内镜下乳头球囊扩张术对比乳头括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石的Meta分析

目的 对比内镜下乳头球囊扩张术(EPBD)与内镜乳头括约肌切开术(EST)治疗胆总管结石的利与弊.方法 检索Cochrane Library、Embase、Medline、Pubmed、CBM、CNKI、VIP和万方数据库,没有语言限制.纳入从1983年1月到2012年9月间发表的比较EPBD与EST治疗胆总管结石的临床随机对照实验,并对其进行了质量学评价,最后用RevMan 5.1软件进行Meta分析.结果 18个临床随机对照实验符合研究标准(2385个研究对象).在第一次成功取石率、总成功取石率、穿孔、长期胆管炎发生率等方面EPBD与EST结果类似.EPBD有更高的危险发生胰腺炎(RR=1.99,95％ CI:1.41 ～2.81)和重症胰腺炎(RR =4.68,95％ CI:1.36～ 16.11),需要机械碎石的概率更高(RR=1.31,95％CI:1.14～ 1.50).相反的是,EPBD不但有明显低的出血率(RR=0.14,95％ CI:0.06 ～0.34),而且长期结石复发(RR =0.67,95％ CI:0.47～0.96),长期胆囊炎(RR =0.38,95％ CI:0.19 ～0.76)和总的长期并发症(RR =0.52,95％ CI:0.40 ～0.67)发生率更低.结论 考虑出血、结石复发或长期并发症的话,相对于EST,EPBD治疗胆总管结石是更好的选择;但后者胰腺炎尤其是重症胰腺炎的发生率更高.     

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.     

经内镜括约肌切开术与球囊扩张治疗胆总管结石的比较

经内镜括约肌切开术（endoscopic sphincterotomy，EST）已广泛应用于治疗胆总管结石患者，具有很好的疗效，但其有出血、后腹膜穿孔、化脓性胆管炎及急性胰腺炎等并发症，死亡率达0．2％～1．5％。近几年开展的乳头球囊扩张术（endoscopic balloon dilation，EPBD）具有创伤小，操作简单、安全，并能部分保留Oddi括约肌功能等特点，但也有学者认为EPBD术后有急性胰腺炎的并发症增多、住院日延长等缺陷。我院2001年2月至2004年11月期问用EST及EPBD治疗282例胆总管结石患者，大部分患者随访2年：     

单纯经内镜乳头球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石的价值

目的初步研究单纯经内镜乳头球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石的安全性和有效性。方法根据入选标准和排除标准,共纳入南京鼓楼医院集团宿迁市人民医院2017年1月—2018年12月期间住院的胆总管结石患者60例,按照随机数字表法将患者分为单纯经内镜乳头球囊扩张取石组(EPBP组,n=30)及经内镜乳头括约肌小切开联合球囊扩张取石组(ESBD组,n=30)。比较经内镜取石时间、X线暴露时间、一次性取石率、碎石率及术后急性胰腺炎发生率、术中及术后出血率等指标。结果EPBD组和ESBD组取石时间[（8.5±2.4）min 比（7.8±2.1）min, P=0.14]、X线暴露时间[（21.8±5.2）min 比 （19.7±6.3） min, P=0.11]相比,差异均无统计学意义。两组患者均一次性取完结石,无需要碎石器病例。两组ERCP术后急性胰腺炎发生率均为（6.67%,2/30）。EPBD组和ESBD组术中出血率[3.33%（1/30）比 10.00%（3/30）,P=0.042]、术后出血率[0 比 3.33%（1/30）,P=0.035]相比,差异均有统计学意义。两组均未发生其他近期并发症。结论单纯经内镜乳头球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石安全、有效。     

经内镜乳头括约肌切开术与气囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石临床评价

目的:评价经内镜乳头括约肌切开术(EST)和气囊扩张术(EPBD)联合机械碎石(EML)治疗胆总管结石的临床疗效．方法:选取我院住院胆总管结石患者60例,随机分成EST组(n=30)和EPBD组(n=30),分别采用EST和EPBD联合机械碎石进行内镜下取石．观察二组的治愈率,近期并发症、远期并发症．结果:正结果EST组与EPBD组的取石成功率为93．3％和90％．无显著性差异(P>0．05): 两组近期并发症发生率(包括胰腺炎、胆道感染、出血)为30％和13．3％,无显著性差异 (P>0．05);而远期并发症(包括胆道感染、结石复发)26．7％和3.3％,有显著性差异(P<0．05)．结论:EST和EPBD的结石清除率及近期并发症相似,但EPBD远期并发症的发病率较低, 表明EPBD能够在一定程度上保护Oddi括约肌功能。     

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。     

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。     

经内镜乳头括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石108例临床分析

目的 :探讨经内镜乳头括约肌切开术 (EST)治疗胆总管结石的临床效果。方法 :EST治疗胆总管结石 1 0 8例。其中结石直径 <0 .5cm 1 2例 ,0 .6～ 1 .0cm 38例 ,1 .1～ 1 .5cm 30例 ,1 .6～ 2 .0cm 1 3例 ,2 .1～ 2 .5cm 9例 ,>2 .5cm 6例。单颗结石 68例 ,2颗结石2 7例 ,3颗以上结石 1 3例 ,最多的 1例结石 1 4颗。结果 :EST取石成功 1 0 5例 ,成功率 97.2 % ,失败 3例。采用取石网篮、取石球囊和机械碎石网篮取石。EST术后并发症 6例 ,发生率 5 .6 %。其中切口出血 3例 ,急性胰腺炎 2例 ,重症胆管炎 1例。随访 88例 ,时间 1个月～ 2年 ,全身状况良好 ,B超或CT检查无再发结石。结论 :经内镜乳头括约肌切开术是一种治疗胆总管结石安全、有效的治疗方法     

内镜乳头括约肌切开术治疗胆总管结石116例临床分析

内镜乳头括约肌切开术（ endoscopic sphincterotomy, EST）治疗胆总管结石具有微创性 [1]。我们自 1996年 1月～ 1999年 5月采用 EST治疗胆总管结石 116例,疗效满意。现报告如下。 　　一、一般资料 　　本组 116例中男 32例,女 84例。年龄 23～ 83岁,平均 58.5岁。单发结石 11例,多发结石 105例。其中外科手术后胆总管结石复发者 25例;合并肝内胆管结石或胆囊结石者 15例;合并胆系感染者 69例（其中急性重症胆管炎 9例）,合并急性胰腺炎 5例。 　　二、器械与方法 　　1.器械：采用 Olympus JF-IT20十二指肠镜、造影导管、 P…     

经内镜乳头括约肌切开术与球囊扩张术治疗梗阻性黄疸的临床评价

目的:探讨内镜下十二指肠乳头括约肌切开术(endoscopic sphincterotomy,EST)与内镜下球囊扩张术(endoscopic papillary balloon dilation,EPBD)及两者联合对治疗梗阻性黄疸的疗效.方法:回顾性分析石河子大学医学院第一附属医院消化内科2013-01/-2014-08 97例行内镜逆行胰胆管造影(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)术的梗阻性黄疸患者的临床资料.结果:E S T组55例、EPBD组8例以及内镜下乳头小切开联合球囊扩张术(small endoscopic sphincterotomy associated with balloon dilatation,sEST+EPBD)组34例.术后患者腹痛、黄疸等症状明显缓解.sEST+EPBD组一次取石成功率明显高于单纯EST及单纯EPBD组,具有统计学意义(P<0.05);合并十二指肠憩室的胆管结石,s EST+EPBD组较EST组有更高的取石成功率(P<0.05);高淀粉酶血症的发生率组间差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),其中EPBD组高淀粉酶血症发生率明显高于EST组(P<0.05).结论:s EST+EPBD、EST、EPBD三种术式均为治疗梗阻性黄疸有效减黄措施,而s EST+EPBD术较单纯EST术及EPBD术有较高的取石成功率,尤其适用于十二指肠憩室等胆道解剖结构改变的患者.其术后并发症少,弥补了单纯EPBD术不足,且安全有效,值得临床推广.     

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.     

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.     

内镜下乳头球囊扩张术治疗胆总管结石的安全性和长期疗效

背景内镜下乳头球囊扩张术(endoscopic papillary balloon dilation,EPBD)是治疗胆总管结石(common bile duct stones,CBDSs)-种有效方法,但其安全性及长期疗效却缺乏评价.本研究拟分析EPBD治疗CBDSs的安全性和长期疗效.目的评估EPBD治疗CBDSs的安全性和长期疗效.方法分析我院2014-01/2015-12期间收治的CBDSs患者行EPBD的资料.主要观察指标为CBDSs清除率、内镜下逆行性胰胆管造影术(endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,ERCP)相关并发症和CBDSs复发率.结果42例CBDSs患者进行了EPBD,全部患者均完成了结石清除(100%).ERCP相关并发症发生4例(4/45,8.8%),均为术后胰腺炎,没有穿孔、出血及胆管炎的发生.在随后进行平均时间为51.8 mo(18-66 mo)随访中,10例(10/42,23.8%)患者CBDSs复发.单因素分析提示女性(比值比=22.891,95%可信区间:1.544-339.362,P=0.023)是结石复发的危险因素.结论EPBD治疗CBDSs是安全和有效的.长期随访发现,女性可能是结石复发的危险因素.     

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation for large common bile duct stones

Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation (EPLBD) involves endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS) followed by balloon dilation using a 12–20-mm balloon to remove large or difficult stones from the common bile duct. The complications and limitations of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy (EBS) are well known. Endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) with a smaller diameter balloon but without sphincterotomy is widely used in a number of regions of the world for removal of routine bile duct stones and has been investigated as an alternative to EBS. EPBD, however, appears to be associated with an increased risk of pancreatitis. EPLBD differs from EPBD as it involves EBS followed by large balloon dilation. EPLBD would theoretically combine advantages of sphincterotomy and balloon dilation by increasing efficacy at stone extraction while minimizing complications of both EBS and EBD. A review of the available literature for EPBLD shows that it is relatively safe and effective. A high success rate (up to 95%) has been described for stone removal using EPLBD, with a low complication rate. Unlike EPBD, EBLBD does not appear to be associated with a higher risk of post-ERCP pancreatitis, probably because of separation of the biliary and pancreatic sphincters after EBS. EPLBD appears to be a reasonable option for removal of large or difficult common bile duct stones. This technique may be especially helpful in patients with difficult papillary anatomy, such as those with small papillae, intra- or peri-diverticular papilla. Its role in patients with coagulopathy or other risks for bleeding remains to be investigated.     

Comparison between endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation and endoscopic sphincterotomy for the treatment of common bile duct stones

Background This study was designed to evaluate the therapeutic outcome and early postoperative complications, especially pancreatitis, of endoscopic papillary balloon dilation (EPBD) and endoscopic sphincterotomy (EST) in patients with common bile duct stones in our department. Methods One hundred eighty patients with common bile duct stones were randomized to undergo EPBD or EST. An 8-mm dilatation balloon was used for EPBD. Modified Cotton's criteria, in which relatively mild pancreatitis is also included as a complication, were used to determine the incidence of postoperative complications. Results The rate of complete removal of stones was significantly higher in the EST group (95.6%) than in the EPBD group (86.6%); for stones less than 10 mm in diameter, however, the rate with EPBD (93.8%) was almost equivalent to that with EST (98.1%). According to modified Cotton's criteria, the incidence of postoperative pancreatitis was significantly higher in the EPBD group (16.7%) than in the EST group (6.7%). Bleeding was encountered in one patient (1.1%) in the EST group, but in none in the EPBD group. No fatal complication occurred in either the EPBD or the EST group. Conclusions Although EPBD appears to be comparable to EST for removal of small common bile duct stones, mild postoperative pancreatitis is more likely to occur with EPBD than with EST.