Comparison of Outcomes between a Basket Catheter and a Balloon Catheter for Endoscopic Common Bile Duct Stone Removal.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Digestive Diseases Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-07 DOI:10.1159/000534458
Hirokazu Saito, Hajime Iwasaki, Hisashi Itoshima, Yoshihiro Kadono, Takashi Shono, Kentaro Kamikawa, Atsushi Urata, Jiro Nasu, Masayoshi Uehara, Ikuo Matsushita, Tatsuyuki Kakuma, Shunpei Hashigo, Shuji Tada
{"title":"Comparison of Outcomes between a Basket Catheter and a Balloon Catheter for Endoscopic Common Bile Duct Stone Removal.","authors":"Hirokazu Saito, Hajime Iwasaki, Hisashi Itoshima, Yoshihiro Kadono, Takashi Shono, Kentaro Kamikawa, Atsushi Urata, Jiro Nasu, Masayoshi Uehara, Ikuo Matsushita, Tatsuyuki Kakuma, Shunpei Hashigo, Shuji Tada","doi":"10.1159/000534458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence for the outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) between a basket catheter and a balloon catheter for endoscopic common bile duct stone (CBDS) removal is lacking. This study aimed to compare ERCP outcomes using a basket catheter and a balloon catheter for endoscopic CBDS removal.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This multicenter retrospective study included 904 consecutive patients with native papilla who underwent endoscopic stone removal for CBDS ≤10 mm using a basket catheter and/or a balloon catheter at three institutions in Japan. ERCP outcomes between the basket and balloon groups were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ERCP-related adverse events occurred in 6.5% (29/449) and 7.7% (35/455) of patients in the basket and balloon groups, respectively (IPTW-adjusted p = 0.52). The incidences of post-ERCP pancreatitis, cholangitis, and perforation were similar in the basket and balloon groups (3.8% vs. 2.9%, 1.3% vs. 0.9%, and 0.7% vs. 0.7%, respectively). However, bleeding incidences were significantly higher in the balloon group than in the basket group (3.3% vs. 0.7%, IPTW-adjusted p = 0.012). Successful complete stone removal at one ERCP session using a single catheter was achieved in 17.8% (80/449) in the basket group and in 81.3% (370/455) in the balloon group (IPTW-adjusted p &lt; 0.001).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>A balloon catheter is more likely to complete stone extraction for CBDS ≤10 mm with a single catheter at one endoscopic stone removal session. However, the risk for post-ERCP bleeding is higher in the balloon group than in the basket group.</p>","PeriodicalId":11294,"journal":{"name":"Digestive Diseases","volume":" ","pages":"87-93"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digestive Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000534458","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence for the outcomes of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) between a basket catheter and a balloon catheter for endoscopic common bile duct stone (CBDS) removal is lacking. This study aimed to compare ERCP outcomes using a basket catheter and a balloon catheter for endoscopic CBDS removal.

Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included 904 consecutive patients with native papilla who underwent endoscopic stone removal for CBDS ≤10 mm using a basket catheter and/or a balloon catheter at three institutions in Japan. ERCP outcomes between the basket and balloon groups were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method.

Results: ERCP-related adverse events occurred in 6.5% (29/449) and 7.7% (35/455) of patients in the basket and balloon groups, respectively (IPTW-adjusted p = 0.52). The incidences of post-ERCP pancreatitis, cholangitis, and perforation were similar in the basket and balloon groups (3.8% vs. 2.9%, 1.3% vs. 0.9%, and 0.7% vs. 0.7%, respectively). However, bleeding incidences were significantly higher in the balloon group than in the basket group (3.3% vs. 0.7%, IPTW-adjusted p = 0.012). Successful complete stone removal at one ERCP session using a single catheter was achieved in 17.8% (80/449) in the basket group and in 81.3% (370/455) in the balloon group (IPTW-adjusted p < 0.001).

Discussion: A balloon catheter is more likely to complete stone extraction for CBDS ≤10 mm with a single catheter at one endoscopic stone removal session. However, the risk for post-ERCP bleeding is higher in the balloon group than in the basket group.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
篮状导管和球囊导管用于内镜下胆总管结石切除的疗效比较。
B简介:缺乏在篮状导管和球囊导管之间进行内窥镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)用于内窥镜胆总管结石(CBDS)切除的结果的证据。本研究旨在比较使用篮状导管和球囊导管进行内镜下CBDS切除的ERCP结果。方法:这项多中心回顾性研究纳入了904名连续的天然乳头患者,他们在日本的三家机构使用篮状导管和/或球囊导管进行了CBDS≤10mm的内窥镜取石。使用逆概率治疗加权(IPTW)方法比较篮组和球囊组的ERCP结果。结果:篮下组和球囊组分别有6.5%(29/449)和7.7%(35/455)的患者发生ERCP相关的不良事件(IPTW调整后P=0.052)。篮下组与球囊组的ERCP后胰腺炎(PEP)、胆管炎和穿孔发生率相似(分别为3.8%对2.9%、1.3%对0.9%和0.7%对0.7%)。然而球囊组的出血发生率明显高于篮组(3.3%对0.7%,IPTW调整后P=0.012)。篮组17.8%(80/449)和球囊组81.3%(370/455(经IPTW调整的P讨论:球囊导管更有可能在一次内窥镜取石过程中用一根导管完成CBDS≤10 mm的取石。然而,球囊组ERCP术后出血的风险高于篮组。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Digestive Diseases
Digestive Diseases 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Each issue of this journal is dedicated to a special topic of current interest, covering both clinical and basic science topics in gastrointestinal function and disorders. The contents of each issue are comprehensive and reflect the state of the art, featuring editorials, reviews, mini reviews and original papers. These individual contributions encompass a variety of disciplines including all fields of gastroenterology. ''Digestive Diseases'' bridges the communication gap between advances made in the academic setting and their application in patient care. The journal is a valuable service for clinicians, specialists and physicians-in-training.
期刊最新文献
Symptom Reporting in Patients with Primary Biliary Cholangitis: Higher Burden of Symptoms detection using an interactive App. Association between the Achievement of Textbook Outcomes in Liver Surgery (TOLS) and Overall Survival in Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma Patients Following Major Hepatectomy: A Multicenter Study. The overlap between type 1 diabetes and celiac disease in children and the role of tTG-IgA positivity in endoscopy decision. Comparison of colon adenoma detection rate using transparent cap-assisted and conventional colonoscopy: result from an international trial in Asia. Tenapanor Improves Abdominal Symptoms Irrespective of Changes In Complete Spontaneous Bowel Movement Frequency in Adults With Irritable Bowel Syndrome With Constipation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1