淀粉酶血症8例（19．0％）、术后急性胰腺炎6例（14．3％）。2组比较,ERCP相关性出血发生率差异无统计学意义（P=0．551）,但ESBD组术后高淀粉酶血症和术后急性胰腺炎发生率均明显低于EPBD组（P〈0．05）。结论ESBD治疗肝硬化合并胆总管结石安全有效,能提高EPBD的取石效果,减少术后高淀粉酶血症和急性胰腺炎的发生,并且不会明显增加ERCP相关性出血风险。     

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。     

单纯经内镜乳头大球囊扩张治疗胆总管大结石的疗效及预后研究

目的 评估单纯经内镜乳头大球囊扩张（EPLBD）治疗胆总管大结石的疗效及预后。方法 山西省人民医院2016年8月至2017年11月收治的153例胆总管大结石（结石直径>1.0 cm）患者按随机数字表法随机分为两组：EPLBD组（n=83例）和经内镜乳头小切开联合大球囊扩张（ESLBD）组（n=70例）,比较两组患者的取石成功率,术中碎石率,术后近期并发症发生率及远期结石复发率。结果 EPLBD组和ESLBD组在总的、一次性结石取尽率方面差异无统计学意义[95.2%（79/83）比97.1%（68/70）,χ2=0.388,P=0.533;92.8%（77/83）比90.0%（63/70）,χ2=0.375,P=0.540]。EPLBD组碎石使用率与ESLBD组比较差异无统计学意义[25.3%（21/83）比35.7%（25/70）,χ2=1.958,P=0.162]。两组近期并发症发生率比较差异无统计学意义[43.4%（36/83）比40.0%（28/70）,χ2=0.178,P=0.673];两组均无术后穿孔病例。EPLBD组随访时间（22.7±4.3）个月,ESLBD组为（20.8±6.3）个月,两组胆总管结石累积复发率差异有统计学意义[2.4%（2/83）比15.7%（11/70）,P=0.003]。结论 EPLBD治疗胆总管大结石在取石成功率、碎石使用率、近期并发症发生率方面与ESLBD相当,远期结石复发率低于后者。单纯EPLBD治疗胆总管大结石安全有效。     

内镜下乳头括约肌小切开联合乳头球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石的临床分析

内镜下乳头括约肌切开术（EST）治疗胆总管结石已得到临床广泛认可,并成为治疗胆总管结石的首选方法,但该技术引起并发症的比例仍较高。单纯乳头球囊扩张术（EPBD）后取石具有与单纯EST术后取石相近的成功率,并发症少,创伤小,且对十二指肠乳头括约肌有保护功能,多数学者认为EPBD是EST的最有价值的替代方法,但因球囊压迫胰管开口,术后胰腺炎的发生率相对较高。如何在胆总管结石内镜取石中取得更好的疗效,如何减少内镜取石术近期、远期并发症？本研究采用内镜下乳头括约肌小切开联合EPBD术治疗胆总管结石,从手术成功率、疗效、并发症等方面对乳头括约肌小切开联合EPBD术和单纯EST术两者进行比较,旨在探讨该方法的临床应用价值和疗效。     

十二指肠乳头括约肌小切开联合气囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石

经内镜乳头括约肌切开术（EST）取石用于治疗胆总管结石已得到广泛认可,但并发症发生率仍较高,经内镜乳头气囊扩张术（EPBD）取石具有与EST取石相近的成功率,出血、穿孔并发症相对较少,且保护了十二指肠乳头括约肌功能,但因球囊压迫胰管开口,术后胰腺炎的发生率相对较高。我们采用内镜下乳头括约肌小切开联合EPBD治疗了38例胆总管结石,现总结资料,探讨其有效性、安全性和在减少近期、远期并发症方面的作用。     

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.     

内镜下乳头球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石并发 十二指肠乳头出血的危险因素分析（含视频）

目的探讨内镜下乳头球囊扩张术（endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation,EPBD）治疗胆总管结石并发十二指肠乳头出血的危险因素。方法回顾性分析杭州市第一人民医院2016年1月—2019年12月收治的411例因胆总管结石行EPBD的患者临床资料,按球囊扩张后是否出现十二指肠乳头出血分为出血组和非出血组,采用单因素及Logistic回归分析筛选十二指肠乳头出血的危险因素。结果411例行EPBD治疗的患者中,29例（7.1%）发生十二指肠乳头出血。单因素分析显示出血组和非出血组患者在球囊扩张直径≥1.2 cm占比（P=0.001）、乳头括约肌切开占比（P=0.002）及切开长度(P＜0.001)方面差异有统计学意义。多因素Logistic回归分析显示切开长度（OR=69.771, 95%CI: 7.544~645.296,P＜0.001）是EPBD并发十二指肠乳头出血的独立危险因素,球囊扩张直径≥1.2 cm（OR=0.192,95%CI：0.071~0.524,P=0.001）是EPBD并发十二指肠乳头出血的保护因素。结论乳头括约肌切开长度是EPBD并发十二指肠乳头出血的独立危险因素。大球囊扩张治疗胆总管结石安全,可减少十二指肠乳头出血发生率。     

单纯十二指肠乳头气囊扩张治疗胆总管结石合并乳头旁憩室的安全性

目的评价内镜下单纯十二指肠乳头气囊扩张(EPBD)治疗胆总管结石合并乳头旁憩室的安全性。方法对65例胆总管结石合并十二指肠乳头旁憩室患者进行内镜下取石治疗,其中35例行单纯EPBD术后取石,30例行十二指肠乳头括约肌小切开(sEST)联合EPBD取石。比较两组取石取净率、术中出血情况及并发症。结果两组取石取净率差异无统计学意义(P0.05);单纯EPBD组术后无出血,明显少于EST+EPBD组(P=0.04)。术后胰腺炎及胆管炎相当,差异无统计学意义,两组均未发生穿孔。结论单纯EPBD术治疗胆总管结石合并十二指肠乳头旁憩室比EST联合EPBD安全,且操作方便,能够减少十二指肠乳头出血的风险。     

内镜下乳头气囊扩张对胆总管结石的治疗价值

经内镜乳头括约肌切开术（EST）是治疗性经内镜逆行胰胆管造影术（ERCP）的基础,尤其在胆总管结石的治疗中EST是运用最广泛最成功的内镜下技术.尽管如此,EST仍然有不少短期、长期并发症,如出血、穿孔、胰腺炎及乳头狭窄、胆管炎等[1].1983年,Staritz等[2]介绍了一项可以替代EST的新技术--内镜下乳头气囊扩张术（EPBD）,与EST相比,EPBD的并发症如出血、穿孔发生率明显降低.     

不同内镜术式治疗胆总管结石青年患者的长期随访研究

目的探讨不同的常用内镜治疗方法对胆总管结石青年患者治疗后结石复发的影响以及结石近期复发、远期复发的危险因素。方法选择经一次性治疗性内镜逆行胰胆管术（ERCP）成功取石后随访资料完整的胆总管结石青年（21～45岁）患者,按手术方式分为内镜下乳头球囊扩张术（EPBD）组、乳头括约肌切开术（EST）组、EST（切开〈0．5cm）＋EPBD组,进行随访,统计近期（≤3年）及远期（〉3年）结石复发率,并对复发危险因素进行Logistic回归分析。结果资料完整的327例患者平均随访76．5个月,54例（16．5％）结石复发,其中近期复发35例（10．7％）,远期复发19例（5．8％）。近期胆总管结石复发率EPBD组（11．3％）和EST组（13．2％）均高于EST＋EPBD组（8．1％）,但无统计学差异（P均〉0．05）。远期胆总管结石复发率EPBD组（11．3％）和EST组（6．6％）均显著高于EST＋EPBD组（0．8％）,差异具统计学意义（P均〈0．05）。Logistic回归分析结果表明,胆囊结石、结石最大径、结石个数、机械碎石与近期结石复发显著相关（P〈0．05）,而远期胆总管结石复发则与结石最大径及单纯球囊扩张显著相关（P〈0．05）。结论对于胆总管结石青年患者,单纯EPBD取石固然可保留乳头括约肌功能,但增加了结石的远期复发风险,而乳头括约肌小切开联合EPBD取石可显著降低胆总管结石复发率。     

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection for early gastric cancer: Current and original devices

Compared with endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is easier to perform and requires less time for treatment. However, EMR has been replaced by ESD, because achieving en bloc resection of specimens > 20 mm in diameter is difficult with EMR. The technique of ESD was introduced to resect large specimens of early gastric cancer in a single piece. ESD can provide precise histological diagnosis and can also reduce the rate of recurrence, but has a high level of technical difficulty, and is consequently associated with a high rate of complications, a need for advanced endoscopic techniques, and a lengthy procedure time. To overcome disadvantages in both EMR and ESD, various advances have been made in submucosal injections, knives, other accessories, and in electrocoagulation systems.     

Technical tips for endoscopic ultrasound-guided hepaticogastrostomy

Interventional procedures using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have recently been developed. For biliary drainage, EUS-guided trans-luminal drainage has been reported. In this procedure, the transduodenal approach for extrahepatic bile ducts is called EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy, and the transgastric approach for intrahepatic bile ducts is called EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (EUS-HGS). These procedures have several effects, such as internal drainage and avoiding post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis, and they are indicated for an inaccessible ampulla of Vater due to duodenal obstruction or surgical anatomy. EUS-HGS has particularly wide indications and clinical impact as an alternative biliary drainage method. In this procedure, it is necessary to dilate the fistula, and several devices and approaches have been reported. Stent selection is also important. In previous reports, the overall technical success rate was 82% (221/270), the clinical success rate was 97% (218/225), and the overall adverse event rate for EUS-HGS was 23% (62/270). Adverse events of EUS-biliary drainage are still high compared with ERCP or PTCD. EUS-HGS should continue to be performed by experienced endoscopists who can use various strategies when adverse events occur.     

Does endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage really have clinical impact?

The well established, gold standard method for treatment of obstructive jaundice involves biliary drainage under endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(ERCP) performed by pancreatobiliary endoscopists. Recently, interventions using endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) have been developed not only for obtaining cytological and histological diagnosis, but also for biliary drainage as alternative method. EUS-guided biliary drainage(EUSBD) was first reported by Giovannini et al. EUS-BD broadly includes EUS-guided rendezvous technique, EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy, and EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy. More recently, EUS-guided antegrade stenting and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage have also been reported. many case reports, series, and retrospective studies on EUS-BD have been reported. However, because prospective studies and comparisons between the different biliary drainage methods have not been reported, the technical success, functional success, adverse events, and stent patency with long-term follow up of EUS-BD are still unclear. Therefore, prospective, randomized controlled studies addressing these issues are needed. Despite this, EUSBD undoubtedly is clinically useful as an alternative biliary drainage method. EUS-BD has the potential to be a first-line biliary drainage method instead of ERCP if results of clinical trials are favorable and the technique is simplified.     

超声内镜对食管静脉曲张结扎术前后侧枝循环变化的临床研究

目的 应用Fujinon SP-701小探头超声内镜观察食管静脉曲张结扎术(EVL)前后曲张静脉及侧枝循环的变化，分析影响疗效的原因。选择合理的治疗方法。方法 对60例单纯食管静脉曲张出血患者依超声检查结果分为3组：Ⅰ组为单纯食管静脉曲张(EV)；Ⅱ组为合并有食管旁静脉(PEV)，但无交通枝(PV)；Ⅲ组合并有食管旁静脉及交通枝。患者EVL术后4、8、12周行超声内镜检查，观察及测量EV、PEV、PV的变化情况，分析影响疗效的原因。结果 Ⅰ组显效率75％，复发率16％，疗效最佳；Ⅲ组显效率0％，复发率100％，疗效最差。Ⅰ组24例中出现PEV者12例；Ⅱ组20例PEV全部增宽，11例出现PV；Ⅲ组全部有PEV增宽、PV增多增宽表现。结论 超声内镜对食管静脉曲张出血治疗方法的选择有指导意义。单纯食管静脉曲张EVL可获得满意疗效，但是伴PEV及PV者不是EVL适应证，建议采用其他方法治疗。     

ERCP结合EPT对胆囊切除术后患者诊治价值的探讨

目的 回顾性研究逆行性胰胆管造影（ERCP）结合乳头肌切开术（EPT）对胆囊切除术后患者的诊治价值。方法 170例胆囊切除术后症状再发或反复发作患者，接受ERCP检查和EPT等治疗，诊断结果与B超作对照。同时动态观察内镜下介入诊治术后临床表现的改变。不良反应及血清淀粉酶的变化及高淀粉酶血症的分布情况。结果 经ERCP结合EPT等术后患者临床症状显著改善；与B超对照ERCP对胆囊切除术后胆总管残余结石的诊断率显著提高（P＜0．001），对胆总管扩张程度的诊断价值显著优于B超（P＜0．05），并能发现许多B超检查不能发现的胆胰病变；术后主要不良反应表现为出血、高淀粉酶血症，ERCP结合EPT等治疗组高淀粉酶的发生率显著高于单纯ERCP操作组（P＜0．01）。经积极地处理后短期内出血控制，血清淀粉酶多在3日内转为正常。结论 对胆囊切除术后患者，ECRP结合EPT不失为一项非常有价值、安全的诊治措施。     

Endoscopic treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD): a systematic review

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease represents an extremely common disorder which has a substantial impact on patients' quality of life and use of health care resources. Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is a chronic relapsing disease for which a lifelong solution is needed. Until now the two competing therapeutic modalities have been the medical and surgical therapies. Quite recently a third option has become available. A number of endoscopic anti-reflux procedures have been described, with the common goal of creating an anti-reflux barrier, thus obviating long-term proton pump inhibitors and the cost and potential risk of laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. In this review the different techniques are thoroughly examined and the results are critically evaluated, giving special emphasis to efficacy, safety and durability of these new anti-reflux procedures. Available data show that these anti-reflux techniques produce significant improvement in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease symptomatology and quality of life as well as reduce the use of anti-reflux medication, without causing serious morbidity or mortality. However, the majority of these techniques have failed to adequately control oesophageal acid reflux. Endoscopic anti-reflux therapies therefore sound very attractive-being less invasive than surgery-and show a significant promise, but are still in the early stages of assessment. Large-scale randomized multi-centre trials comparing control groups with sham procedures are essential to confirm their efficacy. Further studies are also necessary to determine what modifications these techniques require in order to produce maximum clinical efficacy and durability. However, considering that current therapies (both medical and surgical) of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease are highly effective, the need for such new endoscopic modalities may be questionable. Moreover, appropriate trials in dedicated centres should be carried out to assure that the enthusiasm commonly associated with new technology is justified and can be generalized to open-access endoscopists.     

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Hepaticogastrostomy: Technical Review and Tips to Prevent Adverse Events

Most patients who require biliary drainage can be treated by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided procedures. However, ERCP can be challenging in patients with complications, such as malignant duodenal obstruction, or a surgically-altered anatomy, such as a Roux-en-Y anastomosis, which prevent advancement of the duodenoscope into the ampulla of Vater. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biliary drainage via transhepatic or transduodenal approaches has emerged as an alternative means of biliary drainage. Typically, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage or choledochoduodenostomy can be performed via both approaches, as can EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy (HGS). EUS-HGS, because of its transgastric approach, can be performed in patients with malignant duodenal obstruction. Technical tips for EUS-HGS have reached maturity due to device and technical developments. Although the technical success rates of EUS-HGS are high, the rate of adverse events is not low, with stent migration still being reported despite many preventive efforts. In this review, we described technical tips for EUS-HGS related to bile duct puncture, guidewire insertion, fistula dilation, and stent deployment, along with a literature review. Additionally, we provided technical tips to improve the technical success of EUS-HGS.     

Small sphincterotomy combined with endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation vs sphincterotomy alone for removal of common bile duct stones

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic papillary large diameter balloon dilation (EPLBD) following limited endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) and EST alone for removal of large common bile duct (CBD) stones.METHODS: We retrospectively compared EST + EPLBD (group A, n = 64) with EST alone (group B, n = 89) for the treatment of large or multiple bile duct stones. The success rate of stone clearance, procedure-related complications and incidents, frequency of mechanical lithotripsy use, and recurrent stones were recorded.RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding periampullary diverticula (35.9% vs 34.8%, P > 0.05), pre-cut sphincterotomy (6.3% vs 6.7%, P > 0.05), size (12.1 ± 2.0 mm vs 12.9 ± 2.6 mm, P > 0.05) and number (2.2 ± 1.9 vs 2.4 ± 2.1, P > 0.05) of stones or the diameters of CBD (15.1 ± 3.3 mm vs 15.4 ± 3.6 mm, P > 0.05). The rates of overall stone removal and stone removal in the first session were not significantly different between the two groups [62/64 (96.9%) vs 84/89 (94.4%), P > 0.05; and 58/64 (90.6%) vs 79/89 (88.8%), P > 0.05, respectively]. The rates of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis and hyperamylasemia were not significantly different between the two groups [3/64 (4.7%) vs 4/89 (4.5%), P > 0.05; 7/64 (10.9%) vs 9/89 (10.1%), P > 0.05, respectively]. There were no cases of perforation, acute cholangitis, or cholecystitis in the two groups. The rate of bleeding and the recurrence of CBD stones were significantly lower in group A than in group B [1/64 (1.6%) vs 5/89 (5.6%), P < 0.05; 1/64 (1.6%) vs 6/89 (6.7%), P < 0.05, respectively].CONCLUSION: EST + EPLBD is an effective and safe endoscopic approach for removing large or multiple CBD stones.     

Endoscopic polypectomy： A promising therapeutic choice for esophageal carcinosarcoma

Esophageal carcinosarcoma is a rare malignant tumor composing of both carcinomatous and sarcomatous elements. Endoscopic therapy is less invasive and may represent an alternative to esophagectomy for superficial esophageal carcinosarcoma. Here, we report a 61-year-old male who was diagnosed as esophageal carcinosarcoma and underwent endoscopic polypectomy with well tolerance and favorable prognosis. We also present a brief review of the literature.